Absolutely this. It speaks a lot that it’s easier for a millionaire to pirate the game than to get it legally. Make it easy and cheap and people will use it.
It’s simply a service problem. NFL offers great streaming for those abroad because they don’t have exclusive deals with networks. If you want to watch NFL you need numerous subscriptions, and hope you don’t live in the wrong area.
Usually I get pirates’ points, but I mean…this game was on freaking FOX. The dude’s a millionaire and can afford the most expensive streaming package in the world, and even if he couldn’t, Sling TV Blue is only $40/mo and has FOX on it.
With all the popup ads, piracy for live television is actually MORE cumbersome and inconvenient than just paying for live television. If you’re out of market or the game is on a channel that’s obscure or only on something that charges like $70/mo, I’d understand this a bit more.
If this guy is anything like me or a fuckton of other young people, he just doesn’t watch TV. Paying 40 bucks just so he can watch a single game is ridiculous and exactly the point most commenters are trying to make. As long as there’s no easy and cost-effective way to access certain content, people will pirate it, even if they can afford to pay.
I’m not a millionaire by any means, but I’m pretty well off. I can afford to pay for the shit I watch too, but I refuse to support an industry that makes me jump through hoops, juggle multiple services, get package deals and so on, just so I can watch a TV show. Provide a service that is at least on par with the experience pirates get and I’ll gladly pay for it. Valve managed it, why can’t the movie/TV industry?
Pretty much all of them. You go on one, search for what you want and either download it or just stream it, depending on the site.
Meanwhile with streaming services first you gotta figure out which one has the thing you want to watch. Then you hope it’s actually available in your country. If it is you can then watch it, but not in high resolution, that’s for the higher subscription tier, not the one you have. Oh wait, actually, you can’t watch it, cause your mom is currently using your account on her own pc, and you can’t stream on two devices at the same time. Are you starting to see my point?
I admit I am exaggerating slightly, but not by much imo. Streaming services have so many restrictions and random hoops you have to jump through that piracy is just the better option. And it’s a hell of a lot cheaper on top of that.
The ones I’m most familiar with are stream2watch.me and also the LiveNetTV app for Android. Both were worse experiences than using legitimate streaming services. stream2watch.me had TONS of pop-up ads that were absolute hell to wade through. LiveNetTV is pretty good as far as piracy apps go, but there are pre-roll ads whenever you pick a channel which is kind of annoying.
Meanwhile with streaming services first you gotta figure out which one has the thing you want to watch. Then you hope it’s actually available in your country.
That’s not that hard to figure out though unless you’re trying to watch like Australian rugby in the Bronx or something. Most people aren’t going to run into that problem unless American sports blackouts come into play.
If it is you can then watch it, but not in high resolution, that’s for the higher subscription tier, not the one you have.
What service keeps you from watching live channels in SD using a tiered system lol
Oh wait, actually, you can’t watch it, cause your mom is currently using your account on her own pc, and you can’t stream on two devices at the same time.
This doesn’t apply 1:1 to most live streaming services but you do have a point here (Sling Orange only allows 1 simultaneous streams), especially if you have either a large family like the one I’m in, or you’re trying to watch a bunch of live games at the same time.
"Seahawks CB Tariq Woolen was using MethStreams to watch today’s NFL games. He makes over $1 million a year,”
I hate to sound like that guy but, I’m on the side of those who can’t afford the luxury of streaming, playing games as they’re released and vice versa.
Yeah but blackouts are bullshit. Exclusive rights to games are bullshit. Everything that’s been done in the name of profit above all else is bullshit. Everyone deserves to sail.
The last time I tried to use the official stream for a hockey game, I couldn’t get it to load. Not in the app, nor the browser, neither from my cable provider nor the network itself. I gave up and went back to the pirate stream, which played in one click. (It does freeze sometimes and the quality isn’t quite as good, but at least it plays!)
I feel that. Getting the official steam working, plus dealing with blackouts is a nightmare. I usually just listen to the game on the radio and check the box score every period on my phone. It’s unbelievable how much the official stream costs compared to the low quality of the app. And still being subject to blackouts at that price is insane.
Not to mention that my team is basically a factory of sadness anyways, so once regular season is over there’s not much for me to keep up with.
It’s more than likely a problem of service, not price. Even if you have all the money in the world, bad service is bad and people’s time and patience aren’t infinite.
Oh please. Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull. Let’s not kid ourselves here. I’m actually astounded to know how much there is a divide here in the comments, where people are actually defending the rich one here.
