Swansea away 5.2.21 NOT on Ifollow

[JackDuck 5]

No, I'm not Bill

Those are fair points KC but can I ask honestly, did you steal any games last season? I did. But with the legal options increased missing the odd game here and there is now something I can accept. Simularly to how downloading music illegally is something I haven't done in years thanks to streaming services. 

1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

He is quickly finding his way around the forum and is currently looking at a thread about streams dated 2015. I hope you are not suggesting he is a multiple account holder ?

Hello to you too Uncle Fred.

[TIL 1010 4,737]

1 minute ago, JackDuck said:

 

Hello to you too Uncle Fred.

Poor effort at deflection as Fenway Frank will tell you that me and Uncle Fred are best mates.

[king canary 7,603]

1 minute ago, JackDuck said:

No, I'm not Bill

Those are fair points KC but can I ask honestly, did you steal any games last season? I did. But with the legal options increased missing the odd game here and there is now something I can accept. Simularly to how downloading music illegally is something I haven't done in years thanks to streaming services. 

Hello to you too Uncle Fred.

Not as far as I remember but to be honest there wasn't much on the pitch encouraging me it was worth the effort of finding a stream. However I certainly wouldn't have felt any need to call anyone out for watching one last season pre lockdown, especially the 3pm kick offs.

I do think over time we'll be looking at some sort of 'season pass' model for each team that will work out less than £10 a game. I think the genie is now out of the bottle and even when fans are back you'll struggle to get fans accepting they shouldn't be able to watch every game via some form of legal stream

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

14 minutes ago, king canary said:

The bit in bold is key for me. Streamed. Past tense.

I certainly haven't been as militant in my anti streaming view before this season. But this season the circumstances changed.

1) The club has a sizable income black hole that they need to fill

2) For the first time ever, you can legally stream every single Norwich City game.

I know lots of people can't afford £10 a game. Personally I can't justify spending £460 to watch every league match this season. So what do I do? I pick and chose and pay for the games I'm happy paying for, the rest I follow on twitter or the radio.  You say 'what if they don't want to justify spending another tenner?' The answer is simple- don't and do something else. 

I also just kind of wish those who choose to do this would just own it- say 'yeah its stealing, yeah I could pay for it but I don't want to.' Instead you get all these tortured justifications about how it actually isn't wrong and other people do it so blah blah blah. 

I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind but there you go. The absolute minimum for me though is if you're on this thread justifying stealing the coverage then you sure as **** don't get to moan about how much the club spends on transfers similar. 

 

 

No way is it a justification. I can quite clearly read the banners. I am not justifying it I am telling you why I do it. 

But it is totally unnecessary to call it stealing. For goodness sake, have you never bought anything off the back of a lorry or a bootsale? Never broken the speed limit? Smoked a spliff? I could go on.

Don't quote the blackhole. Those employed to coach and play had it in their own hands to alleviate that somewhat. While those office staff etc were on fulough, the stars kept earning. It was the NCFC version of Animal Farm.

[king canary 7,603]

2 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

No way is it a justification. I can quite clearly read the banners. I am not justifying it I am telling you why I do it. 

But it is totally unnecessary to call it stealing. For goodness sake, have you never bought anything off the back of a lorry or a bootsale? Never broken the speed limit? Smoked a spliff? I could go on.

Don't quote the blackhole. Those employed to coach and play had it in their own hands to alleviate that somewhat. While those office staff etc were on fulough, the stars kept earning. It was the NCFC version of Animal Farm.

You're getting something for free via illegal methods that you should be paying for- what else would you call it?

[Bill 1,788]

not guilty, mr plod

I'm just back from Aldi - and what a splendid prime sweet and juicy classic fruit salad at 75% off x 4 plus a good few either delicacies at that discount

4 cans '£1.99 offer from Brew dog delivered this morning so I shall be fine watching us v the taffs

cheers

[GenerationA47 751]

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

You're getting something for free via illegal methods that you should be paying for- what else would you call it?

“Spectating on the black market”..? 😆

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

Not as far as I remember but to be honest there wasn't much on the pitch encouraging me it was worth the effort of finding a stream. However I certainly wouldn't have felt any need to call anyone out for watching one last season pre lockdown, especially the 3pm kick offs.

I do think over time we'll be looking at some sort of 'season pass' model for each team that will work out less than £10 a game. I think the genie is now out of the bottle and even when fans are back you'll struggle to get fans accepting they shouldn't be able to watch every game via some form of legal stream

Good point. Thats what I have been saying all along. iFollow is in the clubs' hands. They don't run it but they do not have to belong to it. If they don't think it suits them, they walk away.

So the clubs are empowered to say, through negotiation with iFollow, how much should be charged.

