[flagged]
Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
21–30 of 59 posts
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s unpopular because it’s a bad argument. It’s not theft because you don’t take anything away. You just create a copy and don’t pay for it, but that’s not theft.
It might not be theft but it's not nothing either. Manslaughter isn't murder but someone still died. Copying might not be theft but you're still taking something you didn't pay for.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#23I'm pretty uneasy about legal action against the subscribers themselves. If you can prove intent, maybe? But I'd argue many or even most don't realize they're doing anything illegal. These IPTV companies, in my experience, never advertise that it's illegal. It's just give us money for a lot of TV channels, just like a cable company does.
I'm not familiar with how these IPTV companies market their services, but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost. It's like those folks that sold bootleg DVDs out of their trenchcoats in Manhattan - the defense of "gosh, I never knew buying a just-released-in-theaters Hollywood b…
Possibly, but not always. When Red Pocket and the other cheap mvnos came around, people were skeptical for the same reason - but it was all above board.
Pricing depends on sales channel and price. If you slum the dregs of shady marketplaces, you can get it for like 3 or 4 bucks a month. But in more mainstream settings, resellers often try to charge as much as 20 or 30 (or more) per month which isn't quite as drastic.
In the US, a few people in my mom's friend circle were raving about their 'magic box.' It cost a couple hundred but got TV, so they were happy. AFAICT it's some shady actors buying cheap android boxes and flashing some iptv software with service preconfigured. These people don't even know they're using iptv.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#24I'm pretty uneasy about legal action against the subscribers themselves. If you can prove intent, maybe? But I'd argue many or even most don't realize they're doing anything illegal. These IPTV companies, in my experience, never advertise that it's illegal. It's just give us money for a lot of TV channels, just like a cable company does.
I'm not familiar with how these IPTV companies market their services, but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost. It's like those folks that sold bootleg DVDs out of their trenchcoats in Manhattan - the defense of "gosh, I never knew buying a just-released-in-theaters Hollywood b…
A few decades ago our family got a 'proper' company with a shop front to install a satellite dish for us. We were then able to watch the Sky Tv from the UK even though we were not based in the UK (we still paid for a subscription but it was billed to a proxy address). This was the 'gray' part of what the company was selling.
What they also sold was sattv boxes with integrated decryption that would allow you to watch pretty much any European Pay TV (albeit not Sky, as they used a more robust encryption scheme) for free. They never mentioned the legality of it but they definitely advertised it as something they openly sold (in shop and in their ads).
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#25Huh, Ireland has copied English law so precisely that it also has Norwich Pharmacal and Anton Pillar orders? (De anonymozation of third parties and non-crime search warrants respectively)
When it became independent, all laws weren't suddenly repealed, some were just ammended over time (as any common law system does). It's my understanding that Irish Courts can still refer to court cases from other common law countries in terms of precidence, even now
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not familiar with how these IPTV companies market their services, but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost. It's like those folks that sold bootleg DVDs out of their trenchcoats in Manhattan - the defense of "gosh, I never knew buying a just-released-in-theaters Hollywood b…
> don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost Possibly, but not always. When Red Pocket and the other cheap mvnos came around, people were skeptical for the same reason - but it was all above board. Pricing depends on sales channel and price. If you slum the dregs of shady marketplaces, you can get it for like 3 or 4 bucks a month. B…
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might not be theft but it's not nothing either. Manslaughter isn't murder but someone still died. Copying might not be theft but you're still taking something you didn't pay for.
Then use an accurate legal term for it, "copyright infringement", or a pejorative that both supporters and detractors agree on, e.g. "piracy"
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s unpopular because it’s a bad argument. It’s not theft because you don’t take anything away. You just create a copy and don’t pay for it, but that’s not theft.
It might not be theft but it's not nothing either. Manslaughter isn't murder but someone still died. Copying might not be theft but you're still taking something you didn't pay for.
This right is enforced by the authority that grants it. Viewing, listening, or otherwise 'consuming' this IP is not and cannot be an infringement on these rights. Those who provide are responsible.
If a country does not grant or enforce this right (or on behalf of others) then there is no infringment possible in that jurisdiction. cf. China or Russia.
Moral arguments beyond that are your own and should be clearly segregated from the law. Murder is, almost universally, both criminal and wrong. "Piracy" requires more attention to detail in order to have productive conversations.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’ll find that a pretty unpopular attitude around here (hence the downvoting on your comment, and I assume mine shortly), but you are right.
It’s unpopular because it’s a bad argument. It’s not theft because you don’t take anything away. You just create a copy and don’t pay for it, but that’s not theft.