backtop


Print 65 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Jul 29 at 2:48 PM


The UFC thinks prison time for pirates would KO piracy.  (Source: Sherdog.com)
"When people start going to jail, people will stop doing it." -- UFC President Dana White on piracy

Zuffa LLC, owned by brothers Lorenzo Fertitta and Frank Fertitta III, is the world's largest provider of pay-per-view content today.  The company owns and operates the Ultimate Fighting Championship, the world's top professional mixed martial arts organization.

The UFC has been among several pay-per-view providers to crack down hard on internet video uploads in recent years.  With fights finding their way onto YouTube and other video sharing sites, the UFC has tried a variety of approaches to cut off the flow of its performances onto the internet.

On Monday, the UFC announced that it has subpoenaed Justin.tv and Ustream.tv -- two major live video stream sites.  The UFC's owners claim that the sites' users purchased pay-per-view buys and then rebroadcast them on the web for all to see.

According the UFC a single IP address uploaded streams from UFC 108 and UFC 110, held this year.  These streams respectively drew 36,000 and 78,000 non-paying viewers.

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, content owners can use subpoenas to force service providers to reveal the identities of individuals who upload infringed content.  The UFC already announced reaching "confidential settlements" with 500 people and businesses for illegal broadcasts and viewing.

UFC President Dana White states, "I can't wait to go after the thieves that are stealing our content.  This is a fight we will not lose."

He hopes that the U.S. Congress adopts the most sweeping provisions of upcoming ACTA pact, which could send those uploading copyrighted materials to prison.  He states, "When people start going to jail, people will stop doing it."

The UFC is a popular piracy target due to the high cost of its PPV buys.  The company airs approximately twelve PPV events annually and sells them for $44.95 each, or $55.95 for an HD version.  In 2009 the UFC is estimated to have sucked in $350M USD in PPV revenue.  However, at January's UFC 106, alone, it estimates that there were 140,000 non-paying viewers of 271 illegal streams, amounting to approximately $6.3M USD in lost revenue.

One driving force behind the UFC's piracy crackdown is also growing competition from smaller competitive leagues like Strikeforce.  Strikeforce has put on a number of recent highly successful events including a recent shocking upset of Russian MMA legend Fedor Emelianenko by Brazil's Fabricio Werdum and a massive knockout by female bantamweight champ, Canada's Sarah Kauffman, over Roxanne Modafferi.  Unlike the UFC, Strikeforce generally televises its main card on cable television thanks to deals with CBS, Showtime, and others.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

NEWSFLASH!!
By Homerboy on 7/27/2010 11:46:35 AM , Rating: -1
PPV is dying.




RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By chmilz on 7/27/2010 11:54:46 AM , Rating: 5
No kidding. That $350M in revenue sure sucks for them, doesn't it.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By msheredy on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 12:23:06 PM , Rating: 3
Hey calm down buddy. I wouldn't want you to drool all over your new TapouT shirt.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By boochi on 7/27/2010 12:39:29 PM , Rating: 3
Actually in the early days of the UFC there was no rule against groin strikes. Joe Son lost a fight to Keith Hackney at UFC 4 after submitting to repeated strikes to the cock and balls. You might remember Joe Son as the guy who played Random Task in the first Austin Powers movie. Yes he fought in MMA but he retired without ever winning a fight.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By JasonMick (blog) on 7/27/2010 12:51:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually in the early days of the UFC there was no rule against groin strikes. Joe Son lost a fight to Keith Hackney at UFC 4 after submitting to repeated strikes to the cock and balls


The worst example of that, though was Gary Goodridge versus Pedro Otavio in the Vale Tudo tournament in Brazil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8icoCU2AGs

It's kinda long, but kinda hilariously horrible. Goodridge not only uses the ball grab as an offensive attack, but he also puts his feet down the guy's shorts while wrestling for position on the ground... not cool.

I think they nicknamed the first round of no-groin strike rules the "Gary Goodridge rule" because of this.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By Desslok on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By Desslok on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By conorvansmack on 7/27/2010 1:55:55 PM , Rating: 1
Read carefully. Vale Tudo Brazil is a completely different promotion with a completely different set of rules.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By Desslok on 7/27/2010 3:26:41 PM , Rating: 1
I suggest you take your own advice.

In the early days of the UFC there were NO rules against blows to the groin.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By HoosierEngineer5 on 7/27/2010 3:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
Personal opinion only, but I believe the people who downloaded this for free barely got their money's worth.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By derricker on 7/27/2010 4:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
Which would make perfect sense in that, it is only those companies putting out subpar products who are trying to go after people's money in courts. What a jewel, they don't rightfully earn it so they'd rather steal it from people in courts.

Dana "drama queen" White is just a bunch of yip yap, this whole thing is what he does best, screaming pathetic drama scenarios right and left

At best they will be "settling" with 500 John Does, that is, using scare tactics.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By bysmitty on 7/27/2010 12:16:11 PM , Rating: 2
And no wonder! I had no clue these events cost $45-$55 ea! That is absurd. I would think they would get a ton more viewers if prices were a little more reasonable ($5-$10).


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By tng on 7/27/2010 1:37:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
However, at January's UFC 106, alone, it estimates that there were 140,000 non-paying viewers of 271 illegal streams, amounting to approximately $6.3M USD in lost revenue.

This assumes that all 140K that did not pay would have paid the $45 fee if it were not available online for free. Not a good assumption on the UFC's part. Probaby more like about 10% of that would have coughed up the fee if it were not available for free......

I think that these people use these numbers which, IMO are non realistic, to try to drum up support for their cause.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By gamerk2 on 7/27/2010 4:31:42 PM , Rating: 2
Irrelevent argument on your part; the fact is, whether or not the viewers would have paid to see the PPV if the stream were not avaliable, they still broke the law, and should be punished. Discussion of PPV prices is another issue altogether.


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By derricker on 7/27/2010 4:54:23 PM , Rating: 2
You try to point an irrelevant argument bring another irrelevant argument??

Of course the availability is relevant to this discussion, of course PPV prices are relevant and directly related to this discussion, oh and you conveniently left out the point of the declining quality of UFC cards.

I wonder why is that?


RE: NEWSFLASH!!
By msheredy on 7/27/2010 12:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
For movies. There aren't any outlets for fights other than actually being there so PPV will most likely stay.


"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki