>> welcome to the communicators. we want to introduce you to the ceo and founder as aerial productions. >> guest: we think about it as a new way of how to view television in the future. it is an online platform which is addressed to consumers and people can get access today to

my broadcast television along with dvr devices and without a cable connection just from the internet for $8 a month. >> host: this is over the air broadcast channel the people can get to? >> guest: that is correct. this is the key element of technology that is a micro antenna. if you think about it as how you used to have antennas in the past, we miniaturized them through a lot of sophisticated technologies. the purpose of miniaturizing them is that we can build hundreds of thousands of these things into a very small room. by doing that, we can allow the cloud-based implementation of how consumers handle that. which is really the big innovation with clout technologies that allow us to it ignore the costs and bring it

down very dramatically, lower barriers to consumers,. >> host: is all it is is a chicken here? >> guest: there is a loop, the front end of it. and does this provide hd? hd reception? >> guest: yes, it does. >> host: are one to two courts that are challenging you. what is that about. >> guest: is somewhere within that broadcast to launch the

company there was a detailed view of the technology, almost a hearing in the trial that completed that and we succeeded the technology. the analysis that we had done was correct. and after that validation, you know, the plaintiffs appealed that decision there.

and as it happens, it is over the plan and the request is part of that. the entire circuit court gets together that is the current status. it continues at the lower court. >> we are a private company. it is one of the moderate luxuries in particular on top of that. so what we are finding is that as we have this subsidy, several kinds of positive people

registered. we understand the conduct and what i do with these other reasons. we understand the online video. and this experience of the price point seems a little bit more logical. most people tend to watch four or five or seven channels and it just appeals to those people to say that there is some rationality with logical long way simplicity and convenience. but i think that a value of this goes to consumers. >> host: are their cable channels that are part of this? >> guest: we are working with a partner on this. and that seems to have done really well.

it coincides with the evolution of television which will be skinny libraries is what i call them. they have a tremendous amount of cable and people want lives that think that this is important there are special events and things of that nature. we are focusing on the first category that we think that we can open this platform up to. >> host: what is your response so you are stealing their signal? >> guest: at some point you have

to call it what it is. when the court courts express an opinion that it is a legal technology that is consistent with what congress intended, it is difficult for me to look at it any other way this is part of the advertising spectrum. and this technology only applies to the broadcast, but not cable as well. when you work for this case, it is a productive partisanship where we enter into this. the consumer has the right to an

antenna and so we have consistently started to prepare the length of the wire that connects the antenna to your dvr and whether you live in an apartnto h a 50-foot wire versus a 10-foot wire, how is that any different? so we think that, you know, but that is how it works. >> host: well, we want to bring into the conversation matt schwartz. he is a correspondent with communications daily. >> guest: from the very beginning of your company's existence, walk me through your start process if you start a company knowing that big rock to broadcasters would try to throw you out.

to what was your help? >> guest: we have spent a few months walking around and educating people. we are hoping that the intent was as we educate these folks, that they would recognize that as surprising as it is, as unexpected as it is it will be good. and frankly, it is a great example how the upstart new technologies are trying to expand. those technologies it has a lot of different areas that i use for interfaces and cost values and cost forms. our hope that isn't we would educate people.

>> host: one of the judges in the design, in most of those instances, they had some issues. they called areas in an attempt to avoid the reach of the copyright act. how would you respond with those accusations? >> first and foremost, i think that it's important to know that the company spends money and we are taking advantage of the guard rails of the law. first we need to build technology that complies this and that is a perfectly fine thing to do so it is part of the

law. >> the program producers are getting their fair share. >> guest: about 54 million people get television over the areas in which it performs. 54 million people have the

intent behind the broadcasting on and i think it started in 1932 and 33. it was granted with broadcasters that have interest in convenience there is plenty of advertising and the fact that he doesn't want to just be part of the dominant part of the broadcasting there's a lot of technological innovation that comes around. we have it on c-span and now

everyone has a meaningful business and everyone is a happy partner. this is the same dispute multiple years later. many billions of dollars and especially as opposed opportunity. >> host: when cable companies originally started that lasted for a while but in 1992 congress change that so why are we

treated in this way, it seems like they are treated unfairly so we really have to take a look at the same thing in the grand or so. it seems like the mvps of cable companies, the person who makes this television set it has scratched this to go along with this content, being able to force people to sell them content. he has rights to public access on this and the rights that come along with this and is part of

that, we have to have a broader effort. so herewith the internet we have no rights we don't know what is going to happen and here is an ecosystem that has absolutely a tremendous amount of uncertainty equipment providers have never proved the retransmission of the signal. they are not vindictive, they don't have the rights and protections. so they are trying to levy that regime on equipment providers and it absolutely makes no sense. and the taxation is something

