SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the why-have-one-cheap-service-with-everything-when-you-could-have-117? dept.
Eight individuals have been charged with an indictment by the United States for allegedly running two of the "largest unauthorized streaming services".
The federal grand jury that gave the indictment alleges that the two streaming services, Jetflicks and iStreamItAll (ISIA), caused copyright owners to lose millions of dollars.
Both services were used by tens of thousands of subscribers, and could be accessed online and on numerous systems including smartphones, tablets, smart TVs, video game consoles, digital media players, set-top boxes, and web browsers.
Jetflicks allegedly obtained infringing television programs from pirate websites -- such as The Pirate Bay, RARBG and Torrentz -- by using automated computer scripts, and then would provide the pirated content to subscribers soon after the shows were aired.
ISIA allegedly used many of the same automated tools that Jetflicks employed to locate, download, process, and store illegal content -- but ISIA also provided movies in addition to television programs -- to quickly make pirated content available to ISIA subscribers.
The two services allegedly reproduced tens of thousands of copyrighted television episodes and movies without authorization, the Justice Department said, and distributed the infringing programs to tens of thousands of paid subscribers located throughout the US and Canada.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @09:09AM (3 children)
if you make money from distributing content, and the content creators/owners whatever did not agree to this, you are doing something wrong.
I'm pretty sure these streaming sites had commercials on them, so it's not simply "sharing".
the copyright owners should be entitled to all the profits made by the "eight individuals".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @05:10PM (2 children)
fuck their copyright. you don't get to make money every time your music is played, you fucking slumlords. you can hold a concert and not distribute if you want that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @06:40PM (1 child)
so instead of the copyright owners, you prefer that you give money everytime you listen to music to these assholes who own the streaming website. i can see through your infinite wisdom.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Friday August 30 2019, @03:58AM
It's called a self-inflicted injury.
When technology changed the market the cartels had the opportunity to provide a decent service at a reasonable price. Instead of adapting they chose to try and use litigation to keep the old exorbitant model running. It's sort of working they still make shitloads of money just not as much as they want.
Most people are ok with paying a reasonable fee for movies and music. What many are not ok with is paying 1000 times the incremental cost of a copy AND annoying DRM that decreases your enjoyment of the product AND still being subject to intrusive ads.
The cartels made it so that your choice is shitty product for ridiculously high fees OR free and easy-to-use high quality pirate product.
[sarc] I must say I am truly astonished that some really depraved people select the second option. [/sarc]
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.