DBSTalk Forum banner
41 - 60 of 66 Posts

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
Apparently he did not have permission to stream these channels!
Too many believe that what they fancy should be free (as in beer). "He" may not have known he wasn't above board or he may have just been lying to scam hopeful patrons.

A copyright holder has rights and those rights have proven to be tough to abridge. Expect that similar ventures will end similarly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
What makes you think that dealing with Amazon and their ecosystem is any easier than rolling your own Roku app?
Because the Fire Stick does have those search engines if there isn't software written for Roku, you do not get it. If it streams on a computer, then you can get it on the Fire Stick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
At least Frndly TV has most of the Weigel fare. They are adding Movies!. The only one missing is METV+. we are lucky to have a Weigal LPTV here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
At least Frndly TV has most of the Weigel fare. They are adding Movies!. The only one missing is METV+. we are lucky to have a Weigal LPTV here.
I started my free 7-day trial of Frndly TV today. I probably won't keep it after the trial ends, but it is nice to play around with, and have access to these channels for awhile.
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
Because the Fire Stick does have those search engines if there isn't software written for Roku, you do not get it. If it streams on a computer, then you can get it on the Fire Stick.
I didn't understand that you were suggesting a web browser. Are you using search engines to find show titles? That sounds like a ton of work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 ·
I did not mean that. Many apps are available via a computer that are not available directly on the Firestick or Roku. I have found a lot of material on the computer I can cast or use a search engine to get. Puffer is one example for those who do not have access to networks. Puffer is not on the Roku or Firestick.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,717 Posts
Roku is very picky. He would have been better off on the Fire Stick.
Roku is acting as a moderator or gatekeeper. Since they can filter their service and have chosen to do so they have made themselves liable for any illegal content on their service. That means they have to be picky lest the content owners come after them for stolen content they allow on their service.

Any of the shady or illegal services have to worry about success. Once they become popular they become noticeable to the content owners who will enforce their copyrights. If you patronize such services EXPECT them to be taken down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
If you patronize such services EXPECT them to be taken down.
The problem is knowing whether such services are legitimate or shady in the first place. Rightly or wrongly, being openly available in the Roku store gives these services the air of legitimacy to the average user. So, such removals do still come as a surprise to the user when they do happen. You might as well say to expect every service on Roku to be taken down, if there is no easy way to tell the difference.

Meanwhile, the one Roku app that I actually do expect to be taken down (CW Seed, since all of their content has been moved to the regular CW app) keeps chugging along. This "service" is nothing more than an info slate to redirect users to the CW app. I keep the CW Seed app on my Home screen just for spite, just to see how long it takes before that one finally gets removed.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,717 Posts
"If a deal seems too good to be true it probably is."
A ridiculously high number of real channels for a ridiculously low price is a red flag.
"Free" channels that the content owners charge MVPDs to rebroadcast is a red flag.
Unidentified or individual owners, and ownership based outside of the US are red flags.
Legitimate companies don't usually mention that they are operating legally. They just do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
"If a deal seems too good to be true it probably is."
A ridiculously high number of real channels for a ridiculously low price is a red flag.
"Free" channels that the content owners charge MVPDs to rebroadcast is a red flag.
Unidentified or individual owners, and ownership based outside of the US are red flags.
Legitimate companies don't usually mention that they are operating legally. They just do.
Locast sure seemed to be legitimate. Look what happened to them. "Real" channels is a subjective term, as some viewers would consider shopping channels and channels like C-SPAN to be "real" channels. Do you really expect the average viewer to keep track of media ownership, or how much each channel charges MVPDs? Most people don't care where their content comes from. They just know what shows they like to watch, and look for the best value to get those shows.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,717 Posts
Perhaps some of us are more in tune with reality. Aereo and Locast both raised red flags and both are gone. I am surprised how long Locast lasted but both companies used the same "creative reading" of the laws and staked their company on loopholes that were not able to stand up in court.

I don't expect the average viewer to know who owns any of the channels they receive let alone do any deep dive investigation - and I did not suggest that potential subscribers do any such thing. But I do expect a level of intelligence or awareness that would prevent those potential subscribers from being scammed.

If one looks at a low price or free streaming service and sees it packed with channels normally seen only on high priced services there should be some suspicion. Then read the rest of my previous post and look for other red flags - Who is the company? Are they being run out of a foreign country or some PO Box location?

Orby raised suspicion for me but they managed to operate in partnership with established companies (Best Buy, etc) to distribute their receivers, they actually provided the service promised and the pricing was comparable to other MVPDs for the packages offered. Their corporate address was a mailbox store - which was one red flag, but they were able to overcome that deficiency by performing the service promised. Until their business failed. (Hopefully the next Orby will do better but I will be looking for red flags.)