And here I thought piracy was for the people that couldn’t afford these luxuries on a daily basis. Piracy being for people that simply, by choice, don’t want to bother with the legal alternative because of the questionable practices in play. Piracy being for people that just simply are locked out and have had their consumer rights stomped on all the way.
Why are we drawing the lines of exception here between a dude that pulls a million a year. That’s like the antithesis of the concept of piracy. He’s earning $83,000 a month, that’s a lot more than an average joe makes in an entire year’s worth of their salary.
You’re defending the 1% and that’s just wrong on so many angles when it comes to piracy.
Can we not shift this from the very important issue of how stupid this streaming situation is into the much less important, albeit still valid, “one rich athlete spends slightly less than his fair share in this one instance”—no one is defending this guy because he’s rich, only because it’s the irony of the situation
The more people who pirate, the better. It doesn’t matter who as long as everyone is getting away with it equally
Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull.
Huh? How does that even work? He’s rich, but they’re not making a custom app or server for him. He still has to deal with the same buggy nonsense as tour average Joe.
He still has more say than average joe. Average joe pays an affordable but budget of a premium. He’s probably paying for top-tier level stuff, giving how much he’s making. He has more saying power than average joe. Average joe is the one getting the hot-potato of agents, getting ignored, getting mislead .etc
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
The fact that they’re almost certainly not using different apps for different users. And the fact that there’s no rich person tier for streaming services. They have no way or reason to distinguish between a rich person and an average Joe. It doesn’t matter how much money you have when there’s nothing to pay for.
no no no, you don’t understand! there’s a secret “rich ppl netflix” that you can’t get unless you pay $12,000 for it. the illuminati built it for bill clinton
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
His team owner gonna punish him for this
The NFL should fine him the $40 it would have cost him to sign up for Sling TV Blue. Or the $20 the introductory first month should have cost him.
His owner gonna extract value in another way.
These guys are deff elite rich but they are not owner class.
And there is one thing a daddy hates the most, a bitch who is causing him problems and not making him money.
Strapping young jock is doing both here, daddy mad, daddy punish
These guys are literally the bottom of the totem poll (none of them are managers etc), there’s a reason theres a players union
They’re rich, but they ain’t likely upper class
Still higher up the food chain vis-a-vis modal fedi poster
Based NFL player is based. Idc how much money you make, piracy is a lifestyle
Don’t hate the player, hate the game 🏴☠️
Absolutely this. It speaks a lot that it’s easier for a millionaire to pirate the game than to get it legally. Make it easy and cheap and people will use it.
It’s simply a service problem. NFL offers great streaming for those abroad because they don’t have exclusive deals with networks. If you want to watch NFL you need numerous subscriptions, and hope you don’t live in the wrong area.
deleted by creator
Usually I get pirates’ points, but I mean…this game was on freaking FOX. The dude’s a millionaire and can afford the most expensive streaming package in the world, and even if he couldn’t, Sling TV Blue is only $40/mo and has FOX on it.
With all the popup ads, piracy for live television is actually MORE cumbersome and inconvenient than just paying for live television. If you’re out of market or the game is on a channel that’s obscure or only on something that charges like $70/mo, I’d understand this a bit more.
If this guy is anything like me or a fuckton of other young people, he just doesn’t watch TV. Paying 40 bucks just so he can watch a single game is ridiculous and exactly the point most commenters are trying to make. As long as there’s no easy and cost-effective way to access certain content, people will pirate it, even if they can afford to pay.
I’m not a millionaire by any means, but I’m pretty well off. I can afford to pay for the shit I watch too, but I refuse to support an industry that makes me jump through hoops, juggle multiple services, get package deals and so on, just so I can watch a TV show. Provide a service that is at least on par with the experience pirates get and I’ll gladly pay for it. Valve managed it, why can’t the movie/TV industry?
I’ve never heard of a piracy website that’s more convenient than live streaming services.
Pretty much all of them. You go on one, search for what you want and either download it or just stream it, depending on the site.
Meanwhile with streaming services first you gotta figure out which one has the thing you want to watch. Then you hope it’s actually available in your country. If it is you can then watch it, but not in high resolution, that’s for the higher subscription tier, not the one you have. Oh wait, actually, you can’t watch it, cause your mom is currently using your account on her own pc, and you can’t stream on two devices at the same time. Are you starting to see my point?
I admit I am exaggerating slightly, but not by much imo. Streaming services have so many restrictions and random hoops you have to jump through that piracy is just the better option. And it’s a hell of a lot cheaper on top of that.
