---

UPDATE with broadcasters’ comment: Big broadcasters responded with relief today to a judge’s ruling from Tuesday granting an injunction against television streaming app Locast from transmitting their local TV streams to customers.

In a statement on behalf of ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC that can be attributed to Gerson Zweifach, counsel for the plaintiffs:

“The federal court’s ruling is a victory for copyright law, vindicating our claim that Locast is illegally infringing copyrights in broadcast television content in violation of federal law,” Gerson Zweifach, counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement on behalf of ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC.

“We will now seek a permanent injunction to stop Locast’s copyright infringement of the programming that the broadcasters and their partners work to create,” the statement said.

PREVIOUSLY: The four major U.S. broadcast networks — ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox — have emerged victorious in a lawsuit against Locast, a nonprofit that enables — or they say, basically steals — local TV streams.



Plaintiffs — the stations — asked a judge to throw out Locast’s claim that its online service is legally exempt from copyright infringement liability because it only seeks donations, not fees, from users, and only enough to keep its business running. Locast wanted a finding that it is exempt.

“Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment is granted. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied,” wrote Judge Louis Stanton of the Southern District of New York in a ruling Tuesday.

Locast users pay it a minimum $5 monthly fee in exchange for monthlong, uninterrupted service which the judge refused to categorize as “merely a recurring gift to a charitable cause.” Locast “still solicits, and receives, substantial amounts in charges from recipients for its uninterrupted service.”

Locast, founded by David Goodfriend, argues that its funding model qualifies for the statutory exemption because payments from users are re-invested in the organization to cover costs of “maintaining an operating an expanding system.” The judge noted that In 2020, Locast “made far more money from user charges than was necessary to defray its costs of maintaining and operating its service.”



Locast has also been expanding into new markets. “But under the statute, income made from charges to recipients can only be used to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the service, not of expanding it into new markets,” Stanton found.

Backers of Locast, which was founded in 2018, say it is adhering to copyright laws, which permit “boosters” of local broadcast signals, which are designed to secure the accessibility of broadcast signals.

---

---

Locast Nation

As you probably know, the federal district court in the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in the case brought against Locast by the big media companies. The court concluded that by interrupting programming to ask users for donations, and by suspending those interruptions based on whether a user makes contributions, Locast actually was charging a fee, not merely seeking a voluntary contribution. The court then concluded that revenues Locast collects in this manner exceed the cost of operating the service because funds are used to add new markets, rendering Locast ineligible to use the copyright exemption for non-profits (17 U.S.C. 111(a)(5)).



Although we disagree with this interpretation and are exploring our legal options to contest it, out of respect for the court's order,



Locast is suspending immediately all programming interruptions to request donations.



This means that anyone located in a market we serve who signs up for Locast will get the service without interruption, regardless of whether or not they donate.



Of course, it is up to you whether or not to contribute to Locast. But if you currently contribute, we humbly request that you continue to do so. And if you don't contribute, we hope that you will do so if you can afford it.


Thank you.

---

---

---

---

Locast has also been expanding into new markets.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

(a)Certain Secondary Transmissions Exempted.—The secondary transmission of a performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission is not an infringement of copyright if...

(5)the secondary transmission is not made by a cable system but is made by a governmental body, or other nonprofit organization, without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, and without charge to the recipients of the secondary transmission other than assessments necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service.

---