Government's Pre-Super Bowl Seizure Of Sports-Streaming Sites

[Charleston Chew]

Run time: 09:26 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeN6RiJmy40   Posted on YouTube: February 03, 2011 By YouTube Member: SamSeder Views on YouTube: 296   Posted on DU: February 04, 2011 By DU Member: Charleston Chew Views on DU: 1557

 
Sports fanatics around the web had already started to notice, but today federal officials gave a full list of the sports-streaming websites they have seized in advance of Superbowl Sunday. They also defended their actions, saying that each year sports leagues and broadcasters lose millions of dollars from illegal streaming. But the sites are already back up at a variety of new web addresses, and critics of the government's action were quick to note that at least one of the sites, Rojadirecta, was found to be legal by two Spanish courts.

The seizure is part of "Operation In Our Sites," a series of actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that involve taking over web domain names that are alleged to be involved in intellectual property crimes. The operation started out with seizures of websites hawking counterfeit goods, but the seizures have moved into new territory that's included a BitTorrent search engine, music blogs, and now sports-streaming sites. via http://paidcontent.org/article/419-government-offers-new-details-on-seizure-of-sports-streaming-sites/

[Charleston Chew]

1. Majority Report w/ Sam Seder, 11:30 AM est

Majority Report streams live M-F at 11:30AM-1PM @ http://majority.fm /

PODCAST available at http://majority.fm /

Listen live with iTunes/VLC/WINAMP using this link: http://live.majority.fm:8000/live.m3u

Join the Majority Report as a member at http://majority.fm/become-a-member /

Majority Report Recap: http://majorityreportrecap.tumblr.com /

also:
http://samsedershow.com

http://twitter.com/samseder

[sharesunited]

2. Sports streaming is intellectual property? OK, if Homeland Security says so.

[Demstud]

3. It's pure theft by the government

No trial, due process of any kind... just theft of websites decimating information. I wouldn't flip out if these sites were being shut down after lawsuits or some kind of trial, but the manner in which they're enforcing copyright law is pretty disturbing.

[Demstud]

4. AND isn't it funny how quickly our law enforcement helps these people?

If a billion dollar corporation files a complaint, the enforcement is near instantaneous. Even if they have to ignore the constitution, they will find justice for these crooks.

[AlbertCat]

5. So, just stream the commercials.

The Super Bowl and it's trials and tribulations are the last...and I mean last... thing to worry about.

They lose millions? So, are they about to go under because of it? How much are those measly millions being lost from? Billions?

Meh....

Seems like just busy work for federal officials. Shouldn't they get back to work on the War on Drugs?

[digidigido]

6. The arguments made here are wrong

Business is business, and yes... theft is occuring. But the other side of the issue is that theft occurs from broadcasters and
cable companies every day. If I have cable TV, and will not watch Fox News. I am being charged for it along with every
other channel of Fox that happens to come in my package. If the issue of theft from the broadcasters is going to be
addressed, then TV must be regulated in a way that does not require me to fund the companies I choose not to suppport

[trumad]

7. really?

I really don't think it is up to you to deem that theft is occurring....wouldn't that be up to the courts?

do you not understand what happened here?

[digidigido]

12. Read Snake Eyes post, and yes...theft is occuring

[Devil_Fish]

15. I canceled my DTV because they refused to remove FOX from my basic package.

[RandomThoughts]

8. Yea they gave me a huge chuck of US enforcement when they tried to do that.

:rofl:

Thanks for the badge :D

[arcane1]

9. How are they losing money?

Maybe I'm not grasping the issue, but if I have my free super bowl broadcast, and I'm streaming it on the internet, how is that any different from watching it on tv?

[SnakeEyes]

10. You're free superbowl broadcast was paid for by Fox.

And they paid a LOT of money. These sites did not pay for the right to broadcast the game. These sites also have their own banner ads, pop ups, in-stream click banners etc. They are gaining from people watching their Superbowl broadcast. Under your logic, NBC could take FOX's broadcast and transmit it too. NBC could add their own ad graphics over the broadcast too, at a lesser cost than FOX would charge.

[arcane1]

11. Ah, got it!

I didn't think about broadcast rights, I was thinking too much about commercials :)

[WhoIsNumberNone]

13. Here's my theory

The network which carries the Superbowl charges advertisers astronomical amounts of money to run commercials during the game. This is based on TV ratings; The Superbowl is watched by more people than any other program on television, and the higher ratings the higher the ad rates. Superbowl halftime is the most expensive advertising you can buy. Every person that watches the Superbowl through a website decreases the TV audience by 1/150,000,000, and decreases the the amount the network can justify gouging out of its advertisers. The billionaires who run the networks don't like it when pennies are taken off their executive bonuses in this manner. It cuts into their cigar-lighting money, and they won't have it.

Edited to add: And yes, SnakeEyes' point is 100% valid too.

[guruoo]

14. rojadirecta is up

Bing found it, Google didn't... http://www.rojadirecta.es/