Illegal Streaming Site Streameast Taken Down

[Dick_Cheney]

19 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I still don't really understand what happened that made everyone so entitled. Back in the day it was well established that you would pay for albums, you would pay for magazine and newspaper subscriptions, etc. You would have been considered a nutjob if you publicly advocated for stealing that stuff at your own pleasure. But today that is the default position. People get angry at 2 minute ad reads in the middle of a free podcast. I guess the modern opinion is that entertainers should do their work for free and feel lucky to have an audience. So I'm with you on this 100%. But there's no stopping the wave now.

 

Not really sure basing an argument on how things were "back in the day" is a strong foundation on which to build. 

 

Some folks in this thread are being dense to the point where I hope they're trolling, or they're either just wildly out of touch and disconnected from the real world, or maybe the lead levels in their blood has finally reached a critical threshold. 

 

The NFL and the media giants which are attached two it are both inherently evil organizations owned and operated by some of the actual worst human beings alive on this planet. At this point in capitalism, they would not hesitate to actually kill you if it meant they could improve their bottom line, and guess what, a lot of them are indeed actually doing that to people all over the world, albeit at different rates depending on their method. 

 

Considering the fanbase of the Bills and the community from which it grew, I really expected a lot more sympathy for the struggling working class person in this thread. It must be delightful to be living such a privileged life that you can exist in a pure ethical and moral space, knowing you're always making the right and good choice. Good for you! I'm sure the powers that be will give you a nice little pat on the head and say thank you for playing along. 

 

Laughable to see people equating pirate streams with other forms of aggravated theft or stealing from your neighbor. Given the extreme economic disparity this country is currently facing and the almost endless number of reasons why we have arrived at this point, I can't say I really respect the opinion of anyone who isn't able to grasp the perspective of the little guy who is just doing what he can to survive, and you know, maybe actually have some joy in his otherwise mundane dog ***** life, even if he has to "steal" from a billion dollar mega corporation to find those few hours of escape from this garbage earth. 

Edited September 4 by Dick_Cheney

[Livinginthepast]

I only ever used these sites to watch Scottish SPL soccer (yes a very niche and pretty much 3rd tier product but rarely on legit tv and never cheap). I  never used this particular site but using an illegal streaming site has been a mega pain in the butt for years now. Clicking on the link which pops up another link which closes the first link, then leads you to a maze of other links. If you try to close the window or the tab pressing the X it pops up another tab and just when things are working, the stream goes down!! Not worth the effort most of the time.

[SirAndrew]

I expect the NFL to hire Lars Ulrich to take care of this. 

Edited September 4 by SirAndrew

[QCity]

20 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I still don't really understand what happened that made everyone so entitled. Back in the day it was well established that you would pay for albums, you would pay for magazine and newspaper subscriptions, etc. 

 

 

Back in the day the technology didn't exist. There wouldn't be so many people on their moral high horses if streaming existed in the Rich stadium blackout era. The 10 billion WNYers that attended The Comeback Game would have been home watching it.

[Big Blitz]

Why did this randomly show up on my X feed?

 

I do not follow them nor have it but I read this thread today.  
 

Wow.  

[HardyBoy]

9 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

LOL ok.  

 

Yeah I get that this is a prevailing view these days - theft from big companies is fine because they're greedy.  I don't agree that it's fine, nor do I agree that it's victimless, but again, I understand that it's a commonly-held core belief now.

 

I mean ensh$tification is a real thing...the issue is we're being turned into the product, not the consumer. 

 

They're also coming in, stealing the market by offering super low prices and getting rid of or buying up any competition that might exist and then once that is achieved, they jack up prices on customers and turn the customers into the product and then using excess cash for stock buy backs and then laying off employees

 

This is a lot more nuanced of an issue than you're making it out to be...like there is a social contract aspect of this whole thing...like $20 for a cd back in the day, when the money mostly went to record companies and the musicians got saddled with signing bonus debt and loss of control of the master recordings (aka their music)

 

Look at spotify...artist make like .0004 cents a stream or something insane like that, but the record labels still get a significantly larger piece per share.

[Bockeye]

19 minutes ago, ganesh said:

I doubt the big corporations are charging paying customers if stealing is going on 

 

corporate greed is at an all time high and if I bet any - they will simply increase the price because they are a monopoly.  

