The Commercial Court was told yesterday that as many as 1.3 million people in the State may be involved in illegally accessing the work of six film and TV studios through various streaming websites.
lawred2 wrote: » Well those kodi plugins must get their content from somewhere.
Dravokivich wrote: » They have nothing to do with Kodi. They constantly speak out against those plugins.https://kodi.tv/the-piracy-box-sellers-and-youtube-promoters-are-killing-kodi/
Jayop wrote: » It's not a monthly sub that people want to pay. It's a pay per view of content that is wanted. So if I want to watch a movie I pay a small fee if I want to watch a match I pay a small fee, if I want to watch a series a small fee. As it stands if I was to pay for Sky sports I still only have access to about a third of the games I want to watch, and about 5 hours a week of content I'm interested on. The rest is utter rubbish that I have no reason to pay for so I don't. Sky movies the same. Reruns over and over of the same old crap. Why anyone pays for that is beyond me. Netflix I pay for so the kids have access but once I've watched 3 series in a year I'll not look at it again till the following year.
lawred2 wrote: » Netflix content here is rubbish. Even for the kids.
Jayop wrote: » It totally is but it's handy for us. We have a lot of small kids in the house every day and being able to stick on the kids shows on Netflix when needed is handy. My teenage daughter also gets a lot of use from it, but she'll re-watch the same stuff over and over. I used to bother with getting the American version but I don't bother any more and just use the other apps if something isn't on the Irish one.
Joeface wrote: » The problem with the likes of sky and virgin is they have dual financial streams. You paying the bill to them and the fee they take from channels and advertising . Then sky go and bib for the premiership rights and dump the cost on to the home user who doesn't even have the sport package. This was just completely wrong.
seamus wrote: » Virgin are very much positioning themselves to get out of the live TV market. They're focussing heavily on their broadband, mobile and in-demand offerings in the expectation that live TV is going the way of the dodo. There will always be a certain amount of demand for live events, whether that be sports or speeches or news coverage But the revenue streams provided by broadcasting pre-recorded content are on a massive decline. Within a decade or two we'll probably be back to one or two broadcast channels in Ireland and 95% of content being on demand.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » This so, so, so much. It's entirely the audiovisual industry's fault that it refuses to get with the times and live in the globalised world the rest of us live in. Just f*cking sort it out, how hard can it be to tell distributors that something can either be released worldwide or not at all? If they don't like it, they can f*ck off and lose the revenue, simple as that.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I suppose it hasn't occurred to them that if they just made the likes of Netflix and HBO available in full to users worldwide, for a reasonable price, then they wouldn't have such problems with streaming. It's so frustrating to see announcements on social media about this movie or that show being available of Netflix when in fact it's only available to viewers in the US. Do the rest of us viewers not matter?
ThisRegard wrote: » They are released worldwide, but different companies purchase the rights across the regions.
murpho999 wrote: » Stranger Things House of Cards are two that spring to mind. Also involved with Better Call Saul which has been excellent.
elefant wrote: » None of those come close to the big HBO productions though.
murpho999 wrote: » No, that's why they earned Emmy and Golden Globe nominations and awards.
elefant wrote: » murpho999 wrote: » Stranger Things House of Cards are two that spring to mind. Also involved with Better Call Saul which has been excellent. elefant wrote: » None of those come close to the big HBO productions though. murpho999 wrote: » No, that's why they earned Emmy and Golden Globe nominations and awards. Well, we clearly have very different views on judging quality in television series if you think House of Cards and Better Call Saul are anywhere close to The Wire and The Sopranos.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I meant that the content should be made available in full worldwide.
buried wrote: » Somebody needs to tell the Hollywood movie studios its not the internets fault why nobody is going to the cinema anymore. They're not going because what Hollywood is currently making is absolute total f**king rehashed rubbish
elefant wrote: » Well, we clearly have very different views on judging quality in television series if you think House of Cards and Better Call Saul are anywhere close to The Wire and The Sopranos.
osarusan wrote: » Yeah, I was coming at it from the 'because they make a lot of rubbish not worth paying for' angle I've seen on here, rather than the issue of access. The argument excludes the streaming of live sports too.
mdwexford wrote: » You literally picked the two best shows in the history of HBO. Going on the past three years of brand new shows I think Netflix offerings beat any of the big networks hands down.
