Jump to content

keoma

Member
  • Posts

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. In Sweden there was a show called Tipsextra which ran on Swedish National Television on Saturdays which used to show one game of British football per week. Back in those days satellite/cable wasn't a thing yet for most people so most (interested) people watched and started following a team. I remember watching Andy Cole and Peter Beardsley around '94 somewhere thinking they were great and started following NUFC. Most friends/family supported Manchester United/Liverpool/Arsenal. I also remember later on watching Sunderland and Niall Quinn, hating Quinn for his appearance and started disliking Sunderland. Had no idea back then about the local rivalry between the clubs but it fell to me naturally
  2. Was thinking about him as a candidate yesterday. Remember he had a scary moment on the field a year ago or something.
  3. Strange that no one had an issue with a previous owners business sponsoring arena etc.
  4. Good lookin lad with a good eye for a goal. Up there with Schäär in my book.
  5. ASM is like Hayden a few seasons ago... always sitting down feeling himself
  6. keoma

    Transfer rumours

    Caio Ferreira is finally coming!!!
  7. As long as application for O&D isn't formally withdrawn they can't comment because of NDA?
  8. It's pretty obvious that there's a stark contrast between Fred and Jeff going halfies on a service they wouldn't otherwise have bothered with, and an IPTV service that splits that service down to tiny, minute fractions, far outside of the fair use on the account (ie 2 separate IPs at one time). Almost all streaming services limit by simultaneous IPs, since it's almost impossible to prove that Fred wasn't watching on one device while Fred's brother who lives in the same paying household was over at Jeff's watching on his own device. The fair use policies are set up like this deliberately, because sharing between two people is usually considered likely to incur a profit that wouldn't have otherwise existed, rather than a loss. The more fractionalised the one legitimate stream becomes, obviously the more severe the loss becomes. It's a conscious concession, and therefore treated differently by providers to large scale organised piracy. Of course it's a stark contrast between IPTV and account sharing, but Jeff paying Fred for usage of his account or 10, 100 people paying Fred, it's still basically the same thing. Penalty for Fred is obviously more severe with 100 users, and IP owners are more intrested in stopping Fred than Jeff. But if Jeff want to watch legally he should pay IP owner not Fred. Usually when you pay for the right to use a media, you pay for the rights for your household. So, sharing within household is ok and as you say, it's virtually impossible to prove that this IP wasn't in use by someone belonging to your household but using another IP address. But when the technology arrives and is accepted to use, like a universial online ID, then I'm sure you won't be able to share accounts outside of family anymore. A few years ago, before IPTV/online streaming, people used to do card sharing for satellite service. Both on larger scale with dreamboxes, but also on a smaller scale like buying a legal twin card which your friend pays for and uses. Small scale, still piracy. Which is why they started locking cards to some hidden ID in your box's CPU when the technology allowed for it.
  9. I'm with Saudi Arabia, I'll stop pirating as long as they email me on the correct address.
  10. Illegal IPTV basically is account sharing on a much larger scale. You pay for illegal IPTV, it's still piracy. If you share accounts on a streaming service whose TOS prohibits sharing of accounts then it's also piracy.
×
×
  • Create New...