that we are talking about. >> host: what would be the difference, chet kanojia, and youtube taking the broadcast programs and putting the whole program right on youtube for people to watch? >> guest: welcome there is a huge amount of difference. they don't dvr this, but they control the entire experience and the consumer would get what they want to do and that would be unique. and that is how i look at it. it is a very distinct

relationship. >> with any other country that decides and build technology aside and cablevision has been a part of that so somehow this applied differently. >> where does the main area come from? >> so in india growing up, it is part of the u.s. in the early '90s. it is part of this area was not

what is your background? >> guest: well, in what area? >> host: businesswise. >> guest: engineering and technology the channel changes, utilization, it is very useful for providing purposes. and this was acquired by microsoft in 2008 on the website talks about all the cities that you are in or coming to or going to where it is available.

the plan and about 15 cities. >> guest: yes, 22 said they hoped to finish and that is about all. >> host: what about washington dc? >> guest: just come up i believe so. on the moment we focus on education and our goal is to educate people and show them what the capabilities and technologies are. and i think that it is a tremendously positive reaction that we get. and it really brings competition and choice into the marketplace, which is obviously important from the consumer's perspective. it creates an alternative way of thinking about it. but how are we going to consume the content.

>> because you really start looking at what else happens, which is content production. there is an approach being developed whether youtube or netflix. there would be part of the future where i could go and say, this is what i have access to and all the of the relevant sports in terms of that nature. we have $300 a month and whether you like it or not, that is the only option you have, for instance. >> host: so if the courts find that this is a violation to proceed, surely others will get into the competition in this area. it will be considered to be part

of this, taking broadcast signals in order to a obtain these transmission fees. some have threatened to take their programming off the air so you don't have access to it. what is the future of the taliban television industry look like and it doesn't quite fit or where there is confusion or how to apply it. >> guest: again, this is an important point. i would really hope that this can be diligent in educating people. there is a distinction between broadcast, which is supposed to be free to you as a consumer. and other content. there is a huge distinction. this area is successful, the

idea that technology allows you access, that is not going to change the industry of television what the evolution will look like at this point. and i think it's a very naïve perspective that if someone says time warner cable can do this. you really have to step back to the reality of the situation. all cable companies are buying from consolidated media companies. so it's not a single broadcaster. there are plenty of cable channels that go along with that. our intention is that the ecosystem move towards individualized choice and you're really not going to see any proliferation of these kinds of technologies that people are talking about. so i think it's a lot of empty

hyperbole arguments and really there should be a distinction drawn between the source of the industry. to answer your question, i think that that is irrational and from a set of people who are not interested in innovation. but the reality is that many are using an antenna in some way. we pick up this, we should've already been part of the cable network. so how is it that people can do that and there is no harm and life is going great in many areas are going to mean that the

reality there has been an agenda behind this historically and in fact this was part of the issue that was essentially part of the spirit of the problem is the intent of congress granting the right for people to use the technology and that needs to be protected. it is a desire to support competition and create

competition and a desire to have choice. >> guest: how many plans are there, eight or 12. >> host: comest you get for what you pay $8 per month? >> guest: you get eight hours of programming and you can even watch it on any device that you need. >> host: so the local broadcast,

how does that work? >> guest: it is when the string to the home market. >> host: were to the funding come from. >> guest: or venture was financed and it was a good way to describe it. postman who's your competition today, is google possibly getting into tv and apple and sony? etc. is that your competition? >> guest: i think that remains how it is to be seen. it is not going to be a one dominant player, it is going to be a fraction at some point.

it is the opposite of what it is today, highly integrated. it is definitely going to be dominated by people that provide interesting experiences it is like the way the system is set up today. it is out of control and we are seeing how this is changing and the median age used to be 21 years old. that is absolutely a kind that

the market is evolving away from. it would be how these consumers want to create that ecosystem. >> host: in regards to monetizing and not a maniac, how does that work? >> guest: i cannot comment on the legal aspects of this. i don't think i have ever thought about the distinction.

and they are technologically distinct. >> host: we have been talking with chet kanojia who is the founder of aereo communications. he has been our guest. thank you, gentlemen. >> guest: thank you. >> guest: thank you very much. >> coming up on c-span2, the brookings institution examines immigration policy and then a speech by president obama and later a discussion about the impact of the march on washington 50 years later. we will be joined by patrick

mchenry and representative donna christensen. we will talk about the implementation of the affordable care act "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> jackie had style and panache in her entertaining and she did it again in the white house after her heritage. right after the administration, during the johnson years come the whole world erupted like volcanoes. and