A Utah federal court’s granting of a preliminary injunction against Aereo Wednesday (CD Feb 20 p19) is a good sign for broadcasters in their approaching U.S. Supreme Court case against Aereo, said analysts in emails to investors Thursday. “This is a huge win for broadcasters with the SCOTUS hearing only 2 months away,” said Wells Fargo’s Marci Ryvicker. “We give broadcasters the edge at this point,” said Stifel Nicolaus. “We are pleased with this outcome and believe there is no reason the Supreme Court would not come to the same conclusion,” said Sinclair CEO David Smith in a released statement. Two Sinclair stations are among the plaintiffs in the Utah case against Aereo. Both Ryvicker and Stifel pointed out that the injunction is the first win for broadcasters against Aereo in court, though they have previously had injunctions granted against competing service FilmOn. FilmOn’s injunctions bar the company from streaming content throughout the country except for the jurisdiction of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously ruled in Aereo’s favor. Wednesday’s ruling bars Aereo from transmitting copyrighted material only within the jurisdiction of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision gives broadcasters “a little more ammo in their campaign against Aereo,” said Stifel. Broadcasters “are more likely than not to succeed in some form or fashion at the Supreme Court,” Stifel said. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the decision to grant cert to the Aereo case, and “will presumably still be recused, leaving only eight justices to hear the case,” Stifel said. That means the court could theoretically deadlock, Stifel said, “which would leave the Second Circuit ruling in place and the parties to continue to fight it out in courts around the country.” An Aereo victory could lead to broadcasters looking to Congress for a legislative fix in satellite-TV copyright legislation, Stifel said. If that happens, it could “give pay-TV companies leverage to extract concessions from broadcasters on retransmission consent,” Stifel said.
The contractor consortium Grupo Unidos por el Canal. S.A. (GUPC) resumed work Feb. 20 on the embattled Panama Canal expansion project, GUPC and the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) said in separate press releases. The ACP pledged to pay on Feb. 21 the agreed upon $36.8 million for GUPC's December payments and obligations. ACP previously refused to pay the December invoices until work resumed, said an ACP source. The two sides continue to dispute $1.6 billion in cost overrun.
A Utah federal court’s granting of a preliminary injunction against Aereo Wednesday (WID Feb 20 p19) is a good sign for broadcasters in their approaching U.S. Supreme Court case against Aereo, said analysts in emails to investors Thursday. “This is a huge win for broadcasters with the SCOTUS hearing only 2 months away,” said Wells Fargo’s Marci Ryvicker. “We give broadcasters the edge at this point,” said Stifel Nicolaus. “We are pleased with this outcome and believe there is no reason the Supreme Court would not come to the same conclusion,” said Sinclair CEO David Smith in a released statement. Two Sinclair stations are among the plaintiffs in the Utah case against Aereo. Both Ryvicker and Stifel pointed out that the injunction is the first win for broadcasters against Aereo in court, though they have previously had injunctions granted against competing service FilmOn. FilmOn’s injunctions bar the company from streaming content throughout the country except for the jurisdiction of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously ruled in Aereo’s favor. Wednesday’s ruling bars Aereo from transmitting copyrighted material only within the jurisdiction of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision gives broadcasters “a little more ammo in their campaign against Aereo,” said Stifel. Broadcasters “are more likely than not to succeed in some form or fashion at the Supreme Court,” Stifel said. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the decision to grant cert to the Aereo case, and “will presumably still be recused, leaving only eight justices to hear the case,” Stifel said. That means the court could theoretically deadlock, Stifel said, “which would leave the Second Circuit ruling in place and the parties to continue to fight it out in courts around the country.” An Aereo victory could lead to broadcasters looking to Congress for a legislative fix in satellite-TV copyright legislation, Stifel said. If that happens, it could “give pay-TV companies leverage to extract concessions from broadcasters on retransmission consent,” Stifel said.
The Commerce Department ruled that Hitachi Metals, Ltd. is the successor to Hitachi Metals and Hitachi Cable Ltd. for the purposes of antidumping duty liability under the AD duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Japan (A-588-845). As a result, Commerce will allow subject merchandise from Hitachi Metals to enter at the zero AD duty rate formerly assigned to Hitachi Metals and Hitachi Cable. Commerce affirmed its preliminary finding in the changed circumstances review (see 13123016), finding Hitachi Metals and Hitachi Cable merged to form Hitachi Metals Ltd., but that production operations remain the same. The zero AD duty cash deposit rate for Hitachi Metals Ltd. takes effect Feb. 24, and will remain in effect until further notice.
