• fartington@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    I don’t understand why you would pay for an illegal service when the other options are to pay legally or pirate.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I dont subscribe to any streaming service (except the occasional free prime trial, to be full disclosure), not even the one in the news story… but I can still answer your question…

      Because I want to pay a single service to watch everything. Like Netflix used to be. Watch everything I want, for one monthly price that was reasonable.

      But its not like that anymore. Every company looked at how well Netflix used to do, went “Fuck them! I want all that money for my self!” and took their content off Netflix, and made their own streaming services.

      Now if you want to consume any media, You have to subscribe to 50 different subscription services, for hundreds of dollars a month, Which is just Cable 2.0 but with worse service and options.

    • sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      In addition to other things people responded with, piracy services tend to not collect users data or prevent us from watching with a VPN enabled.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        or prevent us from watching with a VPN enabled.

        Man this one chaff’s me the most. I way a paying Netflix customer like 8 years ago. I had IPv6 setup as a 6rd tunnel through HE (Hurricane Electric) because my ISP didn’t offer IPv6. Netflix treated that as a VPN and blocked me as a paying customer… Even though I lived/payed from the same fucking locale. It’s not like I was using a VPN to bypass a Geoblock. I was just making IPv6 available to myself. I cancelled because of that. You do not get to tell me how I access the internet at large, especially when I’m not even being shady about it.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      My guess is It’s probably cheaper and has much greater variety. You can watch anything from any streaming service through one single interface at the price of one service.

    • slurpinderpin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      because IPTV is like $6 per month and has every single channel known to earth… it’s a tiny fraction compared to any cable especially if you watch sports (the only real reason to pay for cable anyway)

    • sunzu@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      piracy is a service issue.

      also, fuck IP owners, pigs got too fat while cutting on service.

    • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Because the legal options are garbage.

      The pirates provide a better service with more content for cheaper than the legal options; and pirating yourself takes effort as well as cost (hardware, trackers, usenet, etc).

      Some people are happy to just pay for decent service; others like to learn about the process, then setup and run their own servers.

      To each their own.

    • kakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Because all the legal services are incredibly anti-consumer and are offering less services, with (more) ads, for more money every year.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        The entire system exists for the benefit of business, not customers.

        Just look at what happens with accused theft in a store. You get accused of theft? Cops are there in no time, take you to the ground, throw you in the back of the cop car. only after they’ve gotten the humiliation and brutalization in might someone come and take your proof that you didnt steal anything.

        You accuse the store of stealing from you? Due to not following their own policy on returns, or overcharging and an item and not fixing it Police won’t even show. just tell you its a civil matter and to suck it up.

    • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      My guess is because they did all the pirating for you so you didn’t have to worry about dealing with the technical hurdles of doing so.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      The majority of piracy is not free.

      I’ve paid for usenet, seed boxes, private servers, and more recently torrent cache services.

      You pay because it’s much cheaper than commercial services and a better experience with more content.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      You pay like $5/Mo for the content of all streaming services and more instead of the $500/Mo it would cost to subscribe to each of them individually. Plus you’re not taking any legal risk as a customer.

    • exanime@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Pirating implies some knowledge and effort some people may not have or want to get into

      Paid Legal services are so enshitified some people may think they are getting ripped up

      Paid illegal services are often HUGE bang for buck value (no enshitification, no limits, no nonsense and often better customer service)

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      ITT: Have you heard the good news about our lord and saviour, Jellyfin?

      • Jayb151@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Jellyfin is a bitch to get working outside my network. I don’t get how Plex made it so easy

      • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        You know, I’ve heard this gospel before, I might still have the pamphlet…

        Honestly, I haven’t really looked into jellyfin yet. I hear it’s superior in some way… But I already have Plex all set up and I have 4 friends with servers and we all share content. So it would take a lot for me to switch.

        • mint_tamas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          It really isn’t superior. It’s just the hivemind that gets annoyed with Plex being stagnant, not open source etc. that claims it is. At best it has feature parity for some use-cases. Don’t get me wrong, it’s neat, but it’s not as polished as Plex.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        I’m trying to switch to Jellyfin I really am. With Plex I could just throw a file bot at my files normalize the names and it was fine. I can’t mark things watched or unwatched from the Roku client. I’ve now tried three separate times to get the Doctor who specials to show up with names. Plex is by no means perfect but it’s so much easier to keep Plex goomed

        • stellargmite@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 days ago

          I was fretting over Doctor Specials, season numbers, eras and naming a few weeks back. In fairness it has been running since black and white times so not too bad considering. Whats a filebot by the way and whats a good one?

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 days ago

            Filebot a piece of software, it looks up your files on TMDB and themoviedb and renamese your files based on those lookups. Plex takes that naming very very well. We really need jellyfin to work with it too.

      • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Plex is a privacy nightmare that’s slowly trying to faze out you having a server all together in favor of feeding you commercialized content from other providers; and many people find Jellyfin is far too unpolished/disorganized for a lot of debatable reasons I won’t go into.

        I’ve been quite happy with the middle ground: Emby. It’s not FOSS, but is well polished with consistent development, great feature parity across platforms, excellent clients for pretty much every device I’d want to use, and a helpful community ready to assist with any problems you come across. They also have a heavy focus on privacy; with no third party partners collecting your info like Plex, and no telemetry sent from servers/clients.

        The lifetime premier license I bought 7 years ago was well worth it.

          • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            Yes. Emby was originally open source, but people would regularly fork it to remove the licensing. When they chose to go closed source; jellyfin forked that final release and has built from there.

            Emby has a premier licencing system to support their development, instead of selling user data and making deals with content providers like Plex, or depending on OSS development/contributions like Jellyfin.

            As far as I understand almost 80% of jellyfins current code is the original Emby code (called ‘media browser’ or ‘MB’ at the time), though to be fair, I haven’t verified that claim.

      • MSids@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        I always wonder why some people are so dedicated to Jellyfin. Even if JF had full feature and experience parity, it would still not have secure remote access the way Plex does. There is no need to port forward or NAT Plex for external access. With the threat landscape the way it is today, that is worth a lot.

        • AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          I haven’t used Plex in a while, but I’m confused how Plex handles WAN connections without using any port forwarding? how is that possible?

          • Scrollone@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            I think there’s a misconception.

            Plex can “hide” (not really) your own server because you can direct your users on Plex.tv (they can login there, etc. without ever typing your IP address).

            But Plex can also use an internal reverse proxy that lets you see your content from outside even without port forwarding. However, quality and speed will be decreased.

            I think Jellyfin should work to ease the process of setting up your server as much as they can, but unless they start managing a SaaS like Plex does, they’ll never be able to offer the same simplicity for the end user.

            • AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 days ago

              personally, I wouldn’t want my files going through plexs servers, especially with how shit I’ve heard they are with their privacy policy. that’s a really interesting concept tho, and makes a lot of sense. I doubt jellyfin will ever do that simply because they don’t have the resources to host that as you said.

              thanks for the explanation tho! greatly appreciated

              • MSids@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 days ago

                Plex, as a company, definitely is aware of what items are in your library but streams don’t go through the Plex servers unless you use the Plex proxy service which is enabled by default but only used when the client connection speed is too slow to use the desired streaming setting.

                Everyone who accesses their Plex externally should use app.plex.tv rather than NAT/port forwarding unless you’re also doing IP whitelisting on the NAT (not feasible for most remote access scenarios, as IPs are dynamic in most cases). Jellyfin should never be exposed externally.

                I work in a highly regulated sector of IT and have learned that even the most robust software will have serious exploits at some point.

          • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            Both the client and server connect to plex.tv which then brokers the connection between them. They essentially work as a very limited vpn between your clients and server.

            This also gives them unrestricted access to the entirety of data passed between devices; and the ability to request any and all info from your server to be handed to whoever they chose.

            This is also how they allow you to ‘share’ content/libraries with each others servers; through their public infrastructure that’s collecting your information. Information they then sell to third parties to support their development and broker content agreements.

          • MSids@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            I have not looked into it for a while but I believe their servers broker a direct connection between the client and server.

  • Nobilmantis@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Teoretically speaking, asking for a friend who’s doing research, how would you access such a service? :)

    • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      There’s plenty of services like this that people use a firestick to connect too.

      My friend uses one but I forget the name of it. You can find them online but people usually buy a package of say 20 connections and then sell them to friends and family. I’ll try and remember what to search for and come back.

      Edit: IPTV is a good search term.

        • ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          IPTV is the name of the pirated cable TV streams. Personally, I consider commercialized piracy to be a bit distasteful compared to the free and open source route, and I have the know how to self host my own streaming service.

          Although it’s not piracy, another free option to consider for live TV, if you’re within range of TV broadcasters, is a digital TV antenna. I’m looking into that since not only is it free and legal, it’s also the best picture quality, not compressed like IPTV (legit or pirated) or even cable.

  • muculent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Streaming services become required by law like insurance

    Wait, why am I required to pay for a streaming service?

    Because it has all of the entertainment electrolytes a human needs

    • DasSkelett@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      We already have the private copying levy in Germany and some other countries, where you have to pay a fee for several products (printers, scanners, storage media like HDDs, SSDs, SD cards and thumb drives…) due to the potential that you could do (legal!) private copies of copyrighted media on them. The copyright collectives can set the amount of the fees freely (and it’s ridiculously high).

      This comes shockingly close to the concept already.

