Illegal Streaming Site Streameast Taken Down

[T&C]

I watched the Notre Dame game the other day on streameast so I'm not sure about the OP. Unless it happened After that game...

[RaiderDave]

Nothing got shut down.  The story is completely false.

 

Well...someone in Egypt may have gotten raided, who knows.  Who knows why reporters report what they do anymore.

 

But everything is up and running and fine.

[BullBuchanan]

41 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I would actually like to know what kind of cost people would see as fair? If $522 is too expensive, how much lower do you think it would have to be for the large majority of illegal streamers to start paying for it? I'm genuinely curious.

 

My take is that almost no price drop would be enough to reduce the number of illegal streamers. Because once you've decided that you're entitled to the content for free, there's no reason to pay any amount of money for it as long as you have that free access.

That's not true at all and the streaming market is a direct reflecting of the reality. The reason that paid streaming exists in the first place is because the market demanded from services like napster, limewire, popcorn time, TPB, Xbox Game Pass etc. When services launched with competitive pricing, pirating plummeted. When they started getting greedy again with non-stop pricing increases and worse tiers of services, piracy rose.

As for what the magical price is, that's for marketing research departments to figure out, but somewhere between $20/$30 a month is probably the right number assuming that contains on demand access to games and other content. Make it worth our while to not jump through hoops, and it's easy money.

Edited September 4 by BullBuchanan

[Jauronimo]

So much pearl clutching going on here.  Pirating streams is a victimless crime.  Its like punching someone in the dark. 

 

Sorry your streams were shut down.  You can always try Buffalo Bills Fans International Facebook page or something like that.  Some surly dude in Lackawanna kinda points his phone in the general vicinity of his TV during the game and goes Live.  Mostly he bickers with the people who comment on the live feed who mock his awful TV, his shoddy filming skills, and his gross wallpaper.  He gets pretty pissed off because "I dont gots to be doin this for yous.  U shud be thankin me!"  Pretty sure the clock on his wall is broken.

Edited September 4 by Jauronimo

[BullBuchanan]

2 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

So much pearl clutching going on here.  Pirating streams is a victimless crime.  Its like punching someone in the dark. 

People cry about "piracy", but I bet they aren't sending checks to the NFL when they go watch the game at a buddy's house. How corporations convinced people that paying licensing fees made them people of high moral character will surely be something for future civilizations to ponder after corporations destroy our society.  

[RoscoeParrish]

5 hours 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.

 

A whole generation+ has grown up with access to the internet and without an understanding of copyright and IP and moral arguments against piracy.

 

It became socially acceptable to steal because everyone knows someone who does and has for decades at this point.

 

How many younger folks downloaded music illegally off Napster/Limewire when they were kids? They are now adults. And maybe they don’t do that anymore, but they take the “lesser evil” and just illegally stream. 
 

Just like most things, the internet is the disaster and the cause.

Edited September 4 by RoscoeParrish

[WotAGuy]

3 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

No but they are making money hand over fist in advertising revenue, for content they didn't create and don't own the rights to.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/breaking-news/article/streameast-the-largest-illegal-sports-streaming-service-reportedly-shut-down-after-year-long-investigation-154917542.html

 

 

 

But that is not what this discussion is about - it’s about the moral/legal/ethical aspects of viewing illegal streams (for free) by the public. No one is saying the streamers shouldn’t be prosecuted.

[WotAGuy]

3 hours ago, KellysHandWarmer said:

as an author — absolutely NOT. Libraries are some of authors' biggest buyers. If every library around the country bought a copy of my new book, it would be an instant bestseller!

So every book in the library is a best seller?

 

And how many more books would be sold if people bought them instead of consuming a readily-available copy for free?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

56 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

But that is not what this discussion is about - it’s about the moral/legal/ethical aspects of viewing illegal streams (for free) by the public. No one is saying the streamers shouldn’t be prosecuted.

I'm saying they shouldn't.

 

Again, our government allows our biggest geopolitical rival to steal BILLIONS of far more important IP every year and does NOTHING about it.

 

Why then are they prosecuting these kinds of cases? Not because it's moral.

5 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

I can tell you with certainty that IP companies spend tens of millions of dollars on digital encryption and security, plus tens of millions more on updating their content more frequently because of theft.  These costs get passed on.  Just because they don’t immediately (or ever) lower their prices in response to enforcement steps doesn’t mean there are no real financial costs associated with free unlimited distribution of copyrighted IP.

Won't anyone think of the billionaires?

[WotAGuy]

54 minutes ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

I'm saying they shouldn't.

 

Again, our government allows our biggest geopolitical rival to steal BILLIONS of far more important IP every year and does NOTHING about it.

 

Why then are they prosecuting these kinds of cases? Not because it's moral.

Won't anyone think of the billionaires?

The government thinks of the billionaires. That’s why prosecuting is happening, or being tried anyway. 🤣

 

There is nothing new or unusual about this arrangement. Money talks. 
 

I'm not sure the government is doing “nothing” about IP theft, but apparently you have more inside info on that? I just think it’s smarter people outsmarting smart people. 

[Matt_In_NH]

14 hours ago, YattaOkasan said:

This thread really needs to clarify that watching a stream is not illegal.  Hosting (thus distributing content) is.  If you download copyrighted content onto your device (thus taking undo ownership) that is also illegal.  Thats why they hit the streamers and not the viewers.  

If you watch the stream that was delivered over the internet then you downloaded it. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

52 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

The government thinks of the billionaires. That’s why prosecuting is happening, or being tried anyway. 🤣

 

There is nothing new or unusual about this arrangement. Money talks. 
 

