Aereo is not a regulatory hack, at least not in the context that the other companies are regulatory hacks. It is a business model designed according to what courts have said is legitimate commercial activity involving visual media. It's not trying to bypass existing rules or regulations; rather, it is very carefully modeled to work within what the courts have stated is appropriate. (It is an open question as to whether courts will deem its business model to run afoul of IP laws.)
AirBNB, Uber, etc., are/were regulatory hacks because they are/were attempting to flout or "bypass" existing rules and regulations in their various markets. In AirBNB's case, rules against hoteling; in Uber's case, rules against unlicensed cab and livery services. The difference from Aero: there are no enabling laws or interpretations of existing laws that actually state that what AirBnB or Uber does is (legally) acceptable, but there are plenty of existing laws and regulations that state what they are doing is not acceptable.
Comments
Aereo is not a regulatory hack, at least not in the context that the other companies are regulatory hacks. It is a business model designed according to what courts have said is legitimate commercial activity involving visual media. It's not trying to bypass existing rules or regulations; rather, it is very carefully modeled to work within what the courts have stated is appropriate. (It is an open question as to whether courts will deem its business model to run afoul of IP laws.)
AirBNB, Uber, etc., are/were regulatory hacks because they are/were attempting to flout or "bypass" existing rules and regulations in their various markets. In AirBNB's case, rules against hoteling; in Uber's case, rules against unlicensed cab and livery services. The difference from Aero: there are no enabling laws or interpretations of existing laws that actually state that what AirBnB or Uber does is (legally) acceptable, but there are plenty of existing laws and regulations that state what they are doing is not acceptable.