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

We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

mux.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 241 posts

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#131

Post by prmoustache »

importantbrian wrote: post #63
emacdona wrote: post #8

Sigh... f*ck sports leagues/governing bodies. The reason some honest people pirate streams for sporting events is because they make it so annoying to pay for them. Some examples... I live in the US. I briefly took an interest in the EPL. If I wanted to watch all EPL games (or have the option of watching any particular EPL game), I'd have to subscribe to Peacock _and_ Fubo -- and I'm still not sure that gets me all ga…

F1 has this absolutely nailed. I fear that if it gets popular enough in the US ESPN will buy exclusive rights and then you'll have to have a cable package in order to watch it.

It was easy for them to nail it and un unfair comparison to soccer or cycling.

In F1 there is only one serie/league. And that doesn't give you access to all 4 wheel motorsport, let alone openwheel ones. An F1 subscription doesn't give you access to formula E, formula nippon, national formula 3 championships, or the different motorsport series accross the world. Nor does it give you access to rallying. MotoGP did the same and I used to watch all their races. Now since I want to watch cycling anyway I only pay for eurosport which allows me to watch most races as well as superbike, moto and car endurance, as well as some rallying and formula E. But there is no way I will pay separarely for MotoGP and F1. In that case they just lost a viewer for good.

Also, for 1 F1 grand prix there are 20 to 50 soccer play or cycling races. The thing is cycling races and tv rights aren't managed by the governing body, but by different orgs. On one hand this is annoying to us because ASO, RCA and Flanders Classics (the 3 majors organizers) can sell rights to different channels. On the other hand a monopoly wouldn't necessarily better for the sports, the riders and the smaller races. If there had to be a monopoly, I would wish its shareholders would be the racers themselves but that won't ever happen.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#132

Post by rusticpenn »

Crosseye_Jack wrote: post #102
12907835202 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tennis is definitely not more popular. It's odd that you seem to think popularity = it would be easier. Soccer's popularity is what causes this issue because there is so much money to be made by splitting it up and selling to multiple companies rather than just one cheap, easy solution. If Tennis attempted the same it would be so detrimental to its viewership it wouldn't be able to survive. Unlike soccer which is so…

> Soccer's popularity is what causes this issue because there is so much money to be made by splitting it up and selling to multiple companies rather than just one cheap, easy solution. The reason they are split up in the UK is to stop a single pay tv gaining a monopoly on the broadcasts like in the past. So even if sky wished to pay all of the monies for all the games they can’t, they are limited to a set number of…

It would have made more sense to make the broadcast non exclusive….

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#133

Post by themoonisachees »

Ntrails wrote: post #127
taneq wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not as in an account ban, it just only lets one copy of the game in question (or one game total? Haven't used it much) run at any given time. No different to lending your friend a Nintendo cartridge, except that it requires less running around. :)

Only one person can play from your library at once. So you are essentially lending the whole nintendo. The frustrating thing is just that I cannot play free games on my steam account (hi dotas) whilst lending a paid game to ma famile.

They've fixed that. I had the same problem a few years ago and now if you properly add the game to both libraries it works fine.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#134

Post by Symbiote »

anarchogeek wrote: post #82

People pirate streams of soccer matches because it's nearly impossible to pay for legally. The matches for a single team or league are spread out amongst a ton of different streaming providers. Sometimes there is no paid option at all because of region blocking and complicated deals. I happily pay Apple for MLS matches because there was no reliable way to get them here in New Zealand. It is still stupid because Apple…

Plenty of people also pirate to avoid paying, or to pay less.

I knew someone in England who ran a pirate football streaming service. He had TV and streaming subscriptions to a rented apartment in Cyprus, and streamed from there to people who paid him in England. Customers were introduced by word-of-mouth, so supposedly it was difficult for the copyright holders to discover.

