A federal judge in New York denied Disney’s request to block Sling TV’s short-term passes, which give viewers the ability to stream live content for as little as one day. In a ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Arun Subramanian ruled that Disney didn’t prove that Sling TV’s passes caused “irreparable harm” to the entertainment giant, as reported earlier by Cord Cutters.
Disney sued Sling shortly after the live TV streaming service started allowing viewers to purchase temporary access to its library of channels, starting at a single payment of $4.99 for a one-day pass. Several channels included in the package are owned by Disney, including ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN3, and Disney Channel. In its lawsuit, Disney argued that the passes violate an agreement with Sling TV that says the service must give subscribers access to its content through monthly subscriptions.
However, Judge Subramanian argues that this claim isn’t likely to succeed, as the contract doesn’t stipulate a “minimum subscription length,” adding that the agreement’s “broad definition” of a subscriber “clearly covers users of the Passes.” Additionally, the ruling states that Disney failed to show how the passes might harm the company’s reputation or “siphon customers” from its new ESPN Unlimited live sports streaming service.
“Disney hasn’t shown it has lost customers due to the Passes,” Judge Subramanian writes. “The networks are being distributed in the same platform, in the same manner, that they always have, but to a broader array of Sling customers.”
Sling TV is offering its one-day pass at a discounted $1 rate to celebrate the court win, though Disney’s breach-of-contract lawsuit against the streaming service will continue.
“For too long, traditional ‘big media’ companies have intentionally stifled innovation and forced customers to pay for more content than they want or need,” Seth Van Sickel, Sling TV’s senior vice president, says in a press release. “We believe customers deserve the flexibility to stream the content they want, whenever they want it, at a price they can afford. Consumers deserve affordable TV, not bound by long-term contracts or bloated offerings.”
