OT Reducing cable to "basic" | Page 2 | The Boneyard

OT Reducing cable to "basic"

whaler11 said:
You are confusing the middleman with the producer.

Being mad at Comcast or Dtv isn't really a reason to say it's not stealing to illegally download GOT.

Again I'm not judging - I don't care in the least - I just find the dynamic interesting.
Expand ...
They're all stealing from me. They charge too goshdarn much for channels I don't watch or want. Judd much rather prefer a true ala carte model.
 
In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.
 
noeynox said:
They're all stealing from me. They charge too goshdarn much for channels I don't watch or want. Judd much rather prefer a true ala carte model.
Expand ...

Sure but you deciding to buy something is pretty much the opposite of them stealing from you.

Since you like sports you've actually done a lot better in the deal for a few decades.

You'll look back on these days like you look back on the Sports Center of 1993 some day.
 
whaler11 said:
Sure but you deciding to buy something is pretty much the opposite of them stealing from you.

Since you like sports you've actually done a lot better in the deal for a few decades.

You'll look back on these days like you look back on the Sports Center of 1993 some day.
Expand ...
No way I think I've done better. The price of "cable" was something that escalated kind of quickly. Best part of PS Vue is truly the no contract part. I'm waiting to see what the YouTube and Verizon versions of OTT services look like.
 
whaler11 said:
In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.
Expand ...

Even worse, they're totally useless for UConn fans living in and around CT, which is most of us.

Great - your ESPN3 from Pondunkville, whereeveryoulive gets you UCONN. Awesome. It won't for most of us, and is what keeps most of us tethered to a cable/satellite provider.
 
whaler11 said:
Tell that to the people who produce what you steal.
Expand ...
But what if it's not offered to you and you couldn't buy it if you wanted to? I definitely think it's a grey area
 
.-.
No grey area, it's stealing.

Believe me I am so tempted to jailbreak my firestick and install Kodi, but it's stealing.
 
I also bought a really long hdmi cable and hook my laptop to my tv. NFL.com was streaming draft live so was able to watch it on the big screen.
 
whaler11 said:
In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.
Expand ...
Do you use an ad blocker extension? That's very similar but seems to be perfectly acceptable for most people. You're utilizing the content or website without taking part in how that site makes money.
 
JMick said:
But what if it's not offered to you and you couldn't buy it if you wanted to? I definitely think it's a grey area
Expand ...

That is probably the only time something is morally defensible, even if still technically illegal.

BUT - that is rarely actually true. Most people use that as the argument when they can't buy what they want at the PRICE or in the MANNER they want to buy it.

As an example, if a song was not available on iTunes, people would feel ok ripping it from somewhere. But they could have gone out and bought the CD, even used, from Amazon or wherever and then loaded it into their library. The argument would go - "I just want the song - I don't want to have to pay $10 for the whole album to get the song so I'm justified in stealing the song because I can't buy it anywhere." That is b***shit - you can buy it, you just can't buy it a la carte. Just like you can't go into a Costco and buy 1 can of soda at Costco level pricing. You can buy one at the convenience store, but it is going to cost you $2.
 
Last edited:
WhereistheDove? said:
Do you use an ad blocker extension? That's very similar but seems to be perfectly acceptable for most people. You're utilizing the content or website without taking part in how that site makes money.
Expand ...

That's not at all the same thing.
 
J187Money said:
That's not at all the same thing.
Expand ...
Why not? That is how the sites make money and by disabling it, you're enjoying the content without supporting he content provider that has specifically set up a way to do that.
 
.-.
WhereistheDove? said:
Why not? That is how the sites make money and by disabling it, you're enjoying the content without supporting he content provider that has specifically set up a way to do that.
Expand ...

Ad blockers are not illegal. Theft of content is.
 
J187Money said:
Ad blockers are not illegal. Theft of content is.
Expand ...
I'm talking about ethically which is what this whole thread has been about.

Edit: And if you want to go down that road. Me viewing a sports stream is not illegal. If I downloaded that content or was the person streaming it to the masses, it would be, but as a viewer, it is not illegal so the ethical side of it is the real question.
 
