Shazam-like technology used to identify bars illegally streaming soccer games • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by ugqtq » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:01 AM UTC

ankalagon wrote: post #110

ankit219 wrote: post #28

One of those cases where both sides are in the mud. La Liga is struggling with piracy of games for long. They have been trying to make money of their product (football essentially features two of the greatest players to play the game in last 10 years, only one now) but struggle due to their whacky ideas and no care about fans. Sample this: The timings of games are as early as 12PM (spanish siesta is at 4PM) and as la…

> The timings of games are as early as 12PM (spanish siesta is at 4PM) and as late as 11 PM local time. No adult does "siesta" in Spain. Please, let's stop spreading this stereotype. Soccer games usually start at 22:00 or 23:00 hours.

Funny how your comment got downvoted. Imagine if someone alleged that all citizens of [African country] went to sleep at the same time during daytime [instead of working, etc]. GP would be flagged and banned already. But since it's Spain then it's fair game.

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

#252

Post by SmellyGeekBoy » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:01 AM UTC

acd wrote: post #63

In certain EU countries that could be A) Illegal wiretapping B) GDPR violation If they happen to record other private information such as what political party one likes, or religion one likes they would be even more in legal trouble. And also recording anything about sexual life which could happen in a bar conversation say between friends.

This was pre-GDPR. It would be interesting to see how it would play out today.

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

#253

Post by mikorym » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:03 AM UTC

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…

I find it puzzling why there isn't a Netflix for sports that just shows sports channels. (Or is there?)

Cable providers like to lure people in with sports channels and then force sports to only appear in the top payment tier.

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

#254

Post by stirlo » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:14 AM UTC

mikorym wrote: post #253

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…

I find it puzzling why there isn't a Netflix for sports that just shows sports channels. (Or is there?) Cable providers like to lure people in with sports channels and then force sports to only appear in the top payment tier.

In Australia the dominate cable provider who owns 80+% of sports rights has just launched this (Kayo Sports). Costs 2.5x ($25AUD) a basic Netflix connection ($10AUD) though.

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

#255

Post by VBprogrammer » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:17 AM UTC

pushpop wrote: post #228

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…

Mercedes don’t have a monopoly on car distribution. If people doesn’t like the price of Merc’s then there are dozens of other alternatives. If people don’t like the price of media content then there is no other (legal) alternatives. This is also why broadcasters have gotten away without much innovation in the industry when compared to what’s happening in other equivalent sectors. Edit: Or at least not much innovation…

I think that's a fair point. How long would it have taken for the media industry to come up with Netflix or the equivalent had it not been for people proving the viability of streaming media over the internet through piracy (and porn).

This obviously doesn't justify piracy but it does show how how resistant to change the media industry have become.

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

#256

Post by kuu » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:18 AM UTC

Schiphol wrote: post #229

That's a weird angle. This story is not at all about "piracy", but about an app using the microphone in a clearly illegitimate, and probably illegal, way.

Yep, it's illegal, they've been fined (by a ridiculous amount by the way)

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

#257

Post by animal531 » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:26 AM UTC

briandear wrote: post #191

pdimitar wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is so hard to get about it?

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…

But in this case there is only 1 provider, so imagine there is only Mercedes. Also they're selling it for a price that's 2x more than you can afford, while your job is XX miles/km away and there are no other options to get there.

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

#258

Post by gnomewascool » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:37 AM UTC

dorian-graph wrote: post #240

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 t…

You obviously won't die from not watching Game of Thrones.

However, depending on your circle of friends and acquaintances, you might be excluded from social interactions. This can range from not getting occasional references, to not being able to participate in many conversations (during "peak" Game of Thrones a couple of years ago, they were a major and frequent topic in many circles) and hence being side-lined, to even being semi-ostracised ("Why should they hang out with this loser who doesn't even watch Game of Thrones?"). Obviously you could claim that you should get other/better friends, but that's not really realistic, especially if you're already on the border of social isolation.

This will have negative effects on your well-being and even your health (loneliness is a major health risk, on par with obesity and smoking).[0]

[0] https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20180504/loneliness-rival...

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

#259

Post by jacquesm » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:38 AM UTC

cprecioso wrote: post #231

jacquesm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

https://sena.nl/nl

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

#260

Post by carlmr » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 9:40 AM UTC

dorian-graph wrote: post #240

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 t…

I'm not watching game of thrones, but I can't quite see the connection here.

The argument doesn't really depend on people finding they have to view something.

They want to view it, so they look at the offering, which is illegal with bad customer experience or legal with better customer experience. They weigh their options according to their preferences, illegal VS legal, ad riddled pages vs smooth experience, having to find out how it works vs having it work in the TV out of the box. And then they will check the price to see what is the better trade off for them.

A good customer experience like Netflix will increase the odds that someone won't go through the hassle. Then if the price is reasonable people won't on average decide for the illegal option.

The problem for Netflix now is that a lot of third parties like Disney retract their content. This raises the price and worsens the UX, because you have to go through multiple subscriptions. This again raises the probability of pirating.

This is all just basic economics, not a moral argument.