Surely a fiver a game is nothing they cannot make money on. There are 72 clubs. I know of at least 6 people in Redruth would be up for it. Thats £30 in my little town of 13000.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

You're getting something for free via illegal methods that you should be paying for- what else would you call it?

How is it theft if they never had it? It doesn't belong to Norwich.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

By the way, I have SKY, and had it probably longer than most of you so I reckon I have put plenty of money into the Carrow kitty.

[Greavsy 2,412]

1 hour ago, Krul Mistress said:

It's free to listen to the radio, you only have to pay for a TV

Whilst you don't need a tv license to  listen to  radio its the same bbc,  and they draw their funding from there. 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Greavsy

[Foxy2600 301]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Sorry mate I'm totally lost.

Good, let me make an analogy -  as an Exile I have probably visited Carrow in the multiples of tens in my 62 years. However my attendances away are in the hundreds.

Tonight I have tuned into an Armenian Stream and am listening to a poached Radio Norfolk commentary - life could be so much easier. It actually is the thrill of the chase. Like when you turn up at Crystal Palace on New Years Eve and you get told its a sell-out. You explain to the Box Office that you and your girlfriend have travelled miles and are happy to sit in the 'Away' stand and keep quiet if CP score. And you get shown to your seat.......Get out more 'mate'

It's been going on for years.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

 Watching a stream — even if it’s unauthorized by the copyright holder — doesn’t technically violate these rights. There have been numerous challenges and interpretations as copyright law has adapted to the internet, but this reading has essentially held true. 

“I think the best interpretation of copyright law is that it’s not illegal to watch unlicensed content,” Gibson said. “The person who’s merely watching a stream should incur no copyright liability from that act alone.”

Copyright attaches liability only to public performances, and streams aren’t public performances,” Gibson said. “Streams are performances, but they’re not public if it’s just you in the privacy of your own home and you’re not making a permanent copy — you start it and you stop it and that’s your only interaction with it.”

[hogesar 9,657]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

 Watching a stream — even if it’s unauthorized by the copyright holder — doesn’t technically violate these rights. There have been numerous challenges and interpretations as copyright law has adapted to the internet, but this reading has essentially held true. 

“I think the best interpretation of copyright law is that it’s not illegal to watch unlicensed content,” Gibson said. “The person who’s merely watching a stream should incur no copyright liability from that act alone.”

Copyright attaches liability only to public performances, and streams aren’t public performances,” Gibson said. “Streams are performances, but they’re not public if it’s just you in the privacy of your own home and you’re not making a permanent copy — you start it and you stop it and that’s your only interaction with it.”

Watching illegal streams is illegal whether you like it or not. I've cited multiple sources in the past. Whether its a direct violation of purely copyright law im not sure but it is a crime regardless.

https://crimestoppers-uk.org/keeping-safe/online-safety/streaming-online-know-the-risks

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/warning-over-illegal-football-streams-18450423.amp

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/premier-league-illegal-streaming-free-streams-criminal-malware-a9572811.html%3famp

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

38 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Watching illegal streams is illegal whether you like it or not. I've cited multiple sources in the past. Whether its a direct violation of purely copyright law im not sure but it is a crime regardless.

https://crimestoppers-uk.org/keeping-safe/online-safety/streaming-online-know-the-risks

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/warning-over-illegal-football-streams-18450423.amp

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/premier-league-illegal-streaming-free-streams-criminal-malware-a9572811.html%3famp

 

Wrong. In late December, a bill was put before Congress that would make watching copyrighted material illegal. Currently only the providers are doing anything illegal. And even some judges have ruled that streaming is temporary, no copy is made so is not infringing copyright.

Obviously the main thrust surrounds movies which is what the rulings are concerned with and where it is estimated a quantifiable loss can be calculated. With football for instance, if the game is sold out then it is. argued no loss occurs

At the moment I have no knowledge of whether that bill lapsed because of the administration change. It may well still sit before Congress.

So any of us who watch streams are currently not doing anything illegal.

Using a torrent is illegal because it has been saved on a server as amovie can be watched at any time rather than a football match taking place and being watched at a set time.

Currently, no streaming service for football has been targeted whereas torrent providers such as Pirate Bay are continual closed or harassed.

See the ruling below.

Currently, a pirated stream is treated as an illegal performance, which is a misdemeanor, rather than illegal reproduction and distribution, which is a felony. ... It does not target individuals who access the pirated streams or unwittingly stream unauthorized copies of copyrighted works.

 

[Greavsy 2,412]

are we in the states now?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

58 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

are we in the states now?

Its the internet Greavsy. It doesn't matter what country. An ISP would be duty bound to block it.

The states are taking the biggest interest because of Hollywood. But their sports broadcasting is set up differently to ours, as is all of their broadcasting.

