Global mode over ? Lets see.....

Forums › Online streaming services › Global mode over ? Lets see.....

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 54

1139 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1279970 9-Apr-2015 19:46

It's 1966
The Greatest Era
For British Rock and Roll

But BBC Radio
Plays Less Than
45 Minutes of Pop Music a Day

Fortunately
Pirate Radio Stations,
Anchored in the North Sea

Play Rock & Pop
24 Hours a Day

And 25 Million People
Half the Population of Britain ...................

LISTEN TO THE PIRATES ..................... EVERY SINGLE DAY !!!!

Sound familiar? Things will change for the better, because broadcasters have to survive. It's just that they think they know better.

BigMal

996 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1279979 9-Apr-2015 20:08

NonprayingMantis:
BigMal: The irony for me is that, from my understanding, the main customers of Colliseum Sports (Premiere League Pass and Golf) are people outside NZ using using geo-unlocking services to gain access. I imagine it was Colliseums goal to buy streaming rights in small country like NZ where the rights are relatively cheap with the intention of having a global audience......although they'd never admit this.

The irony is Lightbox are happy to partner with Colliseum sports for their own gain yet probably don't care if non-NZ customers can access said sports.

I've heard this too, but I'd be a little surprised if it was the case.

Given how many people moan about how poor the stream quality of PLP is, imagine how bad it would be to stream an EPL game where the content comes from the UK, all the way to NZ, then all the way back again to the UK. The quality would be abysmal. People would be better off using illegal streams.

I wouldn't be surprised at all. From my understanding the streams are good now. They were patchy when they first launched but not any more. Subscribing to PLP is a lot cheaper than paying to watch in the UK. When people on Reddit ask where they can watch the games they're often directed to PLP so I suspect it is heavily used outside NZ. PLP is also available in Taiwan and the Phillipines and delivered by Akamai CDN so I don't think users being located in Europe would have a poor experience at all. Regardless I still find the irony amusing.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#1280003 9-Apr-2015 20:43

BigMal:
NonprayingMantis:
BigMal: The irony for me is that, from my understanding, the main customers of Colliseum Sports (Premiere League Pass and Golf) are people outside NZ using using geo-unlocking services to gain access. I imagine it was Colliseums goal to buy streaming rights in small country like NZ where the rights are relatively cheap with the intention of having a global audience......although they'd never admit this.

The irony is Lightbox are happy to partner with Colliseum sports for their own gain yet probably don't care if non-NZ customers can access said sports.

I've heard this too, but I'd be a little surprised if it was the case.

Given how many people moan about how poor the stream quality of PLP is, imagine how bad it would be to stream an EPL game where the content comes from the UK, all the way to NZ, then all the way back again to the UK. The quality would be abysmal. People would be better off using illegal streams.

I wouldn't be surprised at all. From my understanding the streams are good now. They were patchy when they first launched but not any more. Subscribing to PLP is a lot cheaper than paying to watch in the UK. When people on Reddit ask where they can watch the games they're often directed to PLP so I suspect it is heavily used outside NZ. PLP is also available in Taiwan and the Phillipines and delivered by Akamai CDN so I don't think users being located in Europe would have a poor experience at all. Regardless I still find the irony amusing.

In that case, yes pretty funny.

Although to be fair Spark has specifically said they don't care about individuals using DNS services. They only care about ISPs providing and promoting the services - so it's not really ironic/hypocritical unless the smaller UK ISPs start selling 'global mode' and directing people to Premier League Pass as a way to watch the EPL without getting Sky or BT Sport, and Spark happily stand by and continue taking the money.

zyo

513 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1280022 9-Apr-2015 21:11

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/67674904/second-internet-provider-wobbles-over-legal-threat

Ok I know you guys (Callplus) are up against some of the biggest players in New Zealand, but please please do fight to keep the Internet open for Kiwis and not cave in to censorship.

I don't usually say this but I am more than happy to donate some $$ so this case can be tested fairly in court.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1280026 9-Apr-2015 21:17

NonprayingMantis:
Here is my 'attempt' at an analogy. see what you guys think.

