mr. kanojia, what is your strongest argument to the supreme court justices that you are not stealing broadcast signals? >> guest: and great start to the questions. i think all of our arguments are extremely strong. so if you start with the basics which is everybody acknowledges that consumers have the right to an antenna, everybody acknowledges a consumer has a right to make a recording of free to air content for themselves, everybody acknowledges there is nothing wrong with a combination of an antenna and, back then, a vcr, now a dvr. so the debate seems to be about where that equipment is located because nobody has appealed the finding of facts which is that each individual consumer controls their own antenna. the antenna is dead until the consumer instructs the antenna to tune to a particular frequency. each individual consumer makes their own copy, unique, distinct, never mingled with anybody else's, and transmits it to themselves. so none of those facts have been appealed or disputed ever. so it comes down to we as a country and as a system, do we permit this idea of private conduct which

mr. kanojia's companies to yank signals out of the air and sell them to the american profit without payingontent. a sustainable business model, would it be better if he was not charging for this content? >> it would be an interesting and different case. you have other arguments available to him. this is the essence of what copyright law is about, the broadcast networks spend billions of dollars every year creating entente and acquiring content, marketing and distributing content. broadcasting is the envy of the world. partly because they expect to get money from it. for an interloper to grab these signals, bundle them, and sell them -- >> is violating the copyright. i went to read one part of dish's brief in support of aereo . uses new technology to allow users to do the same old thing. the only difference is the users do not purchase and maintain the equipment." why is that wrong? is using is aereo not a technology model. they keep saying they have innovative technology. what you were just reading suggests otherwise. this suggests aereo's technology has been around for a long time. the in

mr. kanokia. 0-- kanojia. can you explain why it is rebroadcast pay th these, yet they are able to not provide any compensation back? >> the question holds so many loaded characterizations that i have to object to it myself. you can demonstrate, we do not sell content. we lease technology to consumers. number two, it was demonstrated we do not retransmit the consu mer. the vast differences between cable technology that capture the entire broadcast spectrum band and concert on wires irrespective of what a consumer asks for, that is retransmission. aneo is a classic case of antenna remotely located. that is the technological difference that as you read the it becomese case clear you have to move beyond characterization and look at the material issues underneath to understand the significant differences. third, as a matter of policy, cable companies do not make copyright payments for in-market transmissions. even after the act, it took a decade or later for congress to devise retransmission must carry. the purpos