The pirates are back - Anew study from the European Union’s Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) suggest that online piracy has increased for the first time in years. In fact, piracy rates have bee…::We analyze a new study where the EUIPO suggests online piracy is on the increase within the European Union.
Love how it doesn’t mention the fact that services are getting objectively worse content as they stretch thin, are increasing their prices across the board, and cracking down on password sharing which was previously touted as a benefit.
Exactly. There’s too many platforms, not enough quality content on any one of them, and weaponized greed. Worse, these streaming services have “inspired” every asshole executive out there to make everything under the sun a subscription model.
The anti-piracy measures drive me to piracy, personally. There’s no technical reason I shouldn’t be able to stream 4K in Firefox, but Netflix won’t let me. I have to jump through hoops just to get 1080p, even. Same with most other services. I pirate shit I’m already paying for.
Have done this several times for content on Disney+. I have an ultrawide, HDR1000 display. The movie I’m trying to watch is in 21:9 and available in HDR. Why in God’s name are you delivering it in SDR and in a letterboxed 16:9 which is in turn pillarboxed on my display?!
Also none of the apps have any kind of audio equalizer or range compression, so if you don’t have an audio receiver then you’re doomed to constantly turning up the volume for spoken sections. Absolute minimum viable product garbage.
For sure. Why should I suffer umpteen different video interfaces designed by separate entities who aren’t really in the business of designing highly functional video interfaces? I’d much rather play everything in
mpv, which I can configure exactly the way I like it. I can adjust brightness and contrast, set up specific keyboard/mouse controls, adjust subtitle font/size/color/style/location, and I can even enable motion interpolation if I want to. I can fix those stupid hardcoded letterboxes with a keystroke. I can monomize or normalize audio. That’s because mpv’s entire reason to exist is to be a highly functional video player, and it’s open and extensible.Fuck your proprietary bare-minimum video interfaces. Even YouTube lags like 5-10 years behind the state of the art for video players, and most other services lag years behind YouTube.
Do one thing and do it well!
Fully agree. Shit makes me so mad.
It’s the same reason most car infotainment centers are awful. They aren’t software companies so their software sucks
I wonder how many Youtube users today ever used it when it used quicktime player, you could actually pause and buffer the entire video, it wouldn’t ever jump into an ad, it was the glory days. Aside from the fact it took a few minutes to load at times ahah.
This so much. I’m lucky enough to be able to afford enough streaming services to cover the majority of what I want to watch (although that’s changing for the worse over time). I just want to pipe them all through Kodi or some other software into a unified interface that is media source agnostic, that can also stream the content in the best quality available for my screen.
At that point the content is already paid for, I don’t need to use your own individual reinvention of the interface that inevitably focuses on pushing uninteresting content instead of making it as easy as possible to continue what I’ve already started watching or to find what I want.
Yeah, honestly same. There isn’t much I’m not already paying for, but being able to watch it all in one app (Stremio) is so much nicer.
The push for more money, and no more password sharing, is just making me think more about cutting those services, but that wouldn’t stop me watching.
Enshittification. Every human who uses computers on a daily basis needs to understand this word.
Yep, the only thing I still pay for is Spotify, and as soon as they start carving up music into different exclusivity contracts I’ll go back to piracy for that as well. I’m willing to pay $10-$20/month for one streaming service, but they want you to spend like $200 on services you don’t even end up watching.
It’s just greed, the way the streaming executives talked during the writers strike showed that. You could easily find an equilibrium that works for content creators and consumers, but the middlemen just want too much.
This fear is why I’m careful to maintain my old man MP3 and CD collection because I can’t fully trust a business.
Or vanish.
Google play music merged into YouTube music.
I already had a Plex server so I just rolled.my.own music server.
And then with the emergence of plexamp… I don’t need a streaming music service now.
Have they gotten better? I’ve not had great experience with PMS handling music, even when using PlexAmp, but I last tried maybe about a year ago.
Oh absolutely. Especially with Plex pass. Plexamp is a quality product.
My biggest pain points were that it seemed to do some kind of analysis (reading file information) on my library all the time, which wasn’t good when I have it on a cloud drive. Guess I’ll try it out again and hope they fixed all that :)
You can disable that, however, it’s helpful when having the system make automated mixes.
