Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 321 posts

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#231

Post by cprecioso »

jacquesm wrote: post #70
sneakernets wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had written (in college) a small story about an "RIAA Task Force" collaborating with the FBI to raid small brick-and-mortar businesses with occupants above some fabled "listener limit" that dared to have an FM Radio or iPod connected to a boombox in the corner of the store somewhere. Everything from Barbershops to Butchershops were raided, and the small infringing devices confiscated. Given that the RIAA tried to s…

You think that's fiction? In NL we actually have this...

I live in NL and have never learned about this, do you have any more info?

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#232

Post by fabioborellini »

briandear wrote: post #195
lostmymind66 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means." I disagree. Music is cheaper and easier to buy than ever with things like iTunes and the various streaming services and music piracy is still rampant. Bars have very slim margins and owners will most likely never pay…

Successful bars don’t have slim margins. Restaurants often have slim margins because of food waste, but bars have pretty good margins. There is very good profit on drinks: a 750 bottle of Tito’s vodka costs about $18 wholesale, provides 16 shots, at $5 per shot, that’s $80. Then discount 20% for spillage, that’s $64. Bartenders in the US make tips, so the hourly cost to the bar is pretty minimal, but in Europe, every…

There are huge differences in alcohol prices across Europe (and in wages, too). In the Balkans or Portugal the shot could cost 1-2 euros, and in Norway over 10 euros.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#233

Post by sgift »

libraryatnight wrote: post #220
Moodles wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, this is called inelastic and elastic demand. Edit: Hacker News, plz, it's not that complex guys :-) one person willing to pay $1000000000000000 is better than 100 people willing to pay $1

Isn't that basically why some f2p games that are p2w can alienate a ton of people as long as they have a few "whales"?

Yes, until they alienate too many cause these games depend on a big player base. Then the whales leave too and having alienated all the non-whales the business is usually dead.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#234

Post by sgift »

briandear wrote: post #196
shusson wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> La Liga is struggling with piracy of games for long. They have been trying to make money of their product but struggle due to their whacky ideas and no care about fans. What are you talking about, La Liga is making billions of dollars [1][2] [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2019/03/07/report-... [2] https://www.laliga.es/en/news/laliga-grows-20-6-and-posts-re...

It doesn’t matter how much they make, there is no justifiable reason to suggest that stealing their content is acceptable. It isn’t a social service or some essential like food or medicine where they are gouging people. Content too expensive? Don’t buy it.

Good thing no one steals their content then. Or do they not have it anymore when a private viewing license is used? This is simple greed. And greed may be good from a business perspective, but morally wrong. Society doesn't have to help them with it.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#235

Post by Phillipharryt »

lostmymind66 wrote: post #182
kelnos wrote: post #119

This has the same solution as any other story around copyright infringement. If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means. I'm not saying these bars are correct to resort to illegal streaming, but a wise businessperson would see this as a signal that their product…

"If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means." I disagree. Music is cheaper and easier to buy than ever with things like iTunes and the various streaming services and music piracy is still rampant. Bars have very slim margins and owners will most likely never pay…

You realise you're arguing against fundamental economics right? The convenience of paid services is a product, literally all products have a value so if you price it right then people will pay for it. If you somehow were able to price discriminate perfectly then you could completely remove piracy.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#236

Post by mpetkevicius »

YeahSureWhyNot wrote: post #217
kelnos wrote: post #119

This has the same solution as any other story around copyright infringement. If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means. I'm not saying these bars are correct to resort to illegal streaming, but a wise businessperson would see this as a signal that their product…

not sure about soccer but UFC fights cost 5 to 10 thousand dollars per fight to show PPV at bars. If there are 100 people at the bar then it comes out to 50-100 dollars per person. Thats almost like buying a ticket to see the fight at the actual arena

That figure would likely be significantly lower is bars didn't pirate

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#237

Post by sjwright »

benatkin wrote: post #194
briandear wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a Mercedes costs too much, it’s ok to steal it? That’s what this attitude means. That it isn’t a physical good doesn’t mean there isn’t a cost to produce and distribute it and the price of producing that product is set specifically to make the economics work for the producers. That the bar is making revenue specifically because of the content someone else is producing makes this theft even more unjustifiable. If s…

With piracy, they don't have to pay for distribution, because the peer to peer networks take care of it. What's unjustifiable is overcharging for essential music, books, and video, some of which is old, because of the ridiculous extensions on the copyright terms. Sometimes the artists have said they understand why people who can't afford it download their stuff, and can't blame them. Also unjustifiable is how the med…

Mercedes doesn't bear any costs either when a car is stolen.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#238

Post by oh_sigh »

stale2002 wrote: post #221
oh_sigh wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you publish a naked selfie to limited audience(your partner), you don't mind if anyone else sees it? And you want others to see it?

That's not publishing man. It is quite obvious what I meant when I said publishing. Not really sure why you are acting in bad faith by purposefully misinterpreting what I said. But to give a clear definition of what publishing means, that any non idiot, non bad faith actor would have already known, what I meant by publishing is when I take some media and put it in a place where any large amount of people could access…

How large of a private audience does one's performance need to have before your performance goes from a private to a public thing?

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#239

Post by goto11 »

wolco wrote: post #214
briandear wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a Mercedes costs too much, it’s ok to steal it? That’s what this attitude means. That it isn’t a physical good doesn’t mean there isn’t a cost to produce and distribute it and the price of producing that product is set specifically to make the economics work for the producers. That the bar is making revenue specifically because of the content someone else is producing makes this theft even more unjustifiable. If s…

He pays for a copy and then streams it so everyone at the bar can see it. Similiar to how he pays for cable and everyone at the bar can see it on all of their tvs. I understand the soccer people want more money. But cost to create and produce is paid for by the subscription already or they couldn't afford to offer the service in the first place. The hardship doesn't exist on the producer's side. We could debate wheth…

> But cost to create and produce is paid for by the subscription already or they couldn't afford to offer the service in the first place.

That logic only holds if the majority of the consumers are paying though.

Re: Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games

#240

Post by dorian-graph »

kelnos wrote: post #119

This has the same solution as any other story around copyright infringement. If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means. I'm not saying these bars are correct to resort to illegal streaming, but a wise businessperson would see this as a signal that their product…

> If you provide people with easy, convenient, legal methods to consume the content in a way that works for them, for a price they find reasonable, then they overwhelmingly won't resort to illegal means.

I've never liked this sort of argument because it makes it sound like people simply have to view this content, by whatever means necessary, like their life depends on (excuse my slight exaggeration).

You don't have to watch Game of Thrones. Your life really will be fine.

Post reply on HN