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

F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By chmilz on 7/27/2010 11:53:47 AM , Rating: -1
I can't ever see myself backing the RIAA (and to a lesser extent, MPAA) due to lack of innovation to stay relevant, but the UFC, video game industry, and others absolutely have every right to go after pirates.

If you like what you're getting, BUY IT! Anything less than paying for content you enjoy is theft, and any reason you make for not paying for it is just an excuse to be a cheap SOB.

Sadly, because people steal things they should be paying for, everyone will be worse off in the form of oppressive laws that we will largely unable to stop.




By acer905 on 7/27/2010 12:23:46 PM , Rating: 5
To play devils advocate... If a person listens to the radio, not satellite, just broadcast, they have access to countless new and old songs for free.

Additionally, if a person watches broadcast television, they have access to various television shows for free. If a person wishes to listen to a specific song, they can actually request it from many stations. For TV shows, networks release their weekly schedule, so a person simply needs to look to find what they want to watch. All for free. There is no theft in finding and watching what you want if it is broadcast and received for free.

Therefore, there is no stealing involved in getting something that was recorded off of a free broadcast. This does not include DVD rips or PPV content, where there is no free broadcast. However, a recording from TV networks or radio stations is not stealing anything.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By neogrin on 7/27/2010 12:25:27 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Anything less than paying for content you enjoy is theft,


http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/theft

Theft
Pronunciation: \'theft\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English thiefthe, from Old English thiefth; akin to Old English theof thief
Date: before 12th century
1 a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it .

Note: No one is being deprived of their property.
Just saying


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By rcc on 7/27/2010 1:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you for meeting my expectations. I knew this was coming.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By LRonaldHubbs on 7/28/2010 7:23:43 AM , Rating: 3
Given that posters here continue to make up their own definitions for words, theft being one such, it clearly needs to be posted a few more times until it sinks in.


By rcc on 7/29/2010 2:48:53 PM , Rating: 2
And others holler about the word used as a cover up to the actual issue.

I don't care if it's called theft, piracy, copyright infringement, or just being a low-life scum, IMNSHO it's wrong.

: )

Have a pleasant day!


By ZachDontScare on 7/27/2010 2:39:34 PM , Rating: 3
You are completely right. Copyright is not about theft. Copyright is just that... the right to control how your work is copied. If a copy is made without permission, the copier is violating the rights of the work's creator to control who copies it. That is not 'theft'. Anyone who calls copyright violations 'theft' is simply ignorant.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By chmilz on 7/27/2010 3:27:07 PM , Rating: 2
My apologies, I should have clarified. I'll revise my own quote:

Anything less than paying for content that is offered exclusively in a paid-for manner (ie, never free), is theft.

As I originally stated, I don't side with the RIAA because they've basically shoveled their own hole by finding ways to offer us free music forever and now that we're taking it carte blanche, they realize they made a fatal error and are desperately trying to regain some kind of control.

Same goes for TV. I pay my cable bill, and if I choose to not watch a TV series (on that cable or offered free over-the-air) and instead download all the episodes, I feel I have that right, since it was either paid for or freely distributed to begin with.

But PPV isn't the same. It was solely offered as a paid program. Never free. So to view it without paying for it isn't the same as viewing an episode of Futurama online that you missed on TV.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By mindless1 on 7/27/2010 4:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
You might "feel" you have that right but you don't, the content property owner retains rights to how it is distributed.

I do agree however that in a fair world you would have that right.

As for "theft" I can't agree, once again it is making a copy that does not deprive the owner because these downloaders were a textbook example of people NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR IT - which means zero revenue loss. If they could not download it what would they do instead? Download something else to watch because the whole point of being on the sharing site was *free* shows.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By KCjoker on 7/27/2010 7:36:59 PM , Rating: 2
If they're not willing to pay the price to watch it then why is it they like it enough to watch it for free? Obviously it has value because those people seek it out to watch on those sites for FREE. If it didn't have any value to them they wouldn't waste their time to find it.


By LRonaldHubbs on 7/28/2010 7:29:28 AM , Rating: 2
Do you really not see the answer to your own question? The obvious answer is that the value is less than the asking price. The people who are viewing the content for free do value it, but they don't value it by same amount that the content owner claims it is worth. Since the perceived value is less than the charged value they don't buy it.


By KCjoker on 7/27/2010 7:34:43 PM , Rating: 2
The broadcast is their property and by watching it without paying that is theft. You are depriving them of the money for watching it. It's not free for the UFC to broadcast the event you know.


RE: F--king Pirates ruining it for everyone
By Bateluer on 7/28/2010 7:44:47 AM , Rating: 2
Except, Webster won't hold up in any court. You need to use a legal dictionary, such as Black's Law or some such.

I agree though, while it may be infringement, it is definitely not theft. Still, with PPV essentially going the way of the dodo, these idiots would be well served to offer an online streaming version for a cheaper price, or giving more options with the 45/55 dollar versions, commentaries etc. As the RIAA and MPAA are still struggling to learn, trying to preserve the old order makes it fall faster.


By MrRuckus on 7/28/2010 6:50:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As the RIAA and MPAA are still struggling to learn, trying to preserve the old order makes it fall faster.


QFT. That last sentence sums it all up. The UFC needs to change their ways to satisfy all or fail at trying to put out this forever burning torch.

How do you stop distributors who are in different countries where the copyright laws of the US dont apply??

P2P FTL. Newsgroups FTW. Just remember, they dont want the downloaders, they want the DISTRIBUTORS. In P2P & Torrents, you become a distributor. You dont have that problem with Newsgroups.

I lol'd at the RIAA suing what was it usenet.com? Hahaha. They really need to try harder...


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














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