The Commerce Department issued the preliminary results of its antidumping duty administrative review on citric acid and certain citrate salts from Canada (A-122-853). The company under review is JBL Canada. These preliminary results are not in effect. Commerce may modify them in the final results of this review and change the estimated AD cash deposit rate for this company.
The Commerce Department won’t require countervailing duty cash deposits on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey -- at least for the moment -- finding in its Feb. 20 negative preliminary determination that imports of the product are not being illegally subsidized. Rebar from Turkey is also subject to an antidumping duty investigation, so suspension of liquidation and cash deposits may still be required for AD duty purposes when Commerce issues its preliminary AD duty determination. The agency is due to announce its preliminary decision on AD duties by April 18 (see 14020314). Commerce may also change its mind in this CV duty investigation when it issues its final determination. But for now, the agency will not direct CBP to suspend liquidation on entries of rebar from Turkey.
A countervailing duty cash deposit requirement will take effect Feb. 24 for imports of chlorinated isocyanurates from China (C-570-991), as the Commerce Department found illegal subsidization of Chinese producers in its preliminary determination. The agency assigned CV duty cash deposit rates ranging from 1.55 to 18.57 percent. Chinese chlorinated isocyanurates have already been subject to antidumping duties since 2005. CBP will implement these CV duty cash deposit requirements soon.
A listing of recent antidumping and countervailing duty messages from the Commerce Department posted to CBP's website Feb. 20, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at addcvd.cbp.gov. (CBP occasionally adds backdated messages without otherwise indicating which message was added. ITT will include a message date in parentheses in such cases.)
The U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City issued a preliminary injunction against streaming service Aereo, barring the company from transmitting copyrighted material in the jurisdiction of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to court documents. The decision is the first loss for Aereo, despite many attempted preliminary injunctions sought by broadcasters. Though Aereo had argued that the court should follow the precedent in prior decisions in its favor, Judge Dale Kimball said he was more persuaded by 2nd Circuit Judge Denny Chin’s dissent in an Aereo case and the D.C. Circuit’s ruling against Aereo competitor FilmOn, court documents said. Along with the preliminary injunction, Kimball stayed the case pending a decision on Aereo’s case in the U.S. Supreme Court. Both Aereo and the broadcaster plaintiffs had requested the stay, but were in conflict over whether Aereo would be enjoined while awaiting the high court decision. Kimball also denied Aereo’s request to move the case to the 2nd Circuit. “We are extremely disappointed that the District Court in Utah has chosen to take a different path than every other Court that has reviewed the Aereo technology,” said Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia in an emailed statement. “Consumers have a fundamental right to watch over the air broadcast television via an antenna and to record copies for their personal use. The Copyright Act provides no justification to curtail that right simply because the consumer is using modern, remotely located equipment."
The U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City issued a preliminary injunction against streaming service Aereo, barring the company from transmitting copyrighted material in the jurisdiction of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to court documents. The decision is the first loss for Aereo, despite many attempted preliminary injunctions sought by broadcasters. Though Aereo had argued that the court should follow the precedent in prior decisions in its favor, Judge Dale Kimball said he was more persuaded by 2nd Circuit Judge Denny Chin’s dissent in an Aereo case and the D.C. Circuit’s ruling against Aereo competitor FilmOn, court documents said. Along with the preliminary injunction, Kimball stayed the case pending a decision on Aereo’s case in the U.S. Supreme Court. Both Aereo and the broadcaster plaintiffs had requested the stay, but were in conflict over whether Aereo would be enjoined while awaiting the high court decision. Kimball also denied Aereo’s request to move the case to the 2nd Circuit. “We are extremely disappointed that the District Court in Utah has chosen to take a different path than every other Court that has reviewed the Aereo technology,” said Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia in an emailed statement. “Consumers have a fundamental right to watch over the air broadcast television via an antenna and to record copies for their personal use. The Copyright Act provides no justification to curtail that right simply because the consumer is using modern, remotely located equipment."