Only part I’d tackle here is the monopoly part, which in a limited sense is somewhat true. Limited because you can watch other sports if you’d like.  However, given so many NFL owners use tax payer dollars to fund their stadiums, I think it would be cool if they had cheaper stadium tickets and/or TV subscriptions to watch games for those with limited means.   

 

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

1 hour ago, finn said:

So I can watch the Bills every Sunday with NFL+ premium? (I live in Maine and the "home team" is the Pats*)

No. But you can listen to the live streams and time it with RedZone, then once the game is over I can replay it. If I am missing it it's because I'm taking care of the kids and I can watch the full thing when I want that night.

[HappyDays]

32 minutes ago, Dick_Cheney said:

The NFL and the media giants which are attached two it are both inherently evil organizations owned and operated by some of the actual worst human beings alive on this planet. At this point in capitalism, they would not hesitate to actually kill you if it meant they could improve their bottom line, and guess what, a lot of them are indeed actually doing that to people all over the world, albeit at different rates depending on their method. 

 

And the same logic could apply to shoplifting. The Walton family owns the Broncos and also owns Walmart. You could say that stealing candy bars from Walmart isn't a big deal, and you could say since the owners are billionaires that means it's totally an okay thing to do. But 99% of the population would disagree with that. Even shoplifters themselves know on some level that what they're doing is wrong. What's weird is that everyone agrees shoplifting from billionaires is wrong and shouldn't be encouraged, but streaming content illegally has absolutely zero social taboos at all. Quite the opposite, people brag about it and act personally offended when legal authorities shut it down. Like what did you really expect to happen?

 

33 minutes ago, Dick_Cheney said:

Given the extreme economic disparity this country is currently facing and the almost endless number of reasons why we have arrived at this point, I can't say I really respect the opinion of anyone who isn't able to grasp the perspective of the little guy who is just doing what he can to survive, and you know, maybe actually have some joy in his otherwise mundane dog ***** life, even if he has to "steal" from a billion dollar mega corporation to find those few hours of escape from this garbage earth. 

 

For what it's worth I don't think people that stream content illegally are evil. Nor do I think shoplifters are. Absolutely there are some people in such desperate financiial situations that they have no other choice and while I don't condone the behavior I don't really begrudge them either. What gets me is that there are plenty of people who do have a choice, who could afford that one month of Netflix to watch a single game (or just choose not to watch it) but actively decide that they deserve that content for free. It's as if tens of millions of Americans all at once decided they were going to start walking out of Walmart with toiletries shoved in their pockets, and then got enraged when the stores instituted security measures to stop the endemic.

 

And yes at a macro level I do believe that such widespread illegal activity absolutely affects the overall price of these services. Because if it happened in the opposite direction of course prices would be affected. Imagine if all of a sudden Hershey lost 20% of their annual sales because 20% of their customers decided to just start stealing their candy bars. You don't think that would affect the price?

[HardyBoy]

13 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

And the same logic could apply to shoplifting. The Walton family owns the Broncos and also owns Walmart. You could say that stealing candy bars from Walmart isn't a big deal, and you could say since the owners are billionaires that means it's totally an okay thing to do. But 99% of the population would disagree with that. Even shoplifters themselves know on some level that what they're doing is wrong. What's weird is that everyone agrees shoplifting from billionaires is wrong and shouldn't be encouraged, but streaming content illegally has absolutely zero social taboos at all. Quite the opposite, people brag about it and act personally offended when legal authorities shut it down. Like what did you really expect to happen?

 

 

For what it's worth I don't think people that stream content illegally are evil. Nor do I think shoplifters are. Absolutely there are some people in such desperate financiial situations that they have no other choice and while I don't condone the behavior I don't really begrudge them either. What gets me is that there are plenty of people who do have a choice, who could afford that one month of Netflix to watch a single game (or just choose not to watch it) but actively decide that they deserve that content for free. It's as if tens of millions of Americans all at once decided they were going to start walking out of Walmart with toiletries shoved in their pockets, and then got enraged when the stores instituted security measures to stop the endemic.

 

And yes at a macro level I do believe that such widespread illegal activity absolutely affects the overall price of these services. Because if it happened in the opposite direction of course prices would be affected. Imagine if all of a sudden Hershey lost 20% of their annual sales because 20% of their customers decided to just start stealing their candy bars. You don't think that would affect the price?

