Здравей Гост

0 Потребители и 1 Гост преглежда(т) тази тема.

Неактивен Toshko

*
  • *****
  • 3395
    • Профил
Първите големи нарушители на авторски права бяха дата сървърите.
Всъщност първите съвременни нарушители на авторски права са разбира се меломаните разполагащи с грамофон и магнетофон.
Тук ще направя едно уточнение, че пиратството очевидно е естествена човешка дейност за да мога да продължа публикацията с множествено число "Ние". Развлекателната индустрия се опитва да ни превъзпита така че пиратството да започне да се приема за неморално от повечето хора. За сега нямат успех. Колкото повече се развиват рехнологиите, толкова повече стават пиратите.
Понеже пиратството е естествена човешка дейност, пиратите са и потребителите на  и развлекателните продукти. Някак неудобно е носителите на права да воюват пряко с пазара си. Затова те воюват с технологиите за пренос на данни и с правата на потребителите.
Първо финансираха и водиха война с дата сървърите, след това с автоматичните системи като e-mule, последните сблъсъци бяха с peer-to-peer технологията по която работят торент клиентите.
При всички тези исторически събития са били преследвани услуги предоставени на информационното общество, които винаги са били без собствена добавена стойност и без собствено оригинално съдържание. Услуги предоставяни от собствениците им за да се възползват от естествената човешка дейност пиратството. Ние пиратстваме, а те печелят от реклами.
Обществото винаги е подкрепяло гласно жреците на услугите, които улесняват пиратството му, но също така винаги с намаляващ ентусиазъм. Все пак собствениците на сървъри или тракери не са Васил Левски и Христо Ботев, а бизнесмени подхванали начинание с цел печалба, което по стечение на обстоятелствата е много изгодно за потребителите.

Ако не ставаше дума за развлекателни продукти, а за храна вече щяхме да сме добре дресирани колко е неморално да се краде. Щяха да корумпират държавата да ни държи гладни докато не се отречем от природата си на пирати три пъти.

Собствениците на сървъри и тракери биха ни прожектирали въртяща се теменужка и пак биха печелили от реклами, но за зла беда им се налага да ни дават поле за изява като пирати. Те са класически стопански субекти по Карл Маркс, стремят се максимално към утопичното пари-пари прим.

Вестникът към който е списвал Карл Маркс е затворен от германското правителство по молба на Руския император.
Самият Маркс е изгонен от Германия и Франция по повече от веднъж докато накрая се установява в Англия.
Всички прилики със съвремието не са случайни и са закономерни.

Противостоенето между носителите на права и предоставящите услуги на информационното общество днес се пренесе на нова арена: Социални мрежи срещу pay-per-view.
Което се превежда като pay-per-view срещу pay-per-view, както можете да научите от предишна моя публикация по темата: http://penkiller.com/index.php/topic,1814.0.html

 
LOS ANGELES — Conor McGregor isn't the only one who took it on the chin Saturday.
Pay-per-view was dealt a heavy blow — though probably not a knockout — from live-streaming apps that are likely to only get more nimble before the next round.
Nearly 3 million people watched Saturday's Floyd Mayweather-Conor McGregor fight for free on live streaming services, according to security firm Irdeto. Showtime, which broadcast the fight on its cable TV channel as well as its streaming pay-per-view site and via an app for $99, has not released audience numbers for the event.
The free broadcasts were simple: someone holding a smartphone in front of their TV screen and sharing paid event live on Facebook, Twitter's Periscope, Instagram, YouTube and others.
Screen shot captured from Facebook Live pirated stream
Screen shot captured from Facebook Live pirated stream of the Mayweather/McGregory boxing match 
IRDETO
As these apps advertise the ease of going live by tapping a button, pay-per-view (PPV) promoters such as Showtime face increased threats to a business model that revolves around convincing customers they need to pony up for a must-see event.
Pay-per-view has traditionally been the domain of cable and satellite operators, used primarily for big-ticket sporting events like boxing and wrestling. In recent years, with the advent of streaming and on-demand video rentals from Apple's iTunes and the cable providers themselves, PPV has been used more selectively, for big events.
The event was big, attracting fans — and free loaders.
More: Floyd Mayweather-Conor McGregor hype didn't translate into big crowd in Vegas