People keep talking about Global Mode as if it is something dirty or under the counter. I would remind that it is completely legal. There is no question of anything corresponding to fake ID. No-one gets an undeserved senior discount from Netflix because they are using Global Mode. A few may get cheaper content than they would at home (just like shopping on Amazon) but for many, it is a matter of being able to get the content at all. The issue is not fraud or false competition, but freedom of choice. New Zealand media companies are unable or unwilling to provide that choice. I therefore feel fully entitled to go elsewhere. I think your analogy is misleading and for that reason I reject it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

zyo

513 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1280042 9-Apr-2015 21:33

Rikkitic:
NonprayingMantis:
Here is my 'attempt' at an analogy. see what you guys think.

People keep talking about Global Mode as if it is something dirty or under the counter. I would remind that it is completely legal. There is no question of anything corresponding to fake ID. No-one gets an undeserved senior discount from Netflix because they are using Global Mode. A few may get cheaper content than they would at home (just like shopping on Amazon) but for many, it is a matter of being able to get the content at all. The issue is not fraud or false competition, but freedom of choice. New Zealand media companies are unable or unwilling to provide that choice. I therefore feel fully entitled to go elsewhere. I think your analogy is misleading and for that reason I reject it.

Exactly, there is no violation of copyright as the content is legit. Basically the exclusivity contract is between the content provider (studios) and local distributor (TVNZ, Sky etc etc), local ISPs like Callplus is under no obligation to abide to such contract. If anything the bullies (TVNZ/Sky) should go against Netflix as they are knowingly violating their own agreements with the studios by serving out of region contents to customers.

sultanoswing

814 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1280168 10-Apr-2015 08:34

NonprayingMantis:

Although to be fair Spark has specifically said they don't care about individuals using DNS services. They only care about ISPs providing and promoting the services - so it's not really ironic/hypocritical unless the smaller UK ISPs start selling 'global mode' and directing people to Premier League Pass as a way to watch the EPL without getting Sky or BT Sport, and Spark happily stand by and continue taking the money.

And *if* (and that's a big *if*) they were to win the case *if* (and that's another moderate-sized *if*) it actually makes it to Court, I wouldn't be surprised if they then tried to go after the DNS/VPN services, especially as such a win would likely push people to those services.

And to be pedantic, their statement about not going after the individuals doesn't in any way mean they won't next go after the companies providing DNS/VPN. Good luck to them on that score, given the jurisdictional limitations, but I do see them trying to head there in due course.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#1280182 10-Apr-2015 08:53

sultanoswing:
NonprayingMantis:

Although to be fair Spark has specifically said they don't care about individuals using DNS services. They only care about ISPs providing and promoting the services - so it's not really ironic/hypocritical unless the smaller UK ISPs start selling 'global mode' and directing people to Premier League Pass as a way to watch the EPL without getting Sky or BT Sport, and Spark happily stand by and continue taking the money.

And *if* (and that's a big *if*) they were to win the case *if* (and that's another moderate-sized *if*) it actually makes it to Court, I wouldn't be surprised if they then tried to go after the DNS/VPN services, especially as such a win would likely push people to those services.

And to be pedantic, their statement about not going after the individuals doesn't in any way mean they won't next go after the companies providing DNS/VPN. Good luck to them on that score, given the jurisdictional limitations, but I do see them trying to head there in due course.

As I said earlier, there is a UK service called CatchupTV that basically is a video on demand service to playback live tv via the internet. They got taken to court in the UK as they hadn't blacklisted any VPN/DNS providers and where not taking active measures to control the flow of content outside of the UK. As a consequence, they have to actively block VPN providers in the UK constantly in order to meet their obligations... I suspect that if the four win their case, they will start to go to the ISPs to start to block DNS at the beginning and perhaps look in to VPN measures too.