 

I'd be more curious as to why their customers decided to suddenly start stealing 20% of Hershey's chocolate bars...

[WotAGuy]

24 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

It's as if tens of millions of Americans all at once decided they were going to start walking out of Walmart with toiletries shoved in their pockets, and then got enraged when the stores instituted security measures to stop the endemic.

 

And yes at a macro level I do believe that such widespread illegal activity absolutely affects the overall price of these services. Because if it happened in the opposite direction of course prices would be affected. Imagine if all of a sudden Hershey lost 20% of their annual sales because 20% of their customers decided to just start stealing their candy bars. You don't think that would affect the price?

 

Basically what you describe in bold has happened; Wegmans and Walmart have both had to cut back on self checkout because of rampant theft. There are a LOT of people that have no qualms about walking out with products. 
 

As has been noted upthread, equating the stealing of candy bars and viewing content without paying for it are two very different situations under the stealing umbrella. Because they are different, it directs the conversation to the differences instead of the issue being both are considered “stealing”. 
 

In my opinion, a better comparison is downloading a pdf of a book instead of buying it, or even going to a library and borrowing a book instead of buying it. In both these cases, as with the streaming content, there is a loss of a potential sale but no loss of a product that is removed from circulation that cannot be purchased and the production costs recouped. When a candy bar is stolen, that bar cannot be purchased and its production costs cannot be recouped. Viewing illegal streams only results in a monetary loss if the person was going to buy it but chose not to. 
 

 

Edited September 4 by WotAGuy

[Harold Jackson]

There's 30 other sites 

So, what ever

[Chaos]

32 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

And the same logic could apply to shoplifting. The Walton family owns the Broncos and also owns Walmart. You could say that stealing candy bars from Walmart isn't a big deal, and you could say since the owners are billionaires that means it's totally an okay thing to do. But 99% of the population would disagree with that. Even shoplifters themselves know on some level that what they're doing is wrong. What's weird is that everyone agrees shoplifting from billionaires is wrong and shouldn't be encouraged, but streaming content illegally has absolutely zero social taboos at all. Quite the opposite, people brag about it and act personally offended when legal authorities shut it down. Like what did you really expect to happen?

 

 

For what it's worth I don't think people that stream content illegally are evil. Nor do I think shoplifters are. Absolutely there are some people in such desperate financiial situations that they have no other choice and while I don't condone the behavior I don't really begrudge them either. What gets me is that there are plenty of people who do have a choice, who could afford that one month of Netflix to watch a single game (or just choose not to watch it) but actively decide that they deserve that content for free. It's as if tens of millions of Americans all at once decided they were going to start walking out of Walmart with toiletries shoved in their pockets, and then got enraged when the stores instituted security measures to stop the endemic.

 

And yes at a macro level I do believe that such widespread illegal activity absolutely affects the overall price of these services. Because if it happened in the opposite direction of course prices would be affected. Imagine if all of a sudden Hershey lost 20% of their annual sales because 20% of their customers decided to just start stealing their candy bars. You don't think that would affect the price?

You are absolutely correct that stealing is stealing and stealing is ethically and morally wrong. In this case, no one's children are starving because they did not get to watch their favorite sporting event. There is no moral ambiguity here. Rationalizers pretend they are justifying things, but they are confused or not honest with themselves.

Edited September 4 by Chaos

[Harold Jackson]

6 hours ago, Johnny Bravo said:

You literally said there is a victim when you said the only one being stolen from is the NFL.  The NFL is the victim of this stealing.  Now you might say they are unsympathetic victims or that the owners have enough money, but people who stream illegally are enjoying the owner's product and not paying them for it.

They aren't taking advantage of you.  If the Sunday Ticket isn't worth the price they charge for the service they offer, then don't buy it.  But then don't tur around and watch the games illegally.

 

I will never understand this desire some people have to see themselves as victims or as being screwed over somehow just because they can't have everything they want.

Aren't taking advantage you/us? The hell they aren't. Having to pay hundreds for TV channels is bullpucky! 

What's so hard to understand that youd get more customers if you lower the prices. 

[Harold Jackson]

10 hours ago, Logic said:

You're not paying higher prices because others are stealing.