      • Deway@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        I member the good old days when we were buying our blank CD/DVD in Germany to avoid paying those taxes.

    • Mikina@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’m not sure about other countries, but here in Czech we actually have a mandatory subscription, that’s absolutely bullshit.

      So far, the law is that if you own any TV or radio, you have to pay monthly fee for public service broadcasters (national Czech TV). It’s bullshit, the channels are full of ads anyway, and the shows they run and create is insultingly bad. Sure, it is important to have public service broadcasters that are not dependent on the state (because state-owned TV is reeaallly bad idea), but FFS can they just reduce costs and stick to news, instead of doing another stupid series, and stop forcing us to pay for something I don’t care about or use?

      You could just not pay the fee, if you state you don’t have a TV capable of receiving it (which I don’t). But now, they are changing the law that everyone who has any kind of internet-capable device has to pay the monthly fee, while also rising prices to something like 6 EUR per month. Fuck that and fuck them.

  • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    This is despicable. What specific service was this? So I know how to avoid it if it should resurface.

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    Five men convicted by the court of the high seas for being absolute chads

  • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    “Sophisticated scripts to scour pirate sites”.

    I think we’ve just found a new tagline for radarr or sonarr.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    If five people can maintain a service bigger than all those combined, then the big streamers need to buck their fucking ideas up.

  • Grippler@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    “The group used “sophisticated computer scripts” and software to scour piracy services”

    They used the basic tools that most(?) pirates use today like sonarr and radar??

    I don’t mind people pirating…i do mind people pirating and profiting from redistribution.

    • sunzu@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      redistribution = service?

      Why would they work for free?

      Not gonna pretend like this aint illegal but i don’t cry over some IP owners losing money… EVER, fuck 'em

      • Grippler@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        Oh I don’t care that the IP owner don’t get money.

        IDK, I just don’t like the ethics of pirating media for profit, the entire idea is that it should be accessible to everyone, not just those with money. Cover your operational cost? Sure…Making millions in subscriptions? That is an asshole move IMO. If you’re paying, you might as well pay the people who are making the media in the first place instead of some rando that had nothing to do with it.

        • sunzu@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          All fair points.

          I think the issue is that IP owners are mega corps, ie people who made the content don’t own it and can’t provide it anyway.

        • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          This doesn’t seem that different from paying for usenet. It’s not like they’re making DVDs of pirated movies and selling them on the street corner; they were basically just aggregating content and the service they were providing was making it easily searchable and accessible, not doing the actual pirating, from the sound of it, unless I’m misunderstanding the situation.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 days ago

            This doesn’t seem that different from paying for usenet.

            i would think it would be a little different from usenet, considering that usenet would be a service that you pay for, and people who use that service would host content on it, so that other users can download that content. Which effectively removes the immediate liability that you would have in this case, where you are explicitly hosting a pirated streaming service, and then charging for it, for the explicit purpose of streaming said pirated content.

            • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 days ago

              Yeah, I suppose I should clarify - that was in response to the objection to paying for pirated content; it’s different from the service provider’s point of view, but from the end user’s point of view, they’re paying for pirated content either way.

    • Y|yukichigai@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Guessing they used Sonarr, Radarr, qBittorrent, maybe an NZB client…

      Would you look at that, I’m sophisticated now.

    • cmbabul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yes. Charging money for sharing content like that makes them little better than grifters

  • digger@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    The group used “sophisticated computer scripts” and software to scour piracy services… for illegal copies of TV episodes, which they then downloaded and hosted on Jetflicks’ servers.

    So they used some variant of Sick Beard?

    • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      nah probably the arr stack

      Sonarr: (Automatic TV series downloads)

      Radarr: (Automatic movie downloads)

      Tdarr: (Automatic transcoding of media, can help save you a lot of disk space)

      Bazarr: (Companion app to Radarr and Sonarr, manages subtitles)

      Prowlarr: (A replacement for Jackett from the Arr team)

      Lidarr: Music

      Readarr: Books

      Mylar3: Comic books

      Plex-Meta-Manager: (Automatic collections and metadata)

      Overseerr: Request tracking and website front-end

      Ombi: Let users request both movies/tv shows from a simple web interface.

      Dopplarr: Discord bot to make movie/tv/anime requests

      Pulsarr: Browser extension for adding movies to Radarr or Series’ to Sonarr while browsing IMDB or TVDB.

      • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        Tdarr: (Automatic transcoding of media, can help save you a lot of disk space)

        That’s a new one to me, I’ll have to check that out. Thanks!

        Been doing conversions via Emby, but it’s not a very powerful tool for that.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      If you’re using sickbeard, switch to medusa. The originally developer of sickbeard is a nut case. He took the project back from the team that was doing development so they forked it and renamed Medusa.