|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: FCC Asks Amazon & Ebay To Halt Illegal Streaming Box Sales
|
Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 05-31-2018 10:07 AM
Along the lines of the recent SHOWBOX thread, comes THIS STORY in which the FCC
asks E-Bay & Amazon, et al to stop listing/selling illegal streaming boxes on their
websites. (Original story link also contains images of a response letter from Amazon)
FCC Asks Amazon And eBay To Stop Selling Fake Pay TV Boxes
On Friday, the Federal Communications Commission sent a letter to Amazon
CEO Jeff Bezos and eBay CEO Devin Wenig asking their companies to help remove
the listings for fake pay TV boxes from their respective websites. These boxes often
falsely bear the FCC logo, the letter informed, and are used to perpetuate “
intellectual property theft and consumer fraud.”
With the rise in cord cutting, a number of consumers have found it’s just as easy
to use a software app like Kodi on a cheap streaming media device to gain access
to content — like TV shows and movies — that they would otherwise miss out on
by dropping their pay TV subscription. As an added perk, various software add-ons
enable consumers to stream movies still in the theaters, too. It’s an easier way
to access pirated content than visiting The Pirate Bay and downloading torrent files.
While Kodi’s open-source software itself doesn’t facilitate piracy, through a number
of downloadable add-ons, it’s relatively easy for consumers to figure out how to
stream pirated content thanks to online tutorials and YouTube videos.
It’s not clear if people know that they’re doing something illegal, or just don’t
care because there are seemingly no repercussions related to their behavior.
Amazon, Netflix and major Hollywood studios have gone after these box makers
through the court system already. In January, for example, a U.S. District Court
judge handed down a preliminary injunction against TickBox TV, a Georgia-based
set-top box maker that was profiting from the sale of its so-called “Kodi boxes.”
Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Disney, 20th Century Fox Film, Universal
Pictures and Warner Bros. were also plaintiffs in that case, along with Netflix
and Amazon.
Amazon and eBay also proactively remove devices facilitating piracy from their
websites, the FCC acknowledged in its letter.
Amazon, for example, prevented the sale of “tens of thousands of unlawful
devices” through its “automated proactive detection, preventative investigations,
and notices of infringement from rights holders,” the letter stated.
Ebay, meanwhile, also removes devices reported as infringing and removes
those that say things like “never pay another cable bill” or “fully loaded” in
their descriptions.
But the FCC wants the companies to do more, and faster, it seems.
“Unfortunately, despite your good work in this area, devices continue to make it
to consumers through your website,” writes FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly.
“Many of these devices contain harmful malware that will most certainly be
passed on to the consumer. Moreover, the consumer may unwittingly believe that
the device is lawful since they were able to purchase it from a legitimate company.”
The FCC is additionally concerned because many devices use the FCC logo to aid
in their attempt to defraud consumers.
It notes that nine set-top box distributors were referred to the FCC in October for
streaming pirated content, and seven of those displayed the FCC logo even though
there was no record of their compliance with the commission’s requirements.
The letter specifically asks both Amazon and eBay to step up their enforcement,
by “swiftly removing” devices the FCC alerts them to; it also asks the companies to
provide the FCC with information about the manufacturers, distributors and suppliers,
when requested.
The move not only pushes Amazon and eBay to more quickly and thoroughly cooperate
with the FCC, it also serves as a warning about the U.S. government’s plan to further
its crackdown on these fake pay TV boxes.
Of course, there’s a bit of irony here regarding Amazon’s participation in this fight —
its Amazon Fire TV Stick, or “firestick” as consumers tend to refer to it, is one of the
most popular devices out there today for enabling piracy.
People either buy the “firestick” themselves and install Kodi and various add-ons or they
buy a slightly more expensive, hacked firestick from a local reseller who’s hawking them
on under-the-radar backchannels, like Facebook Groups or online message boards.
The hacked firestick is set up with Kodi pre-installed and the various add-ons for free
streaming already configured. (A search for “kodi box” on Amazon.com also returns the
Fire TV Stick and Fire TV as the top two results thanks to “sponsored” placements
by Amazon. Hmmm.)
The U.S. is not alone in its Kodi box crackdown. Recently, business owners in Wales who
sold fully loaded Kodi boxes were sentenced to prison, for example, and its courts have
ruled Kodi boxes illegal before. Canada has gone after websites that enable piracy
through Kodi, as well.
