from the Don't-blame-$foo.-Blame-$foo-misuse. dept.
In an interview with Variety, the Motion Picture Association of America's CEO Chris Dodd spoke out about the growing popularity of Kodi open source media player:
While torrent sites have been a thorn in the side of the MPAA for more than a decade, there's a new kid on the block. Speaking at the Berlin Film Festival, MPAA chief Chris Dodd cited the growing use of the Kodi platform for piracy, describing the problem as the "$64,000 question."
[...] Legal battles over the misuse of the platform are ongoing, mainly in the UK and the Netherlands, where test cases have the ability to clarify the legal position, at least for sellers of so-called "fully loaded" devices. Interestingly, up until now, the MPAA has stayed almost completely quiet, despite a dramatic rise in the use of Kodi for illicit streaming. Yesterday, however, the silence was broken.
In an interview with Variety during the Berlin Film Festival, MPAA chief Chris Dodd described the Kodi-with-addons situation as "new-generation piracy". "The $64,000 question is what can be done about such illegal use of the Kodi platform," Dodd said.
While $64,000 is a tempting offer, responding to that particular question with a working solution will take much more than that. Indeed, one might argue that dealing with it in any meaningful way will be almost impossible.
First of all, Kodi is open source and has been since its inception in 2002. As a result, trying to target the software itself would be like stuffing toothpaste back in a tube. It's out there, it isn't coming back, and pissing off countless developers is extremely ill-advised. Secondly, the people behind Kodi have done absolutely nothing wrong. Their software is entirely legal and if their public statements are to be believed, they're as sick of piracy as the entertainment companies are. The third problem is how Kodi itself works. While to the uninitiated it looks like one platform, a fully-modded 'pirate' Kodi setup can contain many third-party addons, each capable of aggregating content from dozens or even hundreds of sites. Not even the mighty MPAA can shut them all down, and even if it could, more would reappear later. It's the ultimate game of whac-a-mole.
Previously: XBMC Is Getting a New Name: "Kodi"
Middlesbrough Trader Prosecuted for Selling Streaming Boxes Preloaded With Kodi
Five Arrests in 'Fully Loaded' Kodi Streaming Box Raids
[Ed Note: This is the same Chris Dodd who served 30 years as a US Senator from Connecticut. Probably best known for the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.]
Related Stories
Since 2002, the popular media center software known as XBMC has gone through three namings. First, it was called Xbox Media Player. Upon realizing that it did a bit more than your traditional media player, in 2004 the development team elected to rename it Xbox Media Center. A mere 4 years later in 2008, the team once again elected to rename the software to simply XBMC, given that it had moved on from its original roots on the Xbox. Support for the Xbox was dropped shortly thereafter. Today it's all happening one last time, along with a new release announcement.
Beyond the nonsensical nature of the software's name, there is a secondary issue. Because "XBMC" was originally based on the name "Xbox," the developers of the software (that's us) have never had any sort of legal control over the use of its name, which has resulted in a whole slew of problems.
Brian Thompson, a Middlesbrough trader, has been prosecuted for selling set-top boxes running Android that come pre-installed with the Kodi/XBMC open source media centre software.
A Middlesbrough trader is set to make legal history as the first person to be prosecuted for selling Android boxes. Following an 18-month investigation, Brian Thompson has been told Middlesbrough Council is taking him to court in what could prove a landmark case.
The council claims the boxes are illegal, but Brian said: "I am pleading not guilty and I'm going to fight this."
The kit - also known as a 'Kodi box' - allows viewers to watch copyright material like Premier League football and Hollywood movies for free. As such there are major question marks over both their legality, and exactly just what people can safely watch.
What seems to be at issue here is that some traders, perhaps Thompson, were selling these set-top boxes preloaded with third-party Kodi add-ons that permit access to media in violation of copyright law. More coverage at the BBC.
Five people have been arrested, accused of selling set-top boxes modified to stream subscription football matches, television channels and films for free.
The sale of so-called "fully loaded Kodi boxes" has been called a "top priority" by the Federation Against Copyright Theft (Fact).