The same matches were shown in England, but at a higher price.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#135

Post by rad_gruchalski »

probablynish wrote: post #56
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> THE ONLY sports governing body that has figured this out (for sports I like, anyway), is F1. No. The only ones who figured it out is the NFL. F1 shafted Germany after youg Schuhmacher came into F1 and German Sky bought exclusive rights. The NFL? Intl Game Pass €190 per season live streams, instant repeats no adverts, various show, dedicated tv apps, no limit on number of devices, high def.

I think this is country specific. F1's service in the US is great, but the NFL international game pass isn't available to people who live in the US, it's not as easy to watch domestically.

F1TV in Germany was great, too. Until they shafted Germany because someone put money on the table. That’s what I mean.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#136

Post by dataengineer56 »

> If you had asked me two years ago which sport a video startup needs to be most worried about, I would have said American football or basketball ... It wasn’t until I joined Mux that I found out how much people love soccer…

This is a pretty terrible, sheltered introduction. He didn't realise that American sports aren't the most popular sports outside of America? He feels the need to tell us that in the intro? Did he not do any research before starting his job? Did no one interviewing him pick up on this?

Also note that the detection labels mention "field" but not "pitch" even though a football playing area is by definition called a football pitch. More American-centricity that will ultimately harm them (not that I consider that to be a bad thing in this case).

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#137

Post by bbcloluebsj »

LanceH wrote: post #86
temp_praneshp wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you watch Tottenham despite all that, you deserve the pain their football causes. Jokes apart, is the BT Sports "early kick off games" completely different from the Sky Sports game you mentioned? That's ridiculous. I was in England in Summer 2019 for the cricket world cup, and was shocked at how difficult it was to watch the games on TV. Wimbledon was very easy though, so maybe Tennis is way more popular?

A lot of European countries have a list of events which must be freely available. I guessing Wimbledon is on that list in the UK. Check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom_Code_on_Sports_and_Other...

heh. not sure if that's a internal joke from them... but they did wait until nobody is getting signal from airwaves to put in place rules limited to airwaves distribution. bloody marvelous.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#138

Post by matsemann »

emacdona wrote: post #22
duskwuff wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want to "stop pirates", make it easy for them to give you money and watch their favorite sport. I don't disagree, but that isn't something Mux is in a position to do. They just provide video streaming infrastructure -- they're in no position to demand that various sports broadcast rightsholders change their policies.

That's fair. My main objection is labeling _everyone_ as "pirates". Technically, yes, they are pirating the steam. But some of those people are also PAYING to watch plenty of games in whatever sport they are "pirating" streams for. Calling these people "pirates" fails to acknowledge that they are also "paying customers" who are frustrated with how complicated it has become to pay for the product they want to watch.

But they're not paying Mux. Why so angry at Mux for shutting down abuse of their system?

The whole comment section is weird. Is people not realizing Mux has nothing to do with sports rights? They're just a streaming provider that gets misused and have to foot the bill when people use them to stream stuff illegally.

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#139

Post by matsemann »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #99
duskwuff wrote: post #24

So, a lot of users in this thread seem to be misunderstanding what Mux is, and how the "soccer pirates" interact with their service. Let me clarify: Mux is a streaming infrastructure provider. They provide services for companies who want to stream video to their users -- news web sites, video chat services, etc. Kind of like web hosting, but specifically for video. They are not a video content provider; they do not s…

Regardless, the tone of the post made me dislike Mux, whereas before I had a neutral opinion of them. I'm left wondering if they also forward these details to the copyright holders or the FBI.

[flagged]

Re: We glued together content moderation to stop soccer pirates

#140

Post by rjmunro »

bbcloluebsj wrote: post #137
LanceH wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of European countries have a list of events which must be freely available. I guessing Wimbledon is on that list in the UK. Check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom_Code_on_Sports_and_Other...

heh. not sure if that's a internal joke from them... but they did wait until nobody is getting signal from airwaves to put in place rules limited to airwaves distribution. bloody marvelous.

I think most people got "signal from airwaves" in 1996.

Most people still do, although don't necessarily use it very much.

Post reply on HN