In response to the letter, eBay says it plans to cooperate with the FCC:
We’re committed to working in collaboration with the FCC to prevent the sale of these
illegal products. As outlined in the letter, eBay utilizes a variety of measures to prevent
these products from being sold on our platform. These include proactive filtering and
manual site reviews to identify illegal products, as well as taking action on direct referrals
received from the FCC. We look forward to continuing to work in partnership with the FCC
to keep these illegal products off our site.
<EOT>
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 05-31-2018 04:37 PM
quote: Leo Enticknap
Given that the reviews and comments in the product listing page make clear that it works as an HDCP zapper, I'm a bit surprised that Amazon continues to sell it. In my case, I've never used one for any act of copyright infringement: the ones I've installed in theaters have only ever been used to play legally licensed content. But they certainly could be used for piracy, e.g. passing the video from a cable box to a recording device or Internet streaming.
Well, according to the DMCA you're committing a crime actually... Removing or circumventing any copyright protection whatsoever is considered illegal by the DMCA, even if you possess the proper licenses. So, even ripping a Blu-Ray is illegal as is stripping HDCP, even if you have all the necessary rights to the content.
In practice, for end-users who don't distribute bootlegged copies, there are no real consequences. But, those who create tools that strip DRM and other kinds of copy protections usually face a pretty uphill legal battle.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 06-04-2018 02:27 AM
Piracy will never entirely go away. And to some extent, I think the content owners are even silently asking for their content to be pirated. Even in 2018, it's not that evident to get the content you want, even if you're willing to pay for it and I'm not even talking about the movies still within the theatrical release window, they'll be available for a few bucks or on Netflix in just a few weeks anyways...
But try to get that classical movie that's not on Netflix or any other common service. Or... just try to get an HBO subscription in many countries in the world, especially since they happen to make exclusive deals with all kinds of cable companies some people aren't even able to get service on.
Coming back to those piracy boxes, they're a continuing problem and they're actually maturing, to some extent that the pirate enjoys a better user experience than the legal customer. Some of those piracy boxes even come with subscription models. A lot of ethnic groups around here are using illegal streaming services which they pay for via a monthly fee, to receive a bunch of channels that would otherwise not be accessible for them. Those boxes usually feature at least a few hundred channels, usually including a lot of premium content channels, although they usually only watch a handful of those channels. Nobody else is serving this market and a lot of those channels aren't even available on satellites in this region.
I do believe that some of the users are really convinced, they're actually paying for a legal service, but most people simply don't care...
Although I can understand those boxes will appear on Amazon and eBay via independent sellers, I don't understand how they can appear in the shops of Europe's biggest electronics distributors.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 06-04-2018 10:36 AM
I don't think any content creator (artist, musician, movie maker, etc) or content distributor is asking for their intellectual property to be pirated. This notion of the piracy creating better word of mouth and more business is an illusion. Word of mouth about the content can get around, but that's combined with the motive to get the content for nothing. Napster, Kazaa and other file sharing applications did absolutely nothing to grow the music industry. They only shrank it. Legit online music stores and services (iTunes, Amazon, Google Music) grew out of the phenomenon, followed by the "all you can eat" streaming services. But they were all geared for selling songs one at a time, not whole albums. The music business is tiny compared to what it was 25 years ago.
At some point the people making the product have to get paid. I sure as shit will never do my job creating graphics for free, for "honor of getting published" or some other jerk-off notion like that. Doing shit for free doesn't pay my mortgage or put food in my refrigerator. I guarantee absolutely none of these content free-loaders would happily go to work and do their jobs for free. Unless they have a wealthy spouse or some other cushy arrangement none of them could afford to do their jobs for free. But these same dicks expect anyone creating movies, music or art to provide their work for free. Screw all that. A couple of people I know who are into illegally using Fire Sticks bitch about able-bodied people on welfare, yet have no problem basically being on illegal pay TV welfare.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 06-05-2018 02:46 AM
The irony is that there is often a big gap between the content creator and the one that actually owns the rights to sell it, especially in the music industry.
And although it's easy to blame Napster and the many iterations that followed for the downfall of the music industry, they primarily did it to themselves. While the whole world evolved into an on-line distribution channel that could've made them billions and billions, they simply stood there and did nothing except fighting expensive battles in court, until finally, in 2003 and 2004 Apple rolled out the iTunes Music Store. And even then, it took the better half of a decade before real alternatives became available and those libraries became at least halfway complete.
Still, I don't think it was really piracy that got them, I think it was primarily the crappy products they were pushing out. You see, I never really used any of those file sharing piracy utilities. I've always paid for what I wanted to have, as long as it's good. Yet somewhere in the late 90's I almost completely stopped buying new records, as there was almost nothing that I really wanted to own. In the meanwhile, I kept buying DVDs and I kept visiting movie theaters. The same happened to many people I know, while they started buying the stuff they already had on the iTunes Music Store, they simply didn't buy into "new" stuff.