You're paying higher prices because of corporate greed, which would exist with or without piracy.

Hallelujah 

[HappyDays]

23 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

As has been noted upthread, equating the stealing of candy bars and viewing content without paying for it are two very different situations under the stealing umbrella. Because they are different, it directs the conversation to the differences instead of the issue being both are considered “stealing”. 

 

It is not a 1:1 analogy, but my point is that it is bizarre that stealing from the entertainment industry is perfectly acceptable, but stealing from any other industry is rightfully taboo. The average illegal streamer does not perform deep philosophical musings about the ethics of stealing fungible vs non-fungible commodities. That is just post hoc reasoning to explain why your particular brand of stealing is fine - a shameless shoplifter on the other hand might say that stealing basic necessities is inherently and obviously more ethical than stealing media. Ultimately whatever rationalizations you make don't matter. Stealing is wrong, and it's crazy that that feels like a radical statement. As soon as media became easy to steal, it also became socially acceptable to steal. That's the part I don't understand.

 

Edited September 4 by HappyDays

[BUFFALOBART]

10 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The NFL turned down more money from ESPN to make Sunday Ticket Cheaper and al a carte because they wanted it to remain a "luxury" product. I'm not gonna say piracy is a victimless crime but I'm also not gonna care too much about it either given that the NFL actively chooses to make it's product more expensive and less accessible. 

The NFL's goal is to make all games, 'pay per view'. 

[Harold Jackson]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

It is not a 1:1 analogy, but my point is that it is bizarre that stealing from the entertainment industry is perfectly acceptable, but stealing from any other industry is rightfully taboo. The average illegal streamer does not perform deep philosophical musings about the ethics of stealing fungible vs non-fungible commodities. That is just post hoc reasoning to explain why your particular brand of stealing is fine - a shameless shoplifter on the other hand might say that stealing basic necessities is inherently and obviously more ethical than stealing media. Ultimately whatever rationalizations you make don't matter. Stealing is wrong, and it's crazy that that feels like a radical statement. As soon as media became easy to steal, it also became socially acceptable to steal. That's the part I don't understand.

 

 

Stealing from your neighbor is wrong.

Deciding to view something that is readily available on the Internet. In a signal in the air that should be free anyway... meh, not so much. Water should be dirt cheap if not ultimately free as well

[BillsShredder83]

10 hours ago, Logic said:

Not that this is by any means the gospel on the issue, but...a quick AI answer to the question "does piracy drive up streaming costs?"

It's far from the certainty that you make it out to be.

Even if it was these greedy ****s can e** my ***.  Everything in this country is a scam.

 

Health insurance is worthless for 90%+ of the country. Pay $300-600 a month for the right to pay your first $xx,xxx towards a deductible lol 

 

Banks lending out 10xs what they have in reserves (ones we give them, and even pay service fees to provide), which then get lent out at usury level rates, with next to zero going towards principal. Meanwhile that money they use to loan out 10x on our money, they pay less than inflation on 🤣

 

The SEC sits on their hands at blatant market manipulation by the top .5%'s hedge funds. They get in a pinch? No worries, they'll offload it triple A rating to your local teachers pension programs, and then hand out bonuses from the $1 Trillion paid by taxpayers.

 

I'll pay into social security my whole life, knowing I won't see a cent.

 

The only thing thats owed any to any of these responsible, is a swift judicial hammer of 1776 and a ride on a conveyor belt, moving at Mach speed, fitted with laser triggered guillotine at the end.

 

So no LOL I will not be giving anyone "just" $10 more. 

 

On a totally separate unrelated note, any engineers in here think they can build a really fast conveyor belt? For reasons?

[WotAGuy]

22 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

As soon as media became easy to steal, it also became socially acceptable to steal. That's the part I don't understand.

 

You’ve given yourself the answer. Whenever anything becomes easy to steal, people have, and always will, take advantage of that. This isn’t some new occurrence. Humans have always been this way. 
 

I think the “socially acceptable” part is just rationalizing that SO MANY people are doing it, as noted in the article, that people shrug and go along with the crowd.

You are just being exposed to people’s rationalizations for the first time, but people and stealing have always been this way. 

 

So, I’m curious what do you think about libraries stealing customers from authors?