What I wish it had was something similar to Roon which would be a Spotify integration. If I search for something and I don’t have it in my personal library, let me just stream it from my streaming service subscription.
I think streaming music will be good for awhile at least, somehow, the fucking music industry got it right with streaming (At least on the consumer side, the artist side has been in trouble for some time now (esp with Spotify)). Most big services have most things and a handful of niche services to handle the gaps for the most part.
Xbox Game Pass otoh for Games is a wildcard, who knows where that shits going to end up lmfao people should get in on it now while it’s still good lol
I mean, they’re already doing exclusivity contracts for podcasts (eg. Joe Rogan on Spotify only), it’s going to be a small leap to go to artists being exclusively on one service, and before you know the labels will all start their own streaming service, so you have to have different apps for Sony BMG artists, another app for indie artists, etc.
The enshittification is mostly pushed by wall street, who want instant bigger profits, and they’re happy to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs in the process. Spotify is not immune to those pressures.
That plus actively removing older shows
No new ones…
Star Trek prodigy
People aren’t also willing to spend as much on Oreo’s due to inflation so it’s also probably that if theres a game or movie everyone’s playing, sailing the seven seas is tried and true…and free.
Exactly. That’s when I went back to the seas. My family across 2 states uses Netflix and I already paid for the $20/month high tier. When they told my sister that it wasn’t about to be more expensive, I put my foot down and said I’m gonna setup a plex/overseer box on my on PC. It’s been working mostly alright.
The shift really proves that Gabe Newell was right and that piracy is a service issue and that, for a time, the many services available were worth paying for.
It was honestly really crazy to me when I was excited to see a game on sale, only to remember how I used to pirate everything. Steam has made it legitimately easier to buy games in so many cases.
I sometimes still do pirate games, especially if it’s from a publisher I don’t respect or the cracked version is known to run better, but I buy almost all of my games now days.
I’ve actually started setting up a home server for pirated movies and shows and getting rid of the couple streaming services I have.
I still Piraten EA games, just because the forced origin injection into their games on steam is so fucking annoying, especially if you’re on Linux.
I fucking hate origin, yeah
I know a lot of people idolize him, and that’s probably not healthy, but he just gets it. Provide value and convenience for consumers, and consumers will stick around. Be an inconvenience while squeezing consumers for money, and we’ll leave with a parrot on our shoulders and a one-finger salute.
That’s what happens when you’re not beholden to shareholders.
He’s a weird case, Steam has always been good for pc gaming and Valve releases nothing but polished games without anything predatory.
He just seems to be interested in maintaining a successful business instead of squeezing more money out of people constantly.
Ehh… for as great as Steam and Gaben are, TF2 really seems to have been the catalyst for all the ridiculous lootbox microtransaction mess we have nowadays.
That shit was coming with or without TF2, even if it was the first (which I don’t know if that’s the case). WoW gold farmers proved the concept that people are willing to pay for advantages or conveniences in games (and that was just the first game I played where I saw that, I bet it wasn’t the first), and buying packages with random content was done by MTG and baseball cards before that. It was inevitable that someone would put the two together.
Valve releases nothing but polished games without anything predatory.
Counterpoint: Artifact.
(I mostly agree on everything else though)
I honestly forgot about Artifact entirely.
I think Valve would appreciate if everyone forgot about Artifact as well
Sadly most companies are focused on short term profit over long term growth, Steam is the best example of the opposite.
Hmmmmm. Let’s see here.
People don’t like cable, because it’s too expensive and inconvenient
People start pirating
People like having 2-3 streaming services that show everything, without ads, for much cheaper even combined than cable. They stop pirating.
People don’t like having 20-30 streaming services that show only a little in each service, NOW WITH ADS!?!?! and that become MUCH more expensive than cable ever was.
People start pirating again…
I wonder what happened?!?!
“The more you tighten your grip big tech, the more users will slip through your fingers”
Yeah, it’s reall not even about the prices. It’s just so inconvenient to go between all those apps, and then login forgot your password, rest, 2FA so i have to get up from my couch and grab my phone.
All these paid services could be totally free from a monetary perspective and I still wouldn’t sign back up for them. It’s a worse service than cable TV used to be at this point.
