Zuffa targets illegal streaming sites

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by scurlaruntings, Jul 24, 2010.



  1. roody burns

    roody burns New Member Full Member

    78
    0
    Aug 5, 2009
    nail head
     
  2. chimba

    chimba Off the Somali Coast Full Member

    20,013
    6
    Mar 8, 2007
    They are already raking in the most money ever!:lol:, this **** is so confusing.

    Someone in the office should stand up and present a spreadsheet to both Zuffa Brothers

    Something like "Sir, we had record revenue last year, when we had the most illegal streams" "I think it would be wise to leave whats not broken alone"
     
  3. Sloth

    Sloth Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,680
    0
    Oct 2, 2009

    Excellent point:thumbsup
     
  4. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me Full Member

    389,532
    71,637
    Nov 30, 2006
    How are they losing revenue exactly? Do they really think that everyone who currently watches a stream is going to suddenly pay PPV money instead if the streams are shut down? That's incredibly naive.
     
  5. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me Full Member

    389,532
    71,637
    Nov 30, 2006
    This is a MUCH better analogy.

    If people were charging money for streams, the UFC and other copyright holders would have a legitimate beef.

    Hosting a stream (or ripping and uploading a CD that you bought) is the same as taping a TV show and loaning it to a friend who has a VCR but no cable (or even one who does have cable but didn't bother to tape it themselves). If you consider that to be stealing you're a ******.
     
  6. ONE SHOT KID

    ONE SHOT KID Member Full Member

    104
    0
    Mar 27, 2010
    If the ufc is going to go after stream, they should go after the one that charge people to watch it. At least there's money to be made there. Going after the free stream is just wasting time and money. The free stream are like weeds, you stop one, another 5 is going to pop up. It's a losing battle.
     
  7. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me Full Member

    389,532
    71,637
    Nov 30, 2006
    Not to mention there's nothing "wrong" with free streams.

    Selling product that belongs to someone else or purchasing product from someone other than its rightful owner constitute stealing.

    Free streams constitute a consumer sharing product with others.

    There's nothing wrong with sharing. If the original owner wanted every end user to want to pay them for their product, they'd make it attractive enough that the end user wanted to see it in full TV quality rather than on a choppy little feed online. It isn't like people who utilize free media sharing online would alternately be paying for that media if the option wasn't available. They'd simply not consume the media for the most part. So the owner gains absolutely nothing by attacking those who share or seek out sharing.
     
  8. Beebs

    Beebs Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,229
    3
    Feb 21, 2007
    No, there is a contract in buying a UFC event that you can't share it. It's like buying prescription drugs and and giving them to your buddies.
     
  9. Beebs

    Beebs Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,229
    3
    Feb 21, 2007

    And that has what to do with anything?

    It got napster shut down overnight. It was huge in bringing in the era of people willing to pay for music. Look at sales on itunes before and after.

    It's not a futile attempt, as the past has proven.
     
  10. SomeGuy101

    SomeGuy101 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,965
    0
    Oct 16, 2009
    This content is protected


    Man what's wrong with people like you? You just suckup BS like a hoover! Just because someone 'official' tells you something that doesn't make it true.

    Want to hear something else 'crazy'? People are sharing their 'itunes' and entire MP3 collections via USB and external hard drives nowadays but as you say:

    Yes look at sales of itunes and the wonders for record sales which the record companies are saying it's doing with all the sharing going on. Funny that isn't it?

    Wanna hear something even crazier! Before this we had these things called CDs. And before that tapes. And before that 8 track. And before that LP's....and you know what? they were commonly shared!! I know - it's madness!

    And guess what else!!! When boxing was free to air boxers made even more money! How weird is that?

    So what's the secret behind all this? Well you see kiddies it's all down to this little thing called 'exposure' which in turn leads to branding, endorsements and media sales. Hardly rocket science.



    So now that school has ended Beebs stop being a tool to these big corps that thing only about the short term bottom line with no long term strategies in place.
     
  11. Beebs

    Beebs Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,229
    3
    Feb 21, 2007
    Yes, giving away your product for free is great business.

    On free to air TV, networks pay the company for the rights, streamers don't.

    Every single company or individual who makes an income through intellectual copyrights does what they can to protect them, this is not news.

    Sorry guys, but you do not have a right to anything you want for free, no matter who much you think you do. It is sort of the entire basis of our civilization.
     
  12. Sloth

    Sloth Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,680
    0
    Oct 2, 2009
    Mabye like Itunes, the UFC could charge for individual fights. So if you wanted to see one particular fight you could pay a lesser price to see just that fight. That way it would'nt be like buying an entire CD for one decent song.:fire
     
  13. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,624
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Thats correct. But considering the nature of the industry its somewhat short sighted if your willing to hamper exposure in return for a fraction of revenue that doesnt make a whole lot of difference to the bottom line. Fact is the inherent nature of the internet is to file share. Thats a basic premise that will NEVER change.

    So it doesnt matter how much Dana wants to sue for IP rights he's fighting a loosing battle. The money he would be waste in court isnt conmensurate with the returns gained from such a small gain in relation to the overall PPV event. This is why most cases for IP in regards to rights violations (RIAA MPAA) are settled out of court.
     
  14. (PimpThaSystem)

    (PimpThaSystem) Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,776
    4
    Jun 7, 2009
    Yeah you just described the UFC Video Vault on ufc.com, something that already exists :good
     
  15. Sloth

    Sloth Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,680
    0
    Oct 2, 2009


    Oh, did'nt know that:thumbsup. Does that include live events?