If they lose, I wonder if they will try the rights holders to force more blocking from the other players, although I don't think they would listen as NZ is a small market in comparison to Netflix etc.

zyo

513 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1280184 10-Apr-2015 08:58

Benoire:
sultanoswing:
NonprayingMantis:

Although to be fair Spark has specifically said they don't care about individuals using DNS services. They only care about ISPs providing and promoting the services - so it's not really ironic/hypocritical unless the smaller UK ISPs start selling 'global mode' and directing people to Premier League Pass as a way to watch the EPL without getting Sky or BT Sport, and Spark happily stand by and continue taking the money.

And *if* (and that's a big *if*) they were to win the case *if* (and that's another moderate-sized *if*) it actually makes it to Court, I wouldn't be surprised if they then tried to go after the DNS/VPN services, especially as such a win would likely push people to those services.

And to be pedantic, their statement about not going after the individuals doesn't in any way mean they won't next go after the companies providing DNS/VPN. Good luck to them on that score, given the jurisdictional limitations, but I do see them trying to head there in due course.

As I said earlier, there is a UK service called CatchupTV that basically is a video on demand service to playback live tv via the internet. They got taken to court in the UK as they hadn't blacklisted any VPN/DNS providers and where not taking active measures to control the flow of content outside of the UK. As a consequence, they have to actively block VPN providers in the UK constantly in order to meet their obligations... I suspect that if the four win their case, they will start to go to the ISPs to start to block DNS at the beginning and perhaps look in to VPN measures too.

If they lose, I wonder if they will try the rights holders to force more blocking from the other players, although I don't think they would listen as NZ is a small market in comparison to Netflix etc.

There is a difference between an ISP giving you the technical means to what's essentially a VPN service and a service provider that directly "sells" content to customers they do not have rights to.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#1280185 10-Apr-2015 08:58

Rikkitic:
NonprayingMantis:
Here is my 'attempt' at an analogy. see what you guys think.

People keep talking about Global Mode as if it is something dirty or under the counter. I would remind that it is completely legal. There is no question of anything corresponding to fake ID. No-one gets an undeserved senior discount from Netflix because they are using Global Mode. A few may get cheaper content than they would at home (just like shopping on Amazon) but for many, it is a matter of being able to get the content at all. The issue is not fraud or false competition, but freedom of choice. New Zealand media companies are unable or unwilling to provide that choice. I therefore feel fully entitled to go elsewhere. I think your analogy is misleading and for that reason I reject it.

Well I guess my point is that we don't know if it's legal or not since it hasn't been tested.

You haven't really explained why the 'fake if' analogy is wrong. Just like global mode, it's a way of fooling a business into thinking you are someone you aren't in order to get access to cheaper price or special products. Fundamentally it's he same concetp. Should that be legal? Is it morally right?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1280261 10-Apr-2015 09:49

NonprayingMantis:

You haven't really explained why the 'fake if' analogy is wrong. Just like global mode, it's a way of fooling a business into thinking you are someone you aren't in order to get access to cheaper price or special products. Fundamentally it's he same concetp. Should that be legal? Is it morally right?

I thought I explained it but let’s look at it another way. Say a company only wants to sell its products to certain people. If you happen to be black they won’t do business with you. Do they have that right? They used to in the American South though now that kind of discrimination is generally frowned upon, except maybe when it comes to streaming.

Now imagine you are a black person in the American South 60 years ago and you really want a hamburger. So you paint your face and put on a wig and disguise yourself as a white person. You pay your money and you get your hamburger. Have you committed a crime? The hamburger seller still has their money. You have your hamburger. Business has been done and everyone is happy, except that mean old sheriff who doesn’t think black people should be allowed to eat white hamburgers.

I think you are asking the wrong question here. The question is not if it is morally wrong or illegal to use Global Mode to shop for hamburgers overseas, but if it should be illegal or morally wrong for overseas sellers to refuse to let you buy hamburgers unless you pretend to be someone you are not. And that takes us back to Hollywood and the whole nonsense that has become intellectual property and copyright.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

davidrg

67 posts

Master Geek

#1280356 10-Apr-2015 11:30

zyo:
Exactly, there is no violation of copyright as the content is legit. Basically the exclusivity contract is between the content provider (studios) and local distributor (TVNZ, Sky etc etc), local ISPs like Callplus is under no obligation to abide to such contract. If anything the bullies (TVNZ/Sky) should go against Netflix as they are knowingly violating their own agreements with the studios by serving out of region contents to customers.