The five traders were arrested in early morning raids.
Fact said it believed the suspects had made in the region of £250,000 selling the devices online.
Kodi is free software built by volunteers to bring videos, music, games and photographs together in one easy-to-use application.
Some shops sell legal set-top boxes and TV sticks, often called Kodi boxes, preloaded with the software.
The latest battle in the Forever War...
Roku has refreshed its lineup of TV streaming sticks and boxes, shortly after Apple and Amazon released similar products. Roku now has a device that supports 2160p resolution and high dynamic range:
Roku just announced updates to five of its TV streaming products, as well as a new operating system that marries access to over-the-air TV with video streaming services. The announcements from Roku come after both Apple and Amazon have revealed updates to their own video streaming boxes in recent weeks, with all three companies pushing further into the home with things like 4K, voice control, and improved search functionality.
Roku's low-cost streaming sticks are getting the most interesting updates. The basic Roku streaming stick, which at $49.99 is priced the same as last year's model, is getting a processor update that Roku claims is 50 percent faster. The remote is also getting voice control functionality, along with power and volume buttons to control those functions on your TV set.
Then there's the Roku Streaming Stick Plus, which now supports HDR and 4K Ultra HD. It also has four times the wireless range of the basic stick, which is partly enabled by the wireless module being built directly into the cable, rather than the stick itself. The idea is that moving it away from the television reduces interference. This one, which effectively replaces last year's Roku Premiere 4K box, will cost $69.99.
Also at Ars Technica and Roku.
Previously: Roku OS 7: Developer Highlights
Roku Media Player Maker Seeking IPO
Related: MPAA Chief Focuses Attention on the Kodi Platform
Kodi Panic in the UK and Popularity in North America
Kodi Add-on Library "TVAddons" Disappears After Lawsuit
Apple Investing $1 Billion in Acquiring and Producing TV Shows
The Kodi media player has re-entered the Xbox ecosystem. But can it be "fully loaded"?
The popular Kodi media player software returned to its roots today. The team just announced that Kodi for Xbox One is available worldwide through the Microsoft and Xbox store. This means that the project, which once started as the Xbox Media Player, has come full circle. [...] The roots of Kodi are directly connected to the Xbox, as the first iterations of the project were called the "Xbox Media Player." As time went by XBMP became XBMC, and eventually Kodi. The last name change made sense as the software was no longer being developed for Xbox, but for other devices, running on Linux, Windows, OSX, and Android.
While the broader public was perfectly happy with this, the sentimental few were missing the Xbox connection. For them, and many others, Kodi has a surprise in store today after returning to its roots. "Let us end the year 2017 with a blast including a nostalgic reference to the past," the Kodi team announced. "It has long been asked for by so many and now it finally happened. Kodi for Xbox One is available worldwide through Windows and Xbox Store."
Also at Engadget.
See also: Our 'Kodi Box' Is Legal & Our Users Don't Break the Law, TickBox Tells Hollywood
Previously: XBMC Is Getting a New Name: "Kodi"
Five Arrests in 'Fully Loaded' Kodi Streaming Box Raids
MPAA Chief Focuses Attention on the Kodi Platform
Kodi Panic in the UK and Popularity in North America
Kodi Add-on Library "TVAddons" Disappears After Lawsuit
Hollywood Strikes Back Against Illegal Streaming Kodi Add-Ons
Netflix, Amazon and Hollywood Sue Kodi-Powered Dragon Box Over Piracy
Several major Hollywood studios, Amazon, and Netflix have filed a lawsuit against Dragon Media Inc, branding it a supplier of pirate streaming devices. The companies accuse Dragon of using the Kodi media player in combination with pirate addons to facilitate mass copyright infringement via its Dragon Box device. [...] In recent months these boxes have become the prime target for copyright enforcers, including the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), an anti-piracy partnership between Hollywood studios, Netflix, Amazon, and more than two dozen other companies.
After suing Tickbox last year a group of key ACE members have now filed a similar lawsuit against Dragon Media Inc, which sells the popular Dragon Box. The complaint, filed at a California federal court, also lists the company's owner Paul Christoforo and reseller Jeff Williams among the defendants.