I'm not sure the government is doing “nothing” about IP theft, but apparently you have more inside info on that? I just think it’s smarter people outsmarting smart people. 

The PRC sends "students" here who are obligated to and working for the CCP for the express purpose of IP theft. They know it. Our government knows it. It's not "insider" information. It's common knowledge. 

 

And yet the government still allows half a million "students" from the PRC into the country every year.

 

They simply don't care, which is why it's hard for me to take "IP theft" arguments about things like movies, music, or sports streaming seriously. And that's before we get into purchase/ownership arguments.

 

 

[Matt_In_NH]

10 hours 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 yet here you are feeding the beast.  

[Dan]

26 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

If you watch the stream that was delivered over the internet then you downloaded it. 

Absolutely inaccurate.  Downloaded refers to the content being hosted on the internet and you download it and have a copy on your device.  When you stream something… there is no copy on your computer or phone.  You watch the stream… then it’s gone.   You can’t watch it again unless you stream it again. 
 

This is one of the problems with some movie streaming services.  You can pay to “own” a movie and stream it anytime, but it’s a different fee to actually download it. Problem is you can’t always stream the movie for a variety of reasons so do you really own it?
 

The pricing is akin to the old days of renting a movie at blockbuster vs buying the movie and having a copy forever.   Different price points, different uses for the content.  But even in those days people would rent movies and copy them.   Just like we all used to record songs off the radio and make our favorite mix tapes.   
 

Back to the point, watching an illegal streams isn’t an illegal act. Streaming it is.  Watching it is just condoning or supporting that illegal act.   But, since the beginning of time people been wanting something for nothin. It’s human nature.  I still contend the NFL is driving people to these stream sites with their multi platform streaming and pricing model.   

[Metal Man]

6 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

I would actually like to know what kind of cost people would see as fair? If $522 is too expensive, how much lower do you think it would have to be for the large majority of illegal streamers to start paying for it? I'm genuinely curious.

 

My take is that almost no price drop would be enough to reduce the number of illegal streamers. Because once you've decided that you're entitled to the content for free, there's no reason to pay any amount of money for it as long as you have that free access.

 

I know for me personally if the Sunday ticket actually did give me access to every game then it would be well worth the top end price point just for the ease of access and having everything in one spot for one price.

 

And I do currently subscribe, albeit using my wife's educator discount, but even at the lower price I question if it is worth it when I only get the 1 and 4 Sunday games excluding the locally broadcast.

 

The NFL is making it a PITA to view their product so I understand why even fans who can afford it, like Lebron certainly can, still go to these sites. There really is something to be said for the ease of access argument. 

 

 

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

19 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Perhaps the victims are the law-abiders who pay higher prices because others are stealing?  How is it any different from shoplifting from Target?  

Whew! You’re right … prices are SURE to decrease now 😂😂

[Johnny Bravo]

12 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

Greed is about power and the ability to exploit. You can't be "greedy" without it. Greed isn't about making an extra 1%. It's about destroying anything in your path to make that extra 1%. You can see this first-hand at any fortune 500 company.

There's no magical dollar value associated with greed, because it has absolutely nothing to do with the dollar value, and everything to do with what an entity will do to get it.
 

Thats a very convenient definition of greed.   Such a horrible crime and one that, since you have neither power nor the ability to exploit, you can never be guilty of.  

It will always be some other guy who is being greedy, but never you-even when you choose to take or use a product without paying for it.

[Johnny Bravo]

9 hours ago, Harold Jackson said:

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. 

No, they are not taking advantage of me.  And they are not taking advantage of you.  This perpetual victim mentality is so sad.

 

The NFL are offers a product at a price.  My 30 plus years of Bills fandom doesn’t give me the right to take that product without paying for it.

 

There have been many years in the past when I couldn’t afford Sunday Ticket, so guess what?  I didn’t get to watch the games live like I wanted to.  No one was screwing me over.  Now I can afford it and I get to watch the games live.  Maybe in the future my circumstances will change again and I won’t be able to afford it-so I won’t watch.

 

its football.  It’s the definition of a luxury.  If you can’t afford it or think it is overpriced, find something else fun to do on Sundays. 

[Lost]

7 hours ago, HappyDays said:

I would actually like to know what kind of cost people would see as fair? If $522 is too expensive, how much lower do you think it would have to be for the large majority of illegal streamers to start paying for it? I'm genuinely curious.

 

$150 is fair.   $200 max.

 

 

[Johnny Bravo]

7 hours ago, Dick_Cheney said:

It actually is okay to steal from billionaires and it mosr definitely should be encouraged. 

 

The fact that you are saying that billionaires and working class and poverty class people should operate within the same ruleset is pretty bleak. The fact that you begrudge the people who somehow you “know” can afford things but “steals” anyway says more about you than them. 

 

At the macro level, you are wrong that shoplifting/theft impacts the price of things. It may impact the final bottom line for the retailer, but they are already charging as much as they can to give as little in return as possible. Any shoplifting impact is negligible and used as a scapegoat to increase prices because unfortunately people believe the “argument” you believe you are making. 

 

It doesnt make sense to imagine a Hershey’s theft/price inflation scenario so that’s not really worth examining. Not to mention the cocoa trade is one of the most problematic and exploitive trades on the literal planet. The assumption that billionaires and corporations are operating on the same moral and ethical plane as the rest of the world is absurd on its face. 

 

The common man should be doing everything he can to take back any shred of power and agency from these groups at every opportunity possible. So yeah. Steal that chocolate bar. Download the new Superman movie. Shoplift food and clothes for your family. 

 

 

I want to steal your car.  You probably have a nicer home than I do so I feel justified.

 

tell me why I’m wrong.