The content is only legit if Netflix has a license to distribute that content to people in New Zealand and they just haven't added it to their NZ library yet.

If Netflix doesn't have a license to send the content to you in NZ via their proprietary DRMd protocols then I'm certain its no more legal than me sending a copy of one of my blu-rays to you over bittorrent. In both cases the person sending the content (Me, Netflix) don't have a license to do it.

Assuming the rules for large companies doing things for profit are no more harsh than the rules for individual people doing things for personal use then surely if me sending a movie to you via Bittorrent without a license is Copyright Infringement ("piracy") then Netflix sending it without a license via their protocols would be Copyright Infringement too. If that's not the case then why can Netflix do this and not me? Why does Netflix get special license-ignoring privileges? Does Lightbox get those privileges too? Can they stream stuff they don't have a license for?

If Netflix doesn't have any special privileges then by violating the Netflix terms of service you're probably causing them to do something illegal.

Then there is the question of if the sender doesn't have a license to send the content, does the receiver have a license to receive it? If you download a movie from me via Bittorrent it seems fairly clear that you're committing copyright infringement. I can only assume streaming a movie from Netflix that Netflix doesn't have a license for would fall into the same basket.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1280364 10-Apr-2015 11:39

The Copyright Act says the content is legitimate if it's legitimate in the country of origin ("Meaning of infringing copy"):

An object that a person imports or proposes to import into New Zealand is not an infringing copy under subsection (3)(b) if—

(a)it was made by or with the consent of the owner of the copyright, or other equivalent intellectual property right, in the work in question in the country in which the object was made; or

(b)where no person owned the copyright, or other equivalent intellectual property right, in the work in question in the country in which the object was made, any of the following applies:

(i)the copyright protection (or other equivalent intellectual property right protection) formerly afforded to the work in question in that country has expired:

(ii)the person otherwise entitled to be the owner of the copyright (or other equivalent intellectual property right) in the work in question in that country has failed to take some step legally available to them to secure the copyright (or other equivalent intellectual property right) in the work in that country:

(iii)the object is a copy in 3 dimensions of an artistic work that has been industrially applied in that country in the manner specified in section 75(4):

(iv)the object was made in that country by or with the consent of the owner of the copyright in the work in New Zealand.

Back to the physical world, if I am in the USA and buy a legal DVD that says "For use in the USA only, Region 2 players only" it's legal for me as a single person to bring it to New Zealand because the piece of work is legal where I am buying it. Even though it is "licensed" for use in the USA only the fact I am taking it out of the USA doesn't make it "illegal".

Similarly if I buy a book on Amazon that book was originally licensed so it's not an illegal copy. Again as a single person I can buy that book and have it sent to me ("import").

I am not breaking any laws for doing so. I am actually either flying back home on Air New Zealand or having the book shipped to me via FedEx.

Should either Air New Zealand or FedEx being cited for facilitating this legal act of parallel importing?

Why should Global Mode ISPs be bullied for facilitating a legal act of parallel importing of digital goods?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1280369 10-Apr-2015 11:42

Yeah and if I buy a vinyl record and let you play it we're both criminals bla bla bla. The law is broken and the lawyers are dancing on the head of a pin.

Edit: Sorry I meant this as a reply to the previous post + 1 but freitasm was too fast for me.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Yabanize

2350 posts

Uber Geek

#1280381 10-Apr-2015 12:01

Rikkitic: Yeah and if I buy a vinyl record and let you play it we're both criminals bla bla bla. The law is broken and the lawyers are dancing on the head of a pin.

Edit: Sorry I meant this as a reply to the previous post + 1 but freitasm was too fast for me.

If you even let him listen to it you are too haha

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 54