If not, we can expect to see legal channels raising their prices again to cover the losses caused by piracy.
what a shitty take. Well, anyone who has better memory than only one month back can realize that the reason the people turned to piracy was that they raised their prices. There is no loss caused by piracy. They only missed potential gains. And the reason they raised their prices were not because they were loosing money. Was because they needed to “grow infinitely”. If the free market evangelists are right, the free market will self regulate and the prices will go down in order to attract back the lost customers lol
You’re missing the point, the article is wrong: it’s not about the prices.
enlighten me then
It’s about the service.
I’m not disagreeing with you—the conclusion these services have taken are indeed not logical ones based on historical trends—but I’m curious how you know these services didn’t need to raise the fees? Why have you assumed that it’s to “grow infinitely”?
From my understanding, almost all streaming video providers except Netflix have been operating on a loss. That can only be sustained for so long before the parent company will need to see it begin to generate a positive revenue stream. The most straightforward way to do that is to increase subscription fees. Furthermore, the number of subscribers of Paramount+, MGM+ or even Disney+ is certainly not trending towards “infinite growth.”
I’m not justifying anything, because with five monthly services that have been hiking prices I’m looking at what to slash myself, but I was eager to encourage a bit more discourse on this topic.
That can only be sustained for so long before the parent company will need to see it begin to generate a positive revenue stream. The most straightforward way to do that is to increase subscription fees. Furthermore, the number of subscribers of Paramount+, MGM+ or even Disney+ is certainly not trending towards “infinite growth.”
then their model is flawed. They sell something at loss in order to attract customers because they know that if they sell it at higher profit margins customers will not come. Customers are willing to buy it as long as it is in a price that they are willing to compromise at. So, when they raise their prices, customers realize that now it is above the price they are willing to pay and step out. Their model is based on hoping that the customers will forget or be bored to cancel a subscription that they cannot afford anymore. However it is a subscription that they wouldn’t had been willing to buy in this price in the first place.
So, their initial market share and adoption rate was what it was because of the price of the subscription and the rate of price/value-of-product. Customers are not willing to pay double price and they wouldn’t had paid it in the first place. They are not loosing customers. They are not loosing potential profit. They are basing their numbers in a faked artificial audience that opted in only because it was a good deal in the initial price.
And while the free market evangelists would argue that the market would self regulate, you know what will they in reality do? Ask the government for stricter enforcement of anti-piracy laws because huge loss . Loss based on nothing but their imagination of imaginative potential profit based on “if everyone was continuing buying our product with the same adoption rate we would had X billions. So since we don’t have X billions, this is a loss”. Great math skills and applying of logic.
There are certainly consumers out there with this kind of mentality, but it’s a common sales strategy to lure new customers with a reduced subscription fee for the first months only. It evidently works, because businesses have been doing this long before SVOD services, or even the internet for that matter, existed.
I expect that indeed, a significant number of customers cannot be bothered to cancel a subscription once they begin to use it, or, put another way, perceive the value of it to be justified against the increased price. I don’t think it’s fair to call this a fake audience, because these are real users of which a certain percentage will be retained.
Another factor that probably weighs into this is the competitive race to the bottom among the many SVOD offerings that are available today. Users like you and me perceive a certain dollar amount as the maximum that we are willing to pay, but where does that figure come from? If you are a new player in this space, you are effectively capped to the current market price for subscription fees, whether or not that covers your costs.
The free market effect will gradually resolve this as services that are all currently operating at a loss will correct their price models, which is what I believe is currently happening.
There are certainly consumers out there with this kind of mentality, but it’s a common sales strategy to lure new customers with a reduced subscription fee for the first months only. It evidently works, because businesses have been doing this long before SVOD services, or even the internet for that matter, existed.
Your claim that this is a tactic happening since for ever doesn’t take into account the differences between subscription model and traditional businesses. In traditional businesses, yes, a business may decrease the prices in order to lure customers, but this was never their business model. This was limited time “get to know us”. I don’t think there was for example any supermarket operating at loss for 5 years before they decide to “ok, lets put the real prices on the shelves now”.
I don’t think it’s fair to call this a fake audience, because these are real users of which a certain percentage will be retained.
of course it is a fake audience. The fact that some users will be retained doesn’t make the 100% of the audience real. And also by fake audience it doesn’t necessarily mean that the whole 100% of the audience is fake. However, when they present their numbers, and they claim that “because of piracy we lost 5 million subscribers” this is based on the 5 million subscribers who potentially would never be subscribers if they had their “real” price upfront, instead of a price in which they operate at loss.