I suppose the potential subscribers shouldn't worry if the service they are paying for is legitimate or not. Just use it until it fails and move on to the next one. But my final word of warning when signing up for such services is to watch your payment information. Not that any of the companies in this post or thread are criminal enterprises, but if one freely gives out their credit card or bank information, social security number, birth dates and other confidential information eventually one is going to get scammed. "Too good to be true" offers are common bait for such scams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #53 ·
Locast sure seemed to be legitimate. Look what happened to them. "Real" channels is a subjective term, as some viewers would consider shopping channels and channels like C-SPAN to be "real" channels. Do you really expect the average viewer to keep track of media ownership, or how much each channel charges MVPDs? Most people don't care where their content comes from. They just know what shows they like to watch, and look for the best value to get those shows.
The public are not lawyers. It is impossible to know for sure that is legit or not. If you go hunting I am sure you could find a lot of questionable channels out there. Some are even free. In a World of thousands of channel apps, the sky is the limit. Some feel if the channel streams for free, then they will watch it. The Reg Flag as noted is when someone is selling a bunch of cable type channels for a low price. All the crooks can not be stopped anyway. As fast as they go after one, 10 more spring up. The issue comes up when a service gets advertised and more and more know about. Someone reports them and the letter(s) goes out to shut them down. F2V got that way. Legit or not, when he first started out few knew of the channel app. I ran into in by accident. Then Cut of Cord news services stated talking about it. The guy went to two apps. Too many people knew about the service, and he was found out. Loose lips sink ships. In the beginning (1985) I got my big dish. It was great for several years until the "Free to Air" channels got advertised too much and they scrambled.
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
Many apps are available via a computer that are not available directly on the Firestick or Roku.
I can't say that I've seen any desktop apps since DISH Anywhere went to a browser app. Puffer is a browser app.

Being browser-based makes things very hard for the Apple crowd as their default browser, Safari, isn't particularly popular and while it may be standards-based, it isn't an industry standard. This is perhaps why installed apps rule in the Apple Ecosystem. The size of the installed base of Roku and Fire TV devices can't be ignored by anyone who is serious about being competitive.

Since Roku has largely avoided making browsers available, that lets that huge market out of the browser-based app market. That may be what is protecting these small-time players from more vigorous prosecution. Chrome can be installed on the Fire TV devices so they may be able to run some of the browser apps.

Again, my point is that the desktop viewers aren't desktop apps that need to have a formal program (an application) installed to run. Everything they need can be supported by the browser with the addition of some downloaded (on demand) Javascript code that is executed by the browser itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Loose lips sink ships.
If you patronize such services EXPECT them to be taken down.
"The first rule of Fight Club is: Don't talk about Fight Club."

I guess the real lesson here is that if you start threads advertising such services, expect them (the services, not the threads) to be shut down.

Any of the shady or illegal services have to worry about success. Once they become popular they become noticeable to the content owners who will enforce their copyrights.
I think Locast's strategy was the exact opposite: they were trying to rapidly expand to as many markets as possible, in the hope of becoming "too big to fail." It was not their success that got them permanently shut down, but rather that they were not successful enough. I think Locast was counting on a bigger public outcry when the service went away, so that things would get changed to allow them (or someone like them) to operate such a service in the future, probably using the exact same infrastructure that Locast had already built.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,717 Posts
I believe Locast honestly thought they had a loophole. The broadcasters waited until it was obvious that Locast was using subscription fees for expansion. Locast received some funding from non-subscriber donors - but they collected more from subscribers than it cost to sustain the service. By the ruling of the court, that was not allowed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #57 ·
I believe Locast honestly thought they had a loophole. The broadcasters waited until it was obvious that Locast was using subscription fees for expansion. Locast received some funding from non-subscriber donors - but they collected more from subscribers than it cost to sustain the service. By the ruling of the court, that was not allowed.
I totally agree. That subscription thing is what got Locast in trouble, even if the service was totally free, like F2V TV, the service would still have been shut down. The Networks have a ton of clout along with very deep pockets, so any small outfit would lose out. The Networks totally control over what they broadcast. I cannot argue with that, as they own the content.They are there to make money. Locast and F2V were both cutting into a Network's the revenue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
LocalBTV (one of the recommended "replacements" for F2VTV) is currently having a distribution dispute with my local Buzzr affiliate, a network that is available streaming for free on other services.
And now even more bad news, as LocalBTV just removed Antenna TV also. This time, there is not even an info channel about the dispute. The Antenna TV affiliate simply disappeared completely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #59 ·
And now even more bad news, as LocalBTV just removed Antenna TV also. This time, there is not even an info channel about the dispute. The Antenna TV affiliate simply disappeared completely.

Interesting....It was there earlier, but now not listed on So Cal listings. Hopefully Frndly TV will add it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Today was the last day of my Frndly TV free trial, so I cancelled it. If Frndly had added Antenna TV before LocalBTV dropped it, then I might have considered keeping Frndly.
 
41 - 60 of 66 Posts
Top