According to ACE, these type of devices are nothing more than pirate tools, allowing buyers to stream copyright infringing content. That also applies to Dragon Box, they inform the court. "Defendants market and sell 'Dragon Box,' a computer hardware device that Defendants urge their customers to use as a tool for the mass infringement of the copyrighted motion pictures and television shows," the complaint, picked up by HWR, reads.
According to TorrentFreak (TF) entertainment coalitions such as the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) are continuing to threaten developers of Kodi addons:
The MPA, Netflix, Amazon, and dozens of other content companies are ramping up the pressure on a third-party Kodi addon developer. Last year, JSergio123 was warned by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment to cease his activities and sign a confidential settlement agreement. He did not and now he's coming under pressure to comply. But what are ACE's demands?
[...] JSergio123's reluctance to sign an agreement with ACE hasn't gone unnoticed by the anti-piracy group. In a letter dated March 5, 2018 and signed by Kelly Klaus of US-based lawfirm Munger, Tolles & Olson, the developer is reminded of what transpired last year and what is expected of him moving forward.
"I understand that ACE counsel have discussed with you various of your "Addon" software applications and related software and services, including URLResolver (collectively, the "[redacted] Addons") and other actions you have undertaken to induce and contribute to the mass infringement of the ACE members' copyrighted works," Klaus writes. "I also understand that ACE counsel have provided you with a proposed settlement agreement, pursuant to which you would end your infringing activities and provide cooperation and other consideration in exchange for ACE agreeing not to pursue legal action against you arising out of your infringing activities. To date, you have not signed the settlement agreement."
JSergio123's precise reasons for not signing the settlement agreement aren't being made public. However, TorrentFreak understands that some of the terms presented to addon developers last year have caused considerable concern. In some cases they are difficult to meet, not to mention unpalatable to the people involved. They include promises to ensure that specified addons and indeed any developed in the future can no longer infringe copyright. For those that scrape third-party sources, this could prove impossible to absolutely guarantee. This could effectively put developers out of the addon game – legitimate or otherwise – for good. TF is also informed that ACE demanded a high-level of cooperation, including that the developers should supply what amounts to a full confession, detailing all the projects they've been involved in, past and present.
Meanwhile, Dish Network is continuing to pursue a lawsuit against TVAddons and ZemTV.
Related: MPAA Chief Focuses Attention on the Kodi Platform
Kodi Panic in the UK and Popularity in North America
Kodi Add-on Library "TVAddons" Disappears After Lawsuit
Hollywood Strikes Back Against Illegal Streaming Kodi Add-Ons
Kodi Returns to its Roots With an Xbox One Release
Two New Lawsuits Against Makers of "Pirate Streaming Devices"
Google has censored the term "Kodi" from its search engine's autocomplete feature, despite it being completely legal open source software:
Google has banned the term "Kodi" from the autocomplete feature of its search engine. This means that the popular software and related suggestions won't appear unless users type out the full term. Google has previously taken similar measures against "pirate" related terms and confirms that Kodi is targeted because it's "closely associated with copyright infringement."
[...] The company demotes results from domain names for which it receives many DMCA takedown notices, for example, and it has also removed several piracy-related terms from its autocomplete feature. The latter means that when one types "pirate ba" it won't suggest pirate bay. Instead, people see "pirate bays" or "pirate books" as suggestions. Whether that's very effective is up for debate, but it's intentional.
[...] The Kodi team, operated by the XBMC Foundation, is disappointed with the decision and points out that their software does not cross any lines. "We are surprised and disappointed to discover Kodi has been removed from autocomplete, as Kodi is perfectly legal open source software," XBMC Foundation President Nathan Betzen told us.
The Kodi team has been actively trying to distance itself from pirate elements. They enforce their trademark against sellers of pirate boxes and are in good contact with Hollywood's industry group, the MPAA.