However, when people are charged for piracy, they are charged based on imaginative loses who are based on a potential profit which would had been achieved if their 100% of customer base had been continuing paying a subscription which they would had never agreed paying if the price was not faked in order to attract them.
The free market effect will gradually resolve this as services that are all currently operating at a loss will correct their price models, which is what I believe is currently happening.
the free market will turn to the government to cover their losses and they will push for stricter anti piracy law enforcement. The free market evangelists just want a free to control market. I don’t think they will be “ok, customers are leaving after our latest increase in price, then let’s just decrease the price to get them back on board”
I am pretty sure they know how many accounts they will lose for every dollar they increase the price. It should be a net positive for them because otherwise they would not do it.
Enforcing terms and conditions that they previously did not is just another price increase in the grey area that is not directly perceived that way.
I agree that “Lost x amount to piracy” does not even make sense in that context. They know exactly what they are doing.
With regards to discounts to lure new customers, I was thinking about conventional subscription based services like newspapers or cable providers. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that in a sector with heavy competition, such services might be offered at an initial loss if data suggests that retained memberships can recoup it.
I misunderstood what you were referring to with a definition of “fake audience.” I wasn’t giving any merit to their claims about how it all ties to piracy, clearly that’s nonsense. I’m not completely following your train of thought with a “fake price,” though.
It’s possible this might result in a harsher stance on piracy again, that’s true. Realistically, though, I think it’s more likely that three things will happen: we as consumers will gradually recalibrate our cost expectations for streaming services, production corporations will cut costs with more reality type content, and smaller companies will either be bought up or go out of business as users settle on a deliberate few services to subscribe to.
I’m not completely following your train of thought with a “fake price,” though.
you said that they now needed to correct to the “real price” in terms that it is a price that will allow them not to operate at a loss. So the previous one was a “faked” (artificial) price, that they knew was below cost, however they chose to go with it in order to lure customers.
I’m not implying that they tried to scam anyone with “fake prices” if this is what you understood.
I see. Whether or not the price covers costs, businesses will often invest into attracting new customers, for instance through marketing campaigns or incentives to switch from a competitor. In such cases, the cost isn’t visibly calculated through to the consumer.
However, since the cost is a main factor for purchase decisions, companies might similarly invest in growing their customer base by offering a pricing tier below cost. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the service as a whole is operating at a loss, because there might be higher cost tiers that offer premium content or family plans. Different plans might also have degrees of underutilization that reduces service costs. Finally, cohorts of service tiers might change based on external factors like economic recession or competitive offerings.
All this is to say that pricing models are complicated, and breaking even with a SVOD service is extremely difficult in an industry with extremely high production costs, aging licensable content that viewers are losing interest in all while being overrun with complex, regional licensing agreements that affect both. Especially when this is further compounded with macroeconomic factors including inflation and interest rates that affect both corporations operating at a loss and consumers looking to tighten their belts or user decline due to subscription fatigue, an argument could be made that some middle ground needs to be found to simply remain in business.
Nuanced post. Than you!
Why is this being downvoted? I thought Lemmy was a place for discourse? How does this not contribute to an open discussion?
Pretty common take that people feel like they’ve seen and argued in a lot of other places. In the future, ask YOURSELF why you got downvoted, not the thread. Works way better.
I have genuinely asked myself this, and can’t help but find it strange that the only comments in this thread and other almost identical threads are effectively complaining about corporate greed, and never go into any kind of depth about underlying causes and contributing factors.
Why instead is the same old empty rhetoric repeated and upvoted time and time again? This platform seems to be an echo chamber for ignorance.
and never go into any kind of depth about underlying causes and contributing factors.
sure, if you don’t agree with what is being replied to you, then these are shallow comments. Your replies here were the deep analysis. Good job
Whether or not the insights are deep or shallow, Lemmy would be an inclusive place where discourse is welcomed and civil interactions are commonplace.
