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

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 321 posts

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

#201

Post by [deleted] »

benatkin wrote: post #194
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…

With piracy, they don't have to pay for distribution, because the peer to peer networks take care of it. What's unjustifiable is overcharging for essential music, books, and video, some of which is old, because of the ridiculous extensions on the copyright terms. Sometimes the artists have said they understand why people who can't afford it download their stuff, and can't blame them. Also unjustifiable is how the med…

[deleted]

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

#203

Post by SomeOldThrow »

bhelkey wrote: post #87
ikeyany wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it illegal to amplify music in your store if you paid for the music?

Should it be legal to create a drive-in that plays movies off of Netflix?

Yes.

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

#204

Post by huac »

briandear wrote: post #195
lostmymind66 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 disagree. Music is cheaper and easier to buy than ever with things like iTunes and the various streaming services and music piracy is still rampant. Bars have very slim margins and owners will most likely never pay…

Successful bars don’t have slim margins. Restaurants often have slim margins because of food waste, but bars have pretty good margins. There is very good profit on drinks: a 750 bottle of Tito’s vodka costs about $18 wholesale, provides 16 shots, at $5 per shot, that’s $80. Then discount 20% for spillage, that’s $64. Bartenders in the US make tips, so the hourly cost to the bar is pretty minimal, but in Europe, every…

liquor licenses can be exorbitantly expensive (I hear $300k+ upfront in SF), plus increased recurring costs to comply with regulations; I'm sure authorities understand that establishments which serve liquor are more profitable in a vacuum, so they are likely to try and take a larger cut.

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

#205

Post by SomeOldThrow »

schnevets wrote: post #104
myself248 wrote: post #93

I've never been in a bar where the TVs had their audio on. The sports games are on screens but muted, and some have closed-captioning turned on. Wouldn't that defeat this? Slightly off-topic but I feel like relating it: When I was a kid, we'd watch baseball games on TV, but muted. Then we'd turn on the radio and tune in whatever station was simulcasting the game. Because the radio announcers assume you can't see the…

Sports in bars is a very different experience with sound on vs. off. Without sound, it's a background distraction that a few folks may be interested in. With sound on (even if the commentary is indecipherable), it's a collective experience that holds everyone's attention. Usually the bar will mute or put on music during commercial breaks. I do wonder if alternative commentary would ever catch on. Imagine if instead o…

Honestly the best way to watch baseball at least is to mute the TV and turn on the radio—vastly higher quality commentary, and you can look up in time to see the play you just heard. The ads also tend to be more local and less obnoxious.

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

#206

Post by kevinmchugh »

Fripplebubby wrote: post #160
kevinmchugh wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For pay-per-view events there's usually a commercial PPV sales channel as well. Joe Hand Promotions handled it for the UFC up until this year (now it's all under ESPN+). JHP has some formula for determining cost, it's at least partially determined by venue capacity, hence the use of a cover charge.

I believe UFC still sells with a commercial formula for bars, I don't know if it's through JHP or not, but my understanding is that ESPN+ is for private consumers only

oh, I thought ESPN+ also was doing the commercial licenses. They might handle the delivery now, but yeah, it's Joe Hand still that does the negotiation.

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

#207

Post by lone_haxx0r »

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…

I would completely agree with you if I believed in the premise that it's OK to own an idea.

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

#208

Post by lawnchair_larry »

briandear wrote: post #195
lostmymind66 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 disagree. Music is cheaper and easier to buy than ever with things like iTunes and the various streaming services and music piracy is still rampant. Bars have very slim margins and owners will most likely never pay…

Successful bars don’t have slim margins. Restaurants often have slim margins because of food waste, but bars have pretty good margins. There is very good profit on drinks: a 750 bottle of Tito’s vodka costs about $18 wholesale, provides 16 shots, at $5 per shot, that’s $80. Then discount 20% for spillage, that’s $64. Bartenders in the US make tips, so the hourly cost to the bar is pretty minimal, but in Europe, every…

Since nobody spills 20% of every bottle of alcohol, is that 20% figure attributed to spillage intended to account for stronger pours and such?

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

#209

Post by csa »

stornetn wrote: post #185
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…

> a wise businessperson would see this as a signal that their product offering doesn't actually match demand, and work to fill that demand This is not necessarily true. It depends entirely on the shape of demand. By way of simplified example, imagine that there are two types of consumers equally distributed: those willing to pay $1000 and those willing to pay $100. Unless you can distinguish at time of payment betwee…

> but I think it's as least as likely that they are maximizing profits the way we'd expect a rational business operator to do

I think you grossly overestimate the ability of most large businesses to behave rationally form an organizational profit maximization perspective. It would just as likely or even more likely be something like personal wealth maximization by an employee or group of employees, personal relationship improvement, ego gratification, maintaining/improving social standing, effort minimization, etc.

This is even more so for a monopoly rights holder like La Liga.

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

#210

Post by cheschire »

stornetn wrote: post #185
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…

> a wise businessperson would see this as a signal that their product offering doesn't actually match demand, and work to fill that demand This is not necessarily true. It depends entirely on the shape of demand. By way of simplified example, imagine that there are two types of consumers equally distributed: those willing to pay $1000 and those willing to pay $100. Unless you can distinguish at time of payment betwee…

To go further, in your example it continues to pay out even if the $100 crowd outnumbers by 8 to 1. So it seems they could forego nearly 90% of the population and still profit more at a $1000 price, unless I’m missing something.
Post reply on HN