Related: MPAA Chief Focuses Attention on the Kodi Platform
Hollywood Strikes Back Against Illegal Streaming Kodi Add-Ons
Kodi Returns to its Roots With an Xbox One Release
Kodi Media Player Addon Developers Under Pressure from ACE, Dish Network
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jasassin on Friday February 17 2017, @06:41AM
I'm feeling the Streisand effect.
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @07:10AM
Having said that, I am not sure if all the plugins are using things in the expected manner.
There are plugins supporting WCBS, WNBC, WABC, SyFy, and a number of others. None of which appear to spawn ads, but not having flash available I can't check their official websites for how they work and if ads are spawned.
Additionally there are audio plugins for online radio including SomaFM, ALL PBS stations, Italian Virgin Radio (UK Virgin used to have a regular webstream that worked in xmms a decade or so ago, but I think they broke/discontinued it possibly at the content producers request.)
Quite frankly, if any of these services are discontinued I will just switch to spending my free time on other media, like videogames, or websites, rather than choosing to pay for the content. There are only maybe 2 dozen worthwhile shows each year of interest to me. And if the ones freely available are discontinued I will either go back to gaming full time in lieu of them, or picking up DVDs of the shows until DVDs are discontinued for good. Blurays are not an options thanks to online DRM. At that point I might as well just pirate. And sadly the libbluray decryption key library only contains popular titles, not the esoteric blurays I might be interesting in viewing. Furthermore if I ever lose that DB, the disks become worthless, unlike CSS where outside of decryption library everything you need is on the disc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @07:25AM
Streaming is not a crime, remember?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @02:11PM
Copying blah blah yes I'd download a car.
(Score: 3, Informative) by DannyB on Friday February 17 2017, @02:19PM
Downloading a car would be a crime. Streaming a car would not be a crime.
Copying == theft! (omg!)
Streaming != theft (unless the MPAA says so)
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday February 17 2017, @06:22PM
It may not be theft, it can be copyright infringement. I'd argue that the copyright terms are too long and allow too many renewals, but that's a separate argument. Saying it isn't theft is true, but (nearly) irrelevant.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Friday February 17 2017, @07:40PM
I was hoping the snark would come through in my post. Starting with the absurdity of accepting without criticism the notion of downloading a car.
Copyright Infringement is not theft.
Copyright length should allow exactly zero renewals to the length of copyright which is already absurdly too long.
I don't engage in copyright infringement because I find increasingly little from either MPAA or RIAA that I would even consider worth wanting to have a copy of. Legally or otherwise.
As for MPAA offerings that I do want to see, if it isn't on Netflix, HBO, Starz, Prime, Hulu then it does not exist as far as I am concerned. End of story. I don't care how much they think it is worth. It's not. Really.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:15AM
Well, I suppose "downloading a car" is a legitimate snark...this year. And it's the "this year" which is why it didn't come through...but I've heard analogous arguments that were intended seriously, and were also currently impossible.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday February 17 2017, @11:08PM
It's hardly irrelevant when copyright thugs keep trying to insist that it is theft.
(Score: 3, Informative) by mmcmonster on Friday February 17 2017, @11:04AM
I love Kodi as well. It's extremely easy to use. I rip my own DVDs and BluRays (filling in with stuff from Red Box) and grow a collection like that. Once you have it set up, it's exceedingly easy for the family to use.
That being said, I work in a non-tech field and people at work have 'Kodi hot boxes' and are streaming all sorts of stuff. They know it's illegal and just don't care. Not a single one has mentioned getting a letter from their ISP, so it's all under the radar up until now.
Now the cat is out of the bag and never going back in. A few of the people with the hot boxes know about my ripped collection. They'd drop off a hard drive and I'll fill it up and give it back to them. There's no way that will ever get caught (except in a raid). A year later I will re-copy my collection. (I buy and rent a lot of movies.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @07:33PM
it's not under the radar. isp's know that their customers are "pirating" it's just not in their best interest to do anything about it. good! fuck the mpaa.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:00AM
That notion starts to break down when it's cable companies providing the Internet access, as they're losing money thanks to these streaming options enabling cord cutting.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:52AM
Check out the Exodus [tvaddons.ag] video add-on. Makes streaming sites (which it's just scraping) a lot less of a pain thanks to entirely circumventing the ad and pop up hell most of them are.