Instead, any comment that invites conversation to go more in depth is downvoted with ad hominem attacks, further adding toxicity to the cesspool that is the comment section behind effectively any post on this community.
downvotes is just a way to show that you disagree with something. It is not there to punish you. People choose some topics to engage actively by participating in the comments while in some other topics they prefer to express their opinion just by agree/disagree (upvote/downvote). Now you call a whole community toxic just because not everyone agrees with you…
You misunderstand me. Your posts are the old empty rhetoric, your ideas are not new, and you come off like a parrot. After your long-winded explanation, I get the idea that you’re just young, which personally makes me want to interact with you less.
I did not find any post here on Lemmy that discussed any of the reasons why subscription services are struggling (at least not the past 60 days that I browsed submissions and comments), which is why I chimed in to the conversation with context. If you did not find that insightful, that’s fine.
At least we can agree that we don’t enjoy interacting with one another, no less because you are being a jerk.
I believe it was Gabe Newell who said the best way to avoid piracy is by making legitimate purchasing easier and/or better.
In the early history of streaming services, you could get access to a lot of content in a straightforward way for not much money. People started doing that instead of pirating. The corporations got greedy, they made the services worse and increased the price to the point that piracy is preferable again.
And I don’t have the least amount of sympathy. Yarr matey.
And Steam is a show of success
It’s funny because I pirate everything… except PC games. Because it’s so cheap and convenient on steam to just buy them, I like the tracked achievements thing and comparing to friends, and I can play the games on any PC or my steam deck with a quick login and install. I can easily download and install PC games from my private trackers but steam is just so easy and cheap. If movies and TV were as convenient and affordable as steam I wouldn’t pirate any of it. But as it stands, I’d have to pay over $200 a month just to have access to all the streaming services that have shows that I like. Fuck that noise. Someone needs to make a version of Steam for media. Kind of like Vudu but less crappy. Just let me pay a few bucks to own a series or a movie, have lots of good sales and deals, let me access the content on all platforms easily, and I would definitely start building a library over time like I’ve done with steam.
edit: I still do pirate games on PC sometimes just to try them, but usually end up buying on steam because it works better and it can be played on multiple devices easily.
And now that I switched to Linux, Steam releases Proton, like If I needed another reason to only get my games from them.
deleted by creator
Almost all games these days have a requirement to be online to play them, even in single player, and are absolutely ridden with DRM, sometimes even to the extent that it installs rootkits like in the case of Uplay and Valorant. By not voting with your wallet and pirating it yourself, you’re doing yourself and the community at large a disservice. ^♪
edit because they deleted:
“Poopkins” wrote
Almost all games these days have a requirement to be online to play them, even in single player, and are absolutely ridden with DRM, sometimes even to the extent that it installs rootkits like in the case of Uplay and Valorant. By not voting with your wallet and pirating it yourself, you’re doing yourself and the community at large a disservice. ^
And I replied
Okay then. I guess you didn’t even fucking read what I wrote.
deleted by creator
Nothing of what you wrote related to my comment, which wasn’t deleted—after all, you replied to it. I guess you didn’t read what I wrote.
With the advent of self hosted streaming services and the arr services the option is even easier now. If 1 in 20 ppl are motivated/tech savvy that’s 20 streaming products not being paid for.
What would be the technology behind my own streaming platform?
So far I do it very old school with data on my Nas and a software that catalogs and plays over Lan only.
I thought, im the only one left using this method. Not anymore
Look into the arr suite of apps, radarr + sonarr + prowlarr to manage your library and jellyfin/PleX to play it. Get overseer for request management. You can set it up for remote access from anywhere, have people make requests on overseer and have the data available a few mins later. It’s amazing when it’s set up.
Plex is the most worked on solution out there, runs on Windows, Linux and Linux headless. For the automation of stuff then looking at suff like radarr and sonar alovk with tracktarr and jackett foe the trackers, along with a torrent client. There is also jellyfin as a media client, it’s more open, but getting users onto it could be more problematic as it isn’t as straight fwd from what I hear, haven’t used it myself though.
It’s worth noting that although piracy is up, the rates are still far lower than they were 20, 10 or even five years ago. Whether people continue to access content illegally remains to be seen – hopefully this is just a ‘blip’ and rates of theft begin to fall again as the economy recovers.
I can’t be bothered to pull back all the layers of naive optimism in just these two sentences.
Yep. Stop making shit deals and 100 different services to subscribe to and people will go back to paying for things. Gaben is the only smart one.
Until this month I paid more than $100 for multiple streaming services. I finally got pissed off when something I wanted to watch was no longer available. Instead I went and torrented it and canceled 90% of the services. It’s time to go back to self streaming everything.
Welcome back
It’s almost like making it nearly impossible to watch what we want and, at the same time, octupling our bills, while also increasing the cost of each would, somehow, force people into the desperation of piracy. Huh. Who woulda thunk it.
Let’s not forget random pulling of content so that you can never tell if what you want is actually on any given service at any given time. This was the final straw that led me to rebuilding my own media collection.
It’s not just streaming services that have turned to shit. Society as a whole has been enshittified because shareholders and directors are chasing the dollar.
Reddit started charging out of their butt for API access, and had killed off 95% of third party apps in the process.
YouTube is downright unusable without a Premium subscription or uBlock Origin. Every content creator meanwhile risks demonetization if their videos are too kid-friendly or too inappropriate, and now have to fill half their videos with endorsements for shitty mobile games like Raid: Shadow Legends if they want to break even.
Porn sites are now astroturfed by e-girls shilling their $20/month OnlyFans pages.
Online dating apps are now a carbon copy of one another, are owned by an oligopoly of big corporations and charge you the same price of four WoW subscriptions for basic features like unlimited swipes, seeing who liked you, etc.
Even real life sucks now. Enjoy paying 70% of your monthly income to pay off some filthy rich landlord’s mortgage while the rich continue to snap up properties, all while the wealthy continue to brainwash sheep into voting against their best interests.
Society as a whole has been enshittified
Porn sites are now astroturfed by e-girls shilling their $20/month OnlyFans pages.
It was a veritable new Dark Age for humanity.
A symptom’s a symptom.
I don’t think sex workers being paid better is comparable to what megacorporations have been doing to the internet for the past 10 years.
Porn sites offer the best free user service on the Internet with the exception of Wikipedia. I don’t know what you mean with that point, honestly.
Xnxx has 1 uhm… YouTube would call it shelf… with egirl ads on the first page of your search and that’s it. If you proceed directly to page 2, you will never see it. I don’t even block that element, it’s easy to ignore.
It’s tot BUY SOME SHIT! ally nothi BUY SOME SHIT! ng to do BUY SOME SHIT! with th BUY SOME SHIT! ere be BUY SOME SHIT! ing way to BUY SOME SHIT! o many a BUY SOME SHIT! ds to ma BUY SOME SHIT! ke stuff wa BUY SOME SHIT! tc BUY SOME SHIT! ha BUY SOME SHIT! bl BUY SOME SHIT! e.
I wish I could up AND downvote this, as it gets the point across well, but MAN do I hate that point. Also, the fact that EVERYTHING has its own streaming service now… No, I’m not paying you a subscription to watch 1 show. If you dont want to give the main streaming players a cut, just sell each season as a oje time purchase
Pirate’s all predicted this. It was inevitable that streaming services would turn into Cable TV. The only plus side aside from prime is lack of advertising. Yet here we are again. “I am inevitable.”
Yeah. It was nice having a period of time where obtaining things legitimately wasnt a pain or felt like you were being milked for all you were worth though… Oh well, yo ho it is!
Man was this very hard for me to read. Still up voting it, though
what a ride
I 100% believe this. The video streamers are getting too greedy and pushing out too much subpar content. When it was affordable and easy to find what you want streaming was great. Now it’s expensive and stuff in on 12 different platforms.
Also most of what I watch is older so everyone on the creative and production side has been paid the only ones making money at this point are the studio fat cats.
Ads. It’s all because of ads. There is a low tolerance by way more people now, and piracy is more convenient than putting up with platforms that can’t build a UX to save their lives, and then put in ads. Fuck em, let them die.
I disagree in that I don’t necessarily think all of the content is subpar. But making everything on a different service and each service continues to jack up its prices makes it very difficult to justify subscribing to any one of them. Like, I’m never gonna subscribe to peacock even though it has a few things I’d watch on it, that’s ridiculous.
Everything doesn’t have to be a different service, studios are just being extraordinarily greedy.
There’s a bizarre parallel to picking a hospital in America while you’re unconscious in a merc ambulance.
Is a lobotomy needed to become a lobbyist?