 

 

[Greavsy 2,412]

But we arent governed by US laws. that was my point. 

If not heaven forbid, we would all be allowed guns! 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

6 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

But we arent governed by US laws. that was my point. 

If not heaven forbid, we would all be allowed guns! 

It isn't quite like that. Your ISP probably is.

[hogesar 9,657]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Wrong. In late December, a bill was put before Congress that would make watching copyrighted material illegal. Currently only the providers are doing anything illegal. And even some judges have ruled that streaming is temporary, no copy is made so is not infringing copyright.

Obviously the main thrust surrounds movies which is what the rulings are concerned with and where it is estimated a quantifiable loss can be calculated. With football for instance, if the game is sold out then it is. argued no loss occurs

At the moment I have no knowledge of whether that bill lapsed because of the administration change. It may well still sit before Congress.

So any of us who watch streams are currently not doing anything illegal.

Using a torrent is illegal because it has been saved on a server as amovie can be watched at any time rather than a football match taking place and being watched at a set time.

Currently, no streaming service for football has been targeted whereas torrent providers such as Pirate Bay are continual closed or harassed.

See the ruling below.

Currently, a pirated stream is treated as an illegal performance, which is a misdemeanor, rather than illegal reproduction and distribution, which is a felony. ... It does not target individuals who access the pirated streams or unwittingly stream unauthorized copies of copyrighted works.

 

I dont care whats put before Congress what I care about is UK law and its incredibly dangerous and irresponsible to spout nonsense about how watching ILLEGAL streams isn't illegal. It is and I provided 3 UK based sources. Do you need three more?

[hogesar 9,657]

8 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

It isn't quite like that. Your ISP probably is.

Again, stop spreading lies. Even if you use an American ISP you are legally bound by these countries laws.

[Greavsy 2,412]

9 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

It isn't quite like that. Your ISP probably is.

I'm with BT - I think the 'B' in the names gives it away. (although im never sure when I have to call them!)

And the E in EPL too.  

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Just now, Greavsy said:

I'm with BT - I think the 'B' in the names gives it away. (although im never sure when I have to call them!)

And the E in EPL too.  

We're not there yet mate😀

[Greavsy 2,412]

1 minute ago, keelansgrandad said:

We're not there yet mate😀

I didnt say we were! 

[Greavsy 2,412]

but we are in the EFL too - so same thing applies. 

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

but we are in the EFL too - so same thing applies. 

 

ISPs and platforms like Facebook would not go against US law.

 

10 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Again, stop spreading lies. Even if you use an American ISP you are legally bound by these countries laws.

Why don't go to bed. You are becoming the real childish pillock of the forum.

It isn't illegal in this country either. The Norfolk Constabulary shut down an outfit that was streaming. It could only prosecute those who had subscribed to the site. Not anyone who had "stumbled on the site". And that is the salient point. Until the law changes, and the UK will follow the US no doubt, any stream can be "stumbled" upon and viewed in innocence. Downloading, where there is a deliberate act by either subscription or searching and subsequent saving, is different and illegal.

[Greavsy 2,412]

Isnt Facebook an American owned platform though? 

[hogesar 9,657]

Just now, keelansgrandad said:

ISPs and platforms like Facebook would not go against US law.

 

Why don't go to bed. You are becoming the real childish pillock of the forum.

It isn't illegal in this country either. The Norfolk Constabulary shut down an outfit that was streaming. It could only prosecute those who had subscribed to the site. Not anyone who had "stumbled on the site". And that is the salient point. Until the law changes, and the UK will follow the US no doubt, any stream can be "stumbled" upon and viewed in innocence. Downloading, where there is a deliberate act by either subscription or searching and subsequent saving, is different and illegal.

Oh my god.

The only childish pillock is the one spreading misinformation. If a local constabulary decides its worth going after every single individual viewer is a different matter to IF IT IS BREAKING THE LAW OR NOT. 

IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO KNOWINGLY WATCH AN ILLEGAL STREAM.

FACT released lots of information across multiple platforms to also reduce the ignorance plea in these situations. IFollow show a message to viewers for the same reason.

It is 100% illegal to view an illegal stream in this country. Not only have I researched this long before you got aggy because iFollow won't give you the same price they offered via you circumventing the rules with a VPN, its also partially my job to know.

By all means go and do whatever you want but it is wrong to spread misinformation on a subject you quite evidently have zero actual knowledge on.

[Greavsy 2,412]

Plus, and I dont profess to being an expert - but surely its morally wrong, let alone legally wrong to charge 'subscribers' for something that isnt yours to sell??

 

[TIL 1010 4,737]

5 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

The Norfolk Constabulary shut down an outfit that was streaming. It could only prosecute those who had subscribed to the site.

Please put some meat on the bones over that claim.