Mark Mulready, vice president of cybersecurity services for Irdeto, says the Mayweather-McGregor match was "the largest we've seen to date," in terms of copyrighted big ticket sports content appearing for free online.
The lion's share of the 2.93 million viewers were on Facebook, which dominates live streaming, he adds, followed by YouTube and Twitter's Periscope app.
"In terms of ease of use, it's one or two clicks, and instant viewing," he says.
On Saturday, Periscope, Twitter's live-streaming app, was a trending topic on social media, with many users touting their free streams.
Twitter's copyright policy states that the company will suspend or terminate accounts that violate it. A company spokesperson declined to comment on whether Twitter in fact suspended or terminate any accounts that shared the fight illegally.
The onus is on CBS's Showtime unit or any other pay-per-view promoter to complain to platforms like Facebook and YouTube if too many users are uploading copyrighted streams. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, websites and apps that show content illegally need to take it down once the copyright holder complains.
Facebook presents the biggest challenge to pay-per-view promoters, says Mulready, due to its audience of more than 2 billion people.
With some 239 illegal streams Irdeto caught on Saturday, "so many streams would need to be removed," says Mulready. "It would be difficult for Facebook to take them down as quickly as the industry would like."
Facebook and its Instagram unit did not respond to a request for comment, nor did Showtime.
So it is a losing battle? Are live video apps so easy to operate that pay-per-view promoters should just call it a day and give up?
Mulready doesn't think so. "Pay-per-view will be around for years to come," he says.
He believes promoters need to do a better job protecting their content, like via watermarking, which could identify the source of the pirated stream and convincing social media platforms to prevent the streams from appearing on their networks.
Beyond losing customers, Showtime is also contending with upset customers demanding refunds for the pay-per-view broadcast being delayed, due to tech issues.
A Portland, Ore., man has filed a class action lawsuit against Showtime for the poor quality of the fight, according to a report by the Hollywood Reporter.
If you haven't subscribed to the TalkingTech newsletter yet, what are you waiting for? Just click this link and sign up: usat.ly/2qaIVVQ. We also invite you to subscribe to the #TalkingTech podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Tunein and wherever else you like to hear great online audio, and please follow me on Twitter and on Facebook.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2017/08/28/mayweather-mcgregor-aftermath-body-blow-pay-per-view-live-streaming-apps/609388001/

Неактивен Toshko

*
  • *****
  • 3395
    • Профил
Форбс продължава темата, като 3-те милиона са вече "десетки милиони".

On Saturday, MMA star Conor McGregor said in a pre-fight interview: “I see me outclassing this man… I am eager to put on a show.” Throughout the world, tens of millions watched the interview on illegal streams and then saw McGregor succumb to Floyd Mayweather, despite putting up a good fight.

The numbers coming in about piracy of the fight in social media sites are astounding. VFT Solutions, which specializes in monitoring live streams in social media, is reporting records in its books for a single live event. Its preliminary numbers show more than 7,000 partial or full live streams of the fight in social media platforms, with roughly 100 million viewers, or an average 14,000 viewers per stream. Wow.

Paul Gift, sports economist at Pepperdine’s Graziadio School of Business, and business and analytics writer for the MMA media outlet Bloody Elbow, states: “For certain fans, The Money Fight may have seemed in advance to be a competitively-matched clash of boxing and MMA champions. But for many others, it was more of a spectacle fight, something you might want to see but not necessarily pay for. Add in a higher-than-usual U.S. pay-per-view price of $99.99 for HD and there was certainly a strong incentive to find alternative viewing options.”

From a technology perspective, the uphill battle against piracy is getting steeper as social media platforms enable anyone to stream live. Irdeto, a firm that provides 24x7 monitoring of global internet piracy, reported that of a regional sample of 239 illegal live streams of the fight with almost 3 million viewers, 69% were on social media channels like YouTube Live, Periscope, Facebook Live, and Twitch. Mark Mulready, VP of Cybersecurity Services at Irdeto, states, "Using our automated live sports platform we can detect hundreds or even thousands of pirated live streams during a relatively short live event like this one. One of the biggest challenges our industry currently faces is having this volume of streams shutdown in a timely manner by the social media channels."

For a conservative estimate of the potential losses, let’s suppose half of the viewers reported on social media sites—50 million—watched the full fight, so they could be likely payers. Then, let’s adopt a research-based conservative assumption in the film industry that 10% of viewers of pirated content would have paid for it, and adjust it for this event. Using Gift’s insight that many considered it a spectacle and wouldn’t have paid the hefty $99.99, let’s cut that 10% in half. So that’s 5% of 50 million viewers, or 2.5 million viewers that were willing to pay-per-view, for a revenue loss of $250 million.

I don’t think Mayweather or McGregor will be very happy about that. For them, it may mean a few millions less from the hundreds of millions they will get from pay-per-view revenue share, but for the many entertainers and artists who struggle to survive in this profession, it can be the difference between making it or not.

Some may argue there were special circumstances that may have driven masses to watch the fight on illegal live streams, such as:

The UFC’s streaming site crashed two hours before the fight, which may have caused many to flock to social media for a viewing alternative.
The unusual merging of two sports audiences, boxing and MMA, may have contributed to the massive views on illegal streams.
The fight was advertised heavily, including ads for illegal streams. Irdeto identified 42 ads on e-commerce websites for illicit streaming devices offering the Mayweather vs. McGregor fight.
But what seems undeniable is the magnitude of the live piracy (plus views of illegal replays and downloads of the fight were also massive, probably in the hundreds of millions). The fight marked Mayweather’s record-setting 50 victories with no defeats, but I bet based on the numbers above it will also be record-breaking for piracy of a live event on social media platforms. It should be a trigger for content providers to strongly affirm their intention to stop this seemingly inevitable trend. Just like Mayweather in the fourth round turned around a fight he was losing, content providers need to make bold moves to start winning the fight against piracy.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/nelsongranados/2017/08/28/tens-of-millions-watched-mayweather-beat-mcgregor-on-illegal-streams/#6ef2003f79a3