Beat Hofstra!

Somebody quickly delete this. Didn't anybody tell Bang it's bad luck to post a fantasy 3 before the day of the game?
 
Bang gonna have us riding the L train tonight

14_ltrain_lg.jpg
 
isn't watching stuff on channelsurfing like stealing? if espn wanted you to be able to watch without a subscription they would put up a link on thier site.
 
prchdalaw said:
isn't watching stuff on channelsurfing like stealing? if espn wanted you to be able to watch without a subscription they would put up a link on thier site.
Click to expand...

is this how you "prchdalaw""??? :lol:

broadcasting an unauthorized tv signal is illegal, but im not sure if watching it is. Until someone comes to my house and arrests me for watching it, ill do it.

For our legal conscious fans out there you can also buy the stream from the hofstra website for $4.95.
 
Ram it home said:
prchdalaw said:
isn't watching stuff on channelsurfing like stealing? if espn wanted you to be able to watch without a subscription they would put up a link on thier site.
Click to expand...

is this how you "prchdalaw""??? :lol:

broadcasting an unauthorized tv signal is illegal, but im not sure if watching it is. Until someone comes to my house and arrests me for watching it, ill do it.

For our legal conscious fans out there you can also buy the stream from the hofstra website for $4.95.
Click to expand...
:lol:
I'm pretty sure that channelsurfing.com is operating in a gray area ...technically what they're doing is almost certainly illegal (although perhaps only civilly rather than criminally, although there is criminal infringement too). As a general rule, there isn't much governmental policing of copyright infringement... this is something that the aggrieved party (espn in this case) would have to pursue as a lawsuit. But I'm guessing that the vast majority of the time programing providers calculate that there's more upside than downside in allowing the rebroadcast to occur, especially when you add in potential upfront legal costs. You can bet that if it could be shown to have any real impact on rating, or if it was a pay-per-view type event, that they would stop looking the other way.

As for whether it's right or wrong... well, if the original provider tacitly approves by failing to enforce its rights, maybe that washes the hands... can't really steal it if they're letting it be given away... idk


oh, but fwiw... when watching digital vid, your computer makes a copy... even though it tends to only hold it in RAM/buffer for a very very brief time... and this has been held to be enough to count as making an unauthorized copy for purposes of finding copyright infringement
 
Hey, it's not like channelsurfing.net puts in its own commercials.

Yea for new media. Down with Neilsen ratings.
 
i went through the same sort of mental arguments when deciding if its wrong or stealing...if you looked at if from an advertiser standpoint, i am sure that the folks who advertise on ESPNU would want as many people as possible watching it and that ESPNU, by limiting its broadcast, is acting against the best interest of the advertisers. But nevertheless, ESPNU still owns the rights etc so viewing it in my opinion is morally wrong. Like I said, if they wanted it to be an everybody who wants to watch it thing they would throw up a link.

i have watched it before and actually had the feed cut so I know that at least somtimes companies like ESPN do monitor the sites etc.

And yes, this is part of God's moral law, The Ten commandments. Stealing is number 8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top