1.) Article claims w/o any kind of source/data, that people cannot afford subscriptions 2.) Article warns that the big services have to raise their prices soon, because of losses made by piracy, which according to 1.) is caused by people not having enough money for the subscriptions
The article doesn’t mention the shareholders, which get billions of wins by milking the subscribers stupid enough to sign up for the bullshit. … oh, but the article mentions the poor artists/working people, which loose money because of online piracy. I almost forgot about the recent strikes, because the people actually producing the content don’t get shit from the companies/shareholders.
Seriously, I’ll cancel my last subscription right now, because I am feed up giving my money to shareholders, companies and lobbies who buy politicians and laws.
In the early 2000s, tools like Napster and Limewire allowed people to download music and video files for free – depriving artists of their income. The emergence of streaming services like Netflix, Apple Music and Spotify make it easy to access unlimited content – and ensure that artists are paid for their creations.
Seriously… This told me all I needed to know about how objective this article was going to be. Stopped reading right there.
Absolutely. Spotify doesn’t exactly pay artists very well. It’s better than nothing, but Spotify is wealthier than the vast majority of artists it profits from.
Who is Panda Security?
Wiki page for them. Pretty sure all you need to read is the warnings at the top of the page to know all you need about who they are.
They really should make those warnings expanded by default on mobile. And the last one should be first.
Panda Security is a Antivirus company.
They are owned by Watchguard which sells physical firewalls, MFA and Endpoint Security (which includes technologies like EDPR or Endpoint Detection and Response)A garbage provider since the 90s.
It’s like no longer having one cheap and convinient way of seeing content makes people rather pirate things than paying 7 different platforms each one more expensive than the next and all of them trying to mess with you and your wallet in new and unexpected ways.
I’m literally paying money to pirate content. $20 a year and I can stream anything from Netflix, apple, Disney, HBO, etc through a single app. So much less hassle.
Oh? What are you paying for?
HD, free version tops out at 720
I think they were wondering what service you use
Ah, yes that would make sense lol
Don’t like to mention it in comments in case it gets too much attention and shut down. I can pm people if interested.
I would like that PM if possible. Just got 3 emails in the last 2 weeks about various services raising their pricing
I’m interested! Can you PM me? I currently use an IPTV service that’s just okay.
I would be very happy about a PM too :-)
I would be interested
Me ten
I would very much like a PM :)
Cable sucked for other reasons and I sure wouldn’t have ever really called it cheap. There’s a reason people wanted to get away from it in the first place. I’ve been seeing a lot of pro cable nonsense going around and it would be such a pity if the streaming situation devolved back to putting up with the predatory nature of cable-like services.
I think OP is referring to the original streaming status quo, where Netflix was the only game in town, it cost under 15 bucks a month, and everybody licensed their back catalog to them rather than developing their own competing platforms.
It was illegal for companies to fully vertically integrate by owning production and distribution back then. A corrupt judge struck it down several years ago which put us into this mess. That’s why theaters hadn’t been owned by studios for a long time.
Also why Hulu had all that content: no one owner could run their own service explicitly.
Ahhh, the good old days
That’s exactly what the long game is. Pay for just good enough content in an ad delivery service.
You forgot the part where they try to kill off piracy, because if they charge more then more people pirate, but if they prevent people from pirating then they can charge a whole lot more.
Piracy actually keeps prices down.
The convenience of streaming services disappeared, this is just a natural consequence.
I have subscriptions (and shared subscriptions) to… seven services that I can think of in 20 seconds.
Yet, time and time again, I try to figure out if what I want to watch is covered by one of them (not trivial to figure out), and end up falling back on piracy probably around 50% of the time.
Now that every fucking content owner has its own subscription plan, it makes subscriptions pointless because it’s spread so damn thin.
try to figure out if what I want to watch is covered by one of them
Justwatch.com, my dude.
Doesn’t always work. I’m not in the US. So shows that it says are on a service, aren’t in my country, or if it’s on a service, it doesn’t know because it’s on that service in my country and not the us. For me, Justwatch.com, has been more miss than hit. Sometimes, asking google works, but some services that are available in my country won’t integrate with Google in my country, but if use a VPN for the us on my Android TV it loads all the US features and the integration starts working and everything is correct. So yeah, unless you’re in the US, the experience of figuring out where it is what you want to watch is more miss than hit.
Oh yes this is so true. I have stopped trying to research where each is that I want to watch; if it’s not on netflix or prime video I just download it.
