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

Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#11

Post by i336_ »

girvo wrote: post #10
jfoster wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it sounds like they did eventually cut his access, so that's one measure. Presumably they relied on Facebook having his real name in order to know who he was, though it's also possible that they have some stenographic watermarking.

> they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.

Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this?

Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#13

Post by klackerz »

i336_ wrote: post #11
girvo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.

Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this? Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.

My cable provider also has a unique code which flashes on TV randomly. I could provide a photo or video of it if you are interested later when I reach home.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#14

Post by MatekCopatek »

i336_ wrote: post #11
girvo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.

Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this? Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.

I work in a similar industry and many times content providers require you to implement a system for this kind of identification. It's nothing special technically, you just display a unique ID over the video on ALL client devices for a fraction of a second when a potential infringement is under way - just enough to get evidence that lets you later identify the user from the recording.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#15

Post by ominous »

So is there a limit on the number of people that can watch, per box?

Can I watch it with my dog?

With my friend?

With my friend and her kids?

Can I watch it during a birthday party? There will be 20 kids and their parents around, is that ok?

Can each of said parents have a conference call with their buddies to watch and discuss the game? Is there a limit on the size of the tv? Can I mount a 10x5 monitor setup so people across the street can see as well? Can I project it on that publicity board? Can I twitch my reaction to the game? Can I stream the screen? Oops.

Be creative.

Also,

    "It's stealing. It's no different to video piracy
    or music piracy,"
     one of the fight's promoters
The usual stealing/piracy synonym. I don't remember the name, but there was this project to have a server somewhere running rtorrent continuously, piping any downloaded torrent to /dev/null, stealing and burning money as fast as bandwidth allows it.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#16

Post by flashman »

ominous wrote: post #15

So is there a limit on the number of people that can watch, per box? Can I watch it with my dog? With my friend? With my friend and her kids? Can I watch it during a birthday party? There will be 20 kids and their parents around, is that ok? Can each of said parents have a conference call with their buddies to watch and discuss the game? Is there a limit on the size of the tv? Can I mount a 10x5 monitor setup so peop…

> is there a limit on the number of people that can watch, per box?

While it's not fixed, it's generally thought to be fewer than 91,000.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#17

Post by nkkollaw »

ominous wrote: post #15

So is there a limit on the number of people that can watch, per box? Can I watch it with my dog? With my friend? With my friend and her kids? Can I watch it during a birthday party? There will be 20 kids and their parents around, is that ok? Can each of said parents have a conference call with their buddies to watch and discuss the game? Is there a limit on the size of the tv? Can I mount a 10x5 monitor setup so peop…

I don't think it's hard to see that streaming the event on Facebook is not what the subscription is meant for.

I think it's pretty easy to discern private viewing from public viewing.

You're not allowed to distribute the content. Don't tell me that those people didn't know they weren't supposed to stream someone else's content on Facebook.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#18

Post by posterboy »

chrisbolt wrote: post #8
jstanley wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you draw the line? If he was streaming something else that was going on in his home and happened to have the fight on in the background, would that be OK? What if you only caught a glimpse of the fight? What if it was just audio? I think it's dangerous to let Foxtel sue this guy for streaming something that's going on inside his own home (albeit, a view of his TV).

Wherever you draw the line, it's nowhere near "I've got 78,000 viewers that aren't gonna be happy with you mate" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvoJju4B11s

Why wouldn't it? Arcane laws modeled after theaters presenting unlicensed material are hardly the end of the stick either.

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#19

Post by thejosh »

i336_ wrote: post #11
girvo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.

Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this? Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.

They use to do this in UK pubs for those who were showing something on their TVs without a licensed.

They tried showing an image, but the owners would just stick something covering the watermark so they wouldn't be caught q

Edit - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930

Re: Australian cable provider suing people who streamed event via Facebook

#20

Post by pmiller2 »

ominous wrote: post #15

So is there a limit on the number of people that can watch, per box? Can I watch it with my dog? With my friend? With my friend and her kids? Can I watch it during a birthday party? There will be 20 kids and their parents around, is that ok? Can each of said parents have a conference call with their buddies to watch and discuss the game? Is there a limit on the size of the tv? Can I mount a 10x5 monitor setup so peop…

> Can each of said parents have a conference call with their buddies to watch and discuss the game? Is there a limit on the size of the tv? Can I mount a 10x5 monitor setup so people across the street can see as well? Can I project it on that publicity board? Can I twitch my reaction to the game? Can I stream the screen? Oops.

In the US, it is a violation of copyright law, if "people across the street can see it..." or if you "stream the screen," as that creates a "public performance," which, presumably would be unlicensed.

Post reply on HN