J187Money said:
That is probably the only time something is morally defensible, even if still technically illegal.

BUT - that is rarely actually true. Most people use that as the argument when they can't buy what they want at the PRICE or in the MANNER they want to buy it.

As an example, if a song was not available on iTunes, people would feel ok ripping it from somewhere. But they could have gone out and bought the CD, even used, from Amazon or wherever and then loaded it into their library. The argument would go - "I just want the song - I don't want to have to pay $10 for the whole album to get the song so I'm justified in stealing the song because I can't buy it anywhere." That is b******* - you can buy it, you just can't buy it a la carte. Just like you can't go into a Costco and buy 1 can of soda at Costco level pricing. You can buy one at the convenience store, but it is going to cost you $2.
Expand ...

For live events, is streaming that much different than watching at a bar? And what if you own a physical copy of a movie but want a digital copy, too?
 
J187Money said:
https://www.quora.com/Is-using-an-ad-blocker-in-your-browser-unethical

Some thoughts on the subject. It is a matter of opinion.

But to me, I don't believe it is unethical. TBH - I also don't get the hysteria about internet advertising. It has never occurred to me to use an ad blocker.
Expand ...
I'm just saying, both are legal as the end viewer and the difference between using an ad blocker and viewing streamed sports is about the same as viewing streamed sports and walking into a store and stealing a physical product. In fact probably significantly less so as the latter is actually illegal and in all circumstances leads to financial harm to the producer/store.
 
.-.
JMick said:
For live events, is streaming that much different than watching at a bar? And what if you own a physical copy of a movie but want a digital copy, too?
Expand ...

Two different things:

1) If you own a physical copy of a movie, and rip it to your laptop for personal use, you would never get in trouble for that. Fair use covers that sort of thing.
2) For live events, if you are watching in a bar, you are watching over a feed which someone paid rights fees for the content and is advertising against it. If you are streaming over a legitimate source (NFL.com) or whatever - no issue. If you are streaming on a bootleg link - where someone is probably putting their own ad units against content they don't own, that isn't kosher. Because you are an eyeball that is getting access to something but the rights owner cannot monetize.
 
J187Money said:
Two different things:

1) If you own a physical copy of a movie, and rip it to your laptop for personal use, you would never get in trouble for that. Fair use covers that sort of thing.
2) For live events, if you are watching in a bar, you are watching over a feed which someone paid rights fees for the content and is advertising against it. If you are streaming over a legitimate source (NFL.com) or whatever - no issue. If you are streaming on a bootleg link - where someone is probably putting their own ad units against content they don't own, that isn't kosher. Because you are an eyeball that is getting access to something but the rights owner cannot monetize.
Expand ...
Well you typically can't rip a DVD without software that will break the encryption.

And most streams don't have injected ads from what I've seen. They're usually the same. And if your point goes back to advertising then it's no different than adblock

My overall point, though, is it's not the same as stealing a hostess cake from 7-11. It's much more complicated than that.
 
JMick said:
Well you typically can't rip a DVD without software that will break the encryption.

And most streams don't have injected ads from what I've seen. They're usually the same. And if your point goes back to advertising then it's no different than adblock

My overall point, though, is it's not the same as stealing a hostess cake from 7-11. It's much more complicated than that.
Expand ...
Yeah, it's just not as cut and dry as a lot of people would have you believe, at least in the context of other things like ad blockers that the vast majority of people (I would guess) find totally unobjectionable. This discussion has actually been very interesting in that regard.
 
WhereistheDove? said:
I'm just saying, both are legal as the end viewer and the difference between using an ad blocker and viewing streamed sports is about the same as viewing streamed sports and walking into a store and stealing a physical product. In fact probably significantly less so as the latter is actually illegal and in all circumstances leads to financial harm to the producer/store.
Expand ...

I see your point. And I don't know if it is illegal to "watch" bootleg streams of sports - or if it is just illegal for the one providing the illegal stream. But even I accept that it is immoral to use ad blockers, I don't equate that with straight theft of content - which I find worse.
 