Though given this, it almost seems the MPAA's best fight against Kodi is actually to encourage MORE users, as it puts the pressure on the streaming sites while choking out their revenue stream. Soon enough they'll be in a battle with add-on developers and the MPAA needn't spend a cent.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by migz on Friday February 17 2017, @08:05AM
Where can I get non-pirated content? I have netflix for commercial stuff.
But I would prefer to watch public domain stuff. You tube is full of junk, of questionable origin. There is some "free" stuff on YouTube - student films - fan films etc.
What we need is curated public domain TV. I would be happy to subscribe to a service that had a huge archive of black and white and otherwise public domain material. There is some stuff on archive.org but it's not friendly.
I see scope for a non-profit dedicated to human culture. It could even lobby to repeal the ridiculous copyright terms. And generate own content. LibreVox style to start with.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @08:15AM
You described archive.org and then threw it out for whatever reason. It's a non-profit dedicated to human culture which has lobbied successfully for DMCA exemptions.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @09:54AM
The archive.org plugins for Kodi have been broken for years. :,(
(Score: 1) by Pax on Friday February 17 2017, @07:28PM
you sure about that? it works just fine on mine....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @11:17PM
Pretty sure.
The official Internet Archive addon [kodi.wiki] available in the repositories has not been updated since 3 years ago [github.com], and it broke long ago when the Internet Archive changed the format.
And the MetalChris forks have version/repo/code sync problems also. :(
(Score: 4, Insightful) by migz on Friday February 17 2017, @10:13AM
Archive.org don't do new content. And I don't want DMCA exemptions, I want copyright abolition, but I would gladly take any reduction in copyright. But I want good legal content now, not arguments or discussions about how sucky copyright law is.
I just want to route around the problem.
(Score: 2) by RedGreen on Friday February 17 2017, @11:00AM
"But I want good legal content now, not arguments or discussions about how sucky copyright law is."
Good luck with that because of the never ending extensions to copyright every time Mickey comes up for entering the public domain nothing is ever going to enter the public domain again. Believe it is coming up again in few years here then the content mafia parasites will be out in force telling us how hard done by Disney is by only having had 100 years of protection so they need another 100 to fully recover their costs.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 2) by migz on Friday February 17 2017, @11:13AM
I don't need Mickey. I refuse to watch anything Disney btw. I have SOME morals (Between school and The Church I think I might have managed to stash some away somewhere). It's much harder to begrudge Marvel though.
I'll take whatever is already in or has been committed to the PD.
(Score: 2) by RedGreen on Friday February 17 2017, @11:33AM
"I'll take whatever is already in or has been committed to the PD."
Well that leaves you anything made before the 1920-40 range then I think it is, forget where the cut off line is at at the moment and too lazy to search for it. That is the state of copyright at this point and time since every one of the extensions is retroactive nothing as I said is EVER going to enter the public domain again unless the author pro-actively gives up their rights for it to happen.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday February 17 2017, @06:27PM
Not really. if you're in the US copyright doesn't cover any foreign film published before sometime around (or after) 1970. Probably other countries have some similar status, only favoring THEIR local film studios.
P.S.: Remember why Hollywood is in California? It was so that they couldn't be pestered over legalities like patents by people in New York. (Were copyrights involved? I can't quite remember.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @01:19PM
Oh, just Let It Go
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @01:46PM
You missed the main point. Whenever Micky Mouse nears the end of it's copyright protections Disney successfully lobbies to get copyright extended for ALL works, sometimes even grabbing up material that was previously in public domain. It's extra absurd when you realize Disney ripped off the majority of their characters and content from other works. Micky Mouse is a near direct copy of Steam Boat Willy, all the fairy tales are far older, etc... but Disney managed to make them their own. Go try to make a Steam Boat Willy cartoon (which is in public domain) and Disney will murder you in the court room because it's too similar to Micky Mouse.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday February 17 2017, @04:12PM
Steamboat Willie is a 1928 American animated short film directed by Walt Disney and Ub Iwerks. It was produced in black-and-white by Walt Disney Studios and was released by Celebrity Productions.