The ones I’m most familiar with are stream2watch.me and also the LiveNetTV app for Android. Both were worse experiences than using legitimate streaming services. stream2watch.me had TONS of pop-up ads that were absolute hell to wade through. LiveNetTV is pretty good as far as piracy apps go, but there are pre-roll ads whenever you pick a channel which is kind of annoying.
That’s not that hard to figure out though unless you’re trying to watch like Australian rugby in the Bronx or something. Most people aren’t going to run into that problem unless American sports blackouts come into play.
What service keeps you from watching live channels in SD using a tiered system lol
This doesn’t apply 1:1 to most live streaming services but you do have a point here (Sling Orange only allows 1 simultaneous streams), especially if you have either a large family like the one I’m in, or you’re trying to watch a bunch of live games at the same time.
deleted by creator
Based
"Seahawks CB Tariq Woolen was using MethStreams to watch today’s NFL games. He makes over $1 million a year,”
I hate to sound like that guy but, I’m on the side of those who can’t afford the luxury of streaming, playing games as they’re released and vice versa.
He can afford it.
Maybe he just doesn’t want to run DRM in his browser.
Maybe he wanted use a a least-friction streaming option.
Maybe he doesn’t want the NFL to correlate and data broker his viewing activity.
Maybe he has some ethical qualm with the NFL or their streaming infrastructure choice.
Maybe “It’s Free, it’s for Me” was meant as in liberty and not price.
I’m so conflicted
he knows the nfl is stealing the value he creates. he doesn’t need to pay them
Yeah but blackouts are bullshit. Exclusive rights to games are bullshit. Everything that’s been done in the name of profit above all else is bullshit. Everyone deserves to sail.
Was he pirating because of blackouts though? That part isn’t clear.
The concept alone is enough justification for me so i guess to each his own.
The last time I tried to use the official stream for a hockey game, I couldn’t get it to load. Not in the app, nor the browser, neither from my cable provider nor the network itself. I gave up and went back to the pirate stream, which played in one click. (It does freeze sometimes and the quality isn’t quite as good, but at least it plays!)
I feel that. Getting the official steam working, plus dealing with blackouts is a nightmare. I usually just listen to the game on the radio and check the box score every period on my phone. It’s unbelievable how much the official stream costs compared to the low quality of the app. And still being subject to blackouts at that price is insane.
Not to mention that my team is basically a factory of sadness anyways, so once regular season is over there’s not much for me to keep up with.
It’s more than likely a problem of service, not price. Even if you have all the money in the world, bad service is bad and people’s time and patience aren’t infinite.
Oh please. Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull. Let’s not kid ourselves here. I’m actually astounded to know how much there is a divide here in the comments, where people are actually defending the rich one here.
And here I thought piracy was for the people that couldn’t afford these luxuries on a daily basis. Piracy being for people that simply, by choice, don’t want to bother with the legal alternative because of the questionable practices in play. Piracy being for people that just simply are locked out and have had their consumer rights stomped on all the way.
Why are we drawing the lines of exception here between a dude that pulls a million a year. That’s like the antithesis of the concept of piracy. He’s earning $83,000 a month, that’s a lot more than an average joe makes in an entire year’s worth of their salary.
You’re defending the 1% and that’s just wrong on so many angles when it comes to piracy.
Can we not shift this from the very important issue of how stupid this streaming situation is into the much less important, albeit still valid, “one rich athlete spends slightly less than his fair share in this one instance”—no one is defending this guy because he’s rich, only because it’s the irony of the situation
The more people who pirate, the better. It doesn’t matter who as long as everyone is getting away with it equally
Huh? How does that even work? He’s rich, but they’re not making a custom app or server for him. He still has to deal with the same buggy nonsense as tour average Joe.
He still has more say than average joe. Average joe pays an affordable but budget of a premium. He’s probably paying for top-tier level stuff, giving how much he’s making. He has more saying power than average joe. Average joe is the one getting the hot-potato of agents, getting ignored, getting mislead .etc
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
The fact that they’re almost certainly not using different apps for different users. And the fact that there’s no rich person tier for streaming services. They have no way or reason to distinguish between a rich person and an average Joe. It doesn’t matter how much money you have when there’s nothing to pay for.
no no no, you don’t understand! there’s a secret “rich ppl netflix” that you can’t get unless you pay $12,000 for it. the illuminati built it for bill clinton
WHEN YOU CAN’T AFFORD STREAMING ON AN NFL PLAYER SALARY, PRICES ARE TOO DAMN HIGH
It’s a service problem, though. Not a money problem. This is a perfect example of that very fact.