Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

Post by cgriswald » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 7:04 PM UTC

grogenaut wrote: post #373

sleavey wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I was happy to pay €10/month to DAZN when they had the streaming rights for a football league I was interested in, but then after two years they lost the rights to Sky via whom the minimum payment to get access to the same content was €30+ month. The content did not suddenly get 3x more valuable between seasons, this is just a big company being greedy. You reap what you sow and all that.

You could, you know, just stop paying attention to sports you don't find it worth paying for. I did that with nfl when they upped rates. Just watch the recaps, so you can chat about it. Baseball, which I like, seems to be a pretty good deal to me, ends up being about .97$ a game for 3 hours of content. So I choose to pay for it. My only real complaint is I can't watch it offline.

Post by dllthomas » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 7:04 PM UTC

btown wrote: post #386

Kranar wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well those videos on Youtube won't be impacted by this. This law doesn't go after individuals who upload infringing content, rather it goes after the platform itself. It's unlikely Youtube will be affected by it.

While that may indeed be the intent, an aggressive prosecutor could make a strong argument that individual streamers dancing or singing unlicensed karaoke are providing a digital service (the word "platform" never appears in the text) that "is intentionally marketed by or at the direction of that person to promote its use in publicly performing works." Which would now be a freaking felony.

Post by runesoerensen » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 7:07 PM UTC

jpindar wrote: post #378

seanc wrote: post #179

- Everyone discussing this law should really read the text The difficulty in doing so is a big part of the problem. As per AOC's comments on twitter yesterday, at 2PM Members of Congress got 5000 pages of bill dropped on their desk with a vote call at 4PM. The whole thing needs to be much more transparent.

"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it" - Nancy Pelosi (referring to the Affordable Care Act)

Post by betaby » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 7:08 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #286

znpy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read on a post somewhere that if you replace "the economy" with "rich people yatch money" a lot of headlines make more sense. "Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. rich people yatch money $29.2 billion a year."

The next time you watch something on Netflix go ahead and watch the credits and you'll see the names of the hundreds of mostly regular people who made that thing. In addition, it's worth nothing, that most actors are not remotely rich, they're barely making it if that. Netflix and the Studios profit margins are similar to other distributors, and after all is said and done, most of them are not 'rolling in it', at lea…

Post by herbstein » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 7:08 PM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #269

Evidlo wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yacht?

I wonder how hard it would be to get people to start pronouncing the "ch" in yacht. Maybe to rhyme with the German "nacht" rather than a hard "ch" as in "church". I figure there are more people who enjoy doing silly things to bother other people than who enjoying yachting.