It's extra absurd when you realize Disney ripped off the majority of their characters and content from other works. Micky Mouse is a near direct copy of Steam Boat Willy, all the fairy tales are far older, etc... but Disney managed to make them their own.
Er...can you rip off yourself? I don't like what WD is doing to copyright either, but come on.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Tuesday February 21 2017, @04:53AM
Call it 4Chan Willie and Disney won't go near it.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @02:04PM
I don't get why they even need this. Can't they just trademark Mickey?
It's not like they need to worry about the sales of old black'n'white cartoons - I haven't seen any for sale.
Could it be that the real worry is the "retroactively censored" racist cartoons?
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Friday February 17 2017, @02:56PM
Mickey Mouse is trademarked. But under the ruling in Dastar v. Fox [wikipedia.org], trademarks and other exclusive rights under the Lanham Act cannot be used to extend the effective term of U.S. copyright in a particular work. This means that in 2024, when copyright in the original trilogy of Mickey Mouse short films (Plane Crazy, The Gallopin' Gaucho, and Steamboat Willie) is set to expire, Disney will have no grounds to block creation, distribution, and exhibition of derivative works of said trilogy so long as their authors do nothing to imply their endorsement by Disney.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Pino P on Friday February 17 2017, @02:50PM
never ending extensions to copyright every time Mickey comes up for entering the public domain
That was a fluke caused by the coincidence of three things: work in the 1970s toward aligning U.S. copyright statutes with the Berne Convention, a 1990s recognition of twentieth century health care advances, and when the copyright in works first published in the late 1920s would have expired under the 1909 Act.
The original rationale for the copyright term under Berne was that copyright ought to extend for the life of those heirs who knew the author personally, as they'd be most qualified to carry out the author's will. This is called "life of grandchildren" or the "three-generation principle". It was set at 50 years after the death of the author because of life expectancies a century ago, and the Copyright Act of 1976 implemented the same term in the United States as a step toward that country's joining Berne in the late 1980s. But over the twentieth century, the life expectancy of the author's grandchildren increased dramatically, and copyright no longer covered the life of grandchildren. So the European Union extended the copyright term by 20 years in 1993, and the U.S. followed suit in 1998 because it too saw an increase in life expectancy. (Source [copyrightalliance.org])
When the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the 1998 extension in Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003), it accepted the excuse of harmonization to Europe, but the opinion of the Court was careful to distinguish harmonization to Europe's life expectancy adjustment from "legislative misbehavior" intended to circumvent the Constitution's "limited Times" restriction. Yet in the following years, analysts with only part of the story characterized the record as such "misbehavior", calling it "perpetual copyright on the installment plan" and fearing a third successive extension before 2024, when U.S. copyright in early Mickey shorts and Pooh books is set to expire under current law. But as far as I'm aware, they haven't explained what arguments will be used to distinguish such a third extension from "legislative misbehavior."
If you want to attack the life of grandchildren term, attack it directly.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday February 17 2017, @06:31PM
The legal arguments are the legal arguments, and not necessarily (or even usually) the underlying reason. Blaming Disney is totally appropriate. It's POSSIBLE (hah!) he wasn't behind the original extension, but he certainly lobbied hard in favor of later extensions. Sometimes directly and sometimes through the MPAA.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @09:37AM
There is tons of public domain video material on archive.org, including old movies that are in the public domain.
(Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Friday February 17 2017, @12:43PM
Not sure how it is in the US. In Germany, there are several great, free tv-shows available as podcast. Until recently the pages worked well with podget, last November that unfortunately stopped. But manual download is still no problem. The genres are mainly
- political satire ("Die Anstalt", "Neo Magazin Royal", ...)
- education ("Wissen macht Ah", ...)
Youtube is also not generally bad, just subscribe to high-quality channels:
Jonathan Pie [youtube.com]
Chaos Computer Club [youtube.com] (German club, but most videos available in English)
For entertainment:
SMBC Theater [youtube.com]
Cyanide and Happiness [youtube.com]
There are plenty more, those channels are IMO good examples.