Maybe it's a "generation thing", but I guess the music industry was simply done with pushing out one piece of overproduced and over-marketed garbage after the other and people started to spend their money on other things. They simply were too lazy to go with the changing times. They failed to connect to the new generation and also failed on delivering for their existing customer base, the one with the money...
And while piracy obviously did its part in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's what broke their necks. Meanwhile, as a final sign of their own laziness and incompetence: none of those big record houses managed to push a service with broad user-appeal, they entirely relied on external parties for this, like Apple, Spotify, Deezer, etc. Now they're complaining those guys are eating their lunch... (And to be honest, those record companies are used to eat someone other's lunch: Primarily that of the small artist.)
As for the "hack-box-du-jour" users, whether it is some modified Fire stick, or customized Kodi box, they'll always be around. I think history has proven two ways to get rid of them:
- Provide a BETTER commercial product. You remember those DVDs and BluRays with unskippable copyright protection and FBI notices, often in a zillion languages? Those where I, as a paying customer was being threatened like a potential criminal? Definitely NOT a better product.
- Root out the distributors of those "hack-boxes". Like I said, it's pretty inexplicable that those same boxes sometimes turn up at big chain retail stores. It's also those distributors that are actually making money with bootlegged stuff. Also, once you disable the infrastructure feeding those "hack-boxes", the service for those who bought into such boxes will also go dark.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 06-05-2018 01:49 PM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
The irony is that there is often a big gap between the content creator and the one that actually owns the rights to sell it, especially in the music industry.
That still doesn't make piracy ethical.
I'm aware how media companies and other business outfits screw over content creators. I'm kind of amazed the United States still has any sort of music industry between what the recording labels do to rob musicians of their royalties and the high tech scalping operations that are poisoning the concert industry. Movie studios and production companies are notorious for playing accounting games that let them get away with robbing talent and crew people. My father literally had to sue the publisher of his first book out of business and take his rights to another publisher to get paid anything at all.
The people at home freeloading movies or whatever might feel like they're doing nothing wrong since the big companies screw over artists. They don't realize (or more likely just don't care) that they're just another party in line waiting to screw the artists after the bigger outfits get their turn. I think some people enjoy pirating this stuff because they resent these entertainers.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
And although it's easy to blame Napster and the many iterations that followed for the downfall of the music industry, they primarily did it to themselves. While the whole world evolved into an on-line distribution channel that could've made them billions and billions, they simply stood there and did nothing except fighting expensive battles in court, until finally, in 2003 and 2004 Apple rolled out the iTunes Music Store. And even then, it took the better half of a decade before real alternatives became available and those libraries became at least halfway complete.
I'll repeat what I said earlier: online music sales have done NOTHING to grow the music industry. It has only shrank it. It would not have mattered if/when the labels got on board with Apple, Amazon, Google, etc to do online store sales. Music CD sales have been in the toilet for a long time. The rates of album sales, legally downloaded, are terrible. Most people just buy songs one at a time, if they buy anything at all. Lately the "all you can eat" streaming services have been cannibalizing the online song sales side of the industry. Some are willing to pay a small amount of money per month for what amounts to commercial free digital radio.
The music industry (or rather the big media companies who bought it) did indeed make seriously stupid mistakes in the early 1990's which started the industry's 25 year old downhill slide. Executives tried to exert a strangle-hold on music content innovation. Many recording lables were bought out and consolidated into fewer outlets. Big companies bought out radio stations and militantly enforced stale, repetitive play lists. Payola between labels and radio stations was illegal, but they found technical ways around that. The end result was a tide of bland, predictable music content regardless of the genre. Sales were starting to tank even before Napster grew into a sensation. The online outlets have only been sustaining the declining trend. Matters are getting worse for the music industry. Broadcast radio mostly sucks now. Brick and mortar music stores have disappeared in most places. Walmart and Target were the enemy of such stores in the 1990's. Now the music store is basically Apple, Amazon and Google.
In the early 1960's America's music industry got into the rut of selling the same old shit to customers. Then the British Invasion happened, which threw the music industry into upheaval. It was a great period for music. The industry went through numerous big cycles of change all up until 1990. Then it all stopped. The big companies figured out how to stop big cultural changes in music. Unfortunately they haven't figured out to deal with the content rot that has taken place since then.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic