The Supreme Court decision that killed the company is an excellent example of what happens when jurists don't understand technology... And don't want to, either.
The Supreme Court decision wasn't at all a failure to understand technology... their ruling basically said "the technology here doesn't matter, it's what the technology does that we are ruling on." Aereo brought arguments around the implementation and the Supreme Court said basically that they didn't care about the implementation.
To me it doesn’t even pass the smell test - you can’t rebroadcast content you don’t own, else there’s no point for the content makers to make it. There’s some interesting legal points but to me as a layperson it’s like watching a cammed movie.
The Supreme Court decision that killed the company is an excellent example of what happens when jurists don't understand technology... And don't want to, either.