And iirc, it was decided that ripping your own DVDs is now also considered fair use in the US? So you could will the box with films from existing DVDs, for convenience and in case they get scratched.
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Friday February 17 2017, @07:49PM
I don't have Kodi right now but on my Roku I watch PBS almost exclusively. I did have to specify my zip code to say which PBS station specifically I subscribe to.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday February 17 2017, @07:50PM
It depends on what you're looking for.
I find all kinds of fascinating things on YouTube on my 60 inch screen in my living room.
All sorts of Clojure conference videos.
I can be entertained and inspired by looking at videos of what others do with Arduino and Raspberry Pi.
There is a set of interesting videos that are an introduction to higher math. Starting with groups, rings, etc. Easy to understand. Look for: bill shillito
There are interesting MIT artificial intelligence lectures on YouTube. Just search for: mit 6.034
Want to understand FFT - YouTube.
Etc.
If you like Netflix then you might find that Starz and HBO streaming are a nice supplement. A Roku box or stick can get all of those. If you watch movies, or tv series, then you might find those appealing at a reasonable subscription price. Basically the total cost is less than many cable packages, with greatly superior content. Even Hulu without ads has interesting things.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Dunbal on Friday February 17 2017, @10:33AM
Maybe if the "entertainment industry" made their content available for much less, people would no longer pirate it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by curunir_wolf on Friday February 17 2017, @12:25PM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @01:35PM
Disagree, $2 per 20 min episode is too much for me, I'll pay $0.25 - $0.50 maybe... As always the largest chunk goes to the distributor which is just dumb in the internet age. I bet a large reason for DRM is actually about providing a fictional need for content producers so they feel like they have to use xyz saas. DRM harms the customer, it's really dumb.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Friday February 17 2017, @01:51PM
Also the list of things available is quiet small. I want to play content I paid for on any device I own without paying extra. Most of the time it just isn't possible to do legally, if the content is made available at all.
Content producers have no desire to make things available.
In b4 someone says "oh x is available on this proprietary platform that I can view on this one device that I have and you don't." If I don't get to decide what I do with it, then I am not going to buy it.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Friday February 17 2017, @02:28PM
It is both cost and availability. I'm sure if people could watch the show they wanted, when they wanted, they'd be more than happy to pay a monthly subscription ( a lot do it now through Netflix, Hulu, etc) or a low per/stream price. But $29.99 for the season on DVD? Fuck off.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday February 17 2017, @04:15PM
Silly consumer, just pay $20 a month to 7 different cable streaming services like we tell you! It's The American Way!
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Aiwendil on Friday February 17 2017, @11:51AM
Realise that the most asked-for addon is for netflix but due to the drm it doesn't work (you can log in and search just fine, it's the playback that is an issue).
Seriously - this is an industry-caused problem and is best fixed by fixing the industry.
(For comparasion - the crunchyroll (anime&jap drama) addon for kodi only works with a premium(paid for) account).
The demand is there but the major players refuse to sell.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by gidds on Friday February 17 2017, @01:40PM
Erm, isn't this equivalent to noticing people running some piracy app on their PCs, and making lots of noise about how Windows should be banned?
(Of course, many would welcome a ban on Windows, but not for that reason :-) )
I use Kodi myself, but I wasn't even aware of that sort of plug-in. (I installed it on a Raspberry Pi last year, connected to a TV, to play TV programmes and movies I record myself off air or rip from my own DVDs. Both of which are, or at least should be, completely legal and morally acceptable.)
Are people really so undiscriminating*?
Should we ban cars, because they can be driven to restricted places?
Or ban spectacles, because they can be used to view pirated movies?
(* Rhetorical question. Of course we know they are. :-( )
[sig redacted]
(Score: 2) by jummama on Friday February 17 2017, @10:30PM
Similar to the MPAA trying to ban the VCR because of concerns that people might use it to pirate.
Or RIAA putting up such huge roadblocks to stop DAT tape from being the major player it should have been, for much the same reason.
We should ban cars because people might download them /s