How Sketchy Streaming Sites Really Work — And Why Some Are Legal

>>But is streaming unlicensed content online illegal? Jim Gibson, director of the Intellectual Property Institute at the University of Richmond law school, told Business Insider that streaming online content breaks the law in two cases.

When the user downloads even part of a file — called "pseudo-streaming" — it counts as a copy of copyrighted material, which is illegal. And when the user streams content as a "public performance" — namely, when it's shown to a substantial number of people outside the normal family circle and its close acquaintances — it also constitutes a copyright violation.

Outside of these cases, accessing unlicensed streamed content is generally legal.

On the other side of the screen, however, uploading or posting unlicensed streamed content is illegal — even if it's free, according to Gibson. "That's the most basic part of copyright — protection of your work. When someone uploads a video online, they're literally making a copy," he said. <<
 
JMick said:
Well you typically can't rip a DVD without software that will break the encryption.

And most streams don't have injected ads from what I've seen. They're usually the same. And if your point goes back to advertising then it's no different than adblock

My overall point, though, is it's not the same as stealing a hostess cake from 7-11. It's much more complicated than that.
Expand ...

Owning the DVD doesn't give you the right to steal a digital copy, if that was the point. Maybe that isn't fair, but that's the law.

I've never watched a bootleg stream, so don't know what would be in it for the host / streamer - if not an ad content stream of his own. Why break laws when there is no upside?

I would agree that bootlegging a stream for an individual sporting event (especially if you have no other way to watch it) is not the same as stealing from a 7-11. But people that are routinely bypassing legitimate means of consuming content when it is available is pretty much the same thing.
 
.-.
Back in the day I was involved with the RIAA when they were suing college students for stealing music - so I'm pretty black and white about that sort of theft.
 
J187Money said:
I see your point. And I don't know if it is illegal to "watch" bootleg streams of sports - or if it is just illegal for the one providing the illegal stream. But even I accept that it is immoral to use ad blockers, I don't equate that with straight theft of content - which I find worse.
Expand ...

In all fairness, I'm playing ultimate devil's advocate here just to point out that this issue isn't nearly as black and white as some people in this thread are saying. And ethically, I agree it's wrong, but I do believe that it's far closer to the ethical wrongness of an adblocker than it is to physical theft. As the article that was posted above this said, this isn't a legal issue so up to everyone to decide where their line is.
 
J187Money said:
Owning the DVD doesn't give you the right to steal a digital copy, if that was the point. Maybe that isn't fair, but that's the law.

I've never watched a bootleg stream, so don't know what would be in it for the host / streamer - if not an ad content stream of his own. Why break laws when there is no upside?

I would agree that bootlegging a stream for an individual sporting event (especially if you have no other way to watch it) is not the same as stealing from a 7-11. But people that are routinely bypassing legitimate means of consuming content when it is available is pretty much the same thing.
Expand ...
Those bootleg sites have a ton of adware.

From at @huskymedic's post:

Outside of these cases, accessing unlicensed streamed content is generally legal.

You can go on ebay or amazon right now and purchase "jailbroken" devices with kodi on them right now. If it is "illegal to use" it must be illegal to sell. How do these people get away with this?

I've bought two streaming boxes from a website. If I thought the feds were going to kick my door in and arrest me, I certainly wouldn't be buying the stuff.
 
whaler11 said:
In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.
Expand ...

Taking things from Target is against the law. Accessing a web address is not.
 
whaler11 said:
The number of people perfectly fine with stealing always amazes me in these threads.
Expand ...
C'mon Whaler. They sell it on amazon and Ebay.
Kodi's legal 'til it isn't. It is very good. Not great. Very good.
 
Alum86 said:
C'mon Whaler. They sell it on amazon and Ebay.
Kodi's legal 'til it isn't. It is very good. Not great. Very good.
Expand ...

Who said Kodi is illegal?

If people want to tell themselves much of this is stealing that's fine. It's just interesting.

FWIW I think Kodi is highly overrated. It's next to useless for sports.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,284
Messages
4,561,242
Members
10,454
Latest member
Uconn84


Top Bottom