Interested in how add ons reimburse movie makers
#46
As I said before, we're neither helping not hindering people's free choice as to how they use Kodi. But what we are trying to do is ensure that it is they who name that choice rather than it being made for them by pre installing certain add-ons, and that the user knows exactly what it is that they are accessing and using.

A quick trawl of the average content of the bin here shows that many users are ignorant of what they are using and where it comes from and is "legal status" (for want of a better way of putting it).

Basically if you want to use pirated media that's up to you, but don't come running to us if it doesn't work, if your device ends up full of malware and viruses or if there's a knock on the door from the authorities. We are just trying to ensure people know what they may be getting into and that responsibility is taken by the appropriate parties.

Those are the rules and how we operate here.
|Banned add-ons (wiki)|Forum rules (wiki)|VPN policy (wiki)|First time user (wiki)|FAQs (wiki) Troubleshooting (wiki)|Add-ons (wiki)|Free content (wiki)|Debug Log (wiki)|

Kodi Blog Posts
Reply
#47
(2016-05-02, 09:26)DarrenHill Wrote: As I said before, we're neither helping not hindering people's free choice as to how they use Kodi. But what we are trying to do is ensure that it is they who name that choice rather than it being made for them by pre installing certain add-ons, and that the user knows exactly what it is that they are accessing and using.

A quick trawl of the average content of the bin here shows that many users are ignorant of what they are using and where it comes from and is "legal status" (for want of a better way of putting it).

Basically if you want to use pirated media that's up to you, but don't come running to us if it doesn't work, if your device ends up full of malware and viruses or if there's a knock on the door from the authorities. We are just trying to ensure people know what they may be getting into and that responsibility is taken by the appropriate parties.

Those are the rules and how we operate here.

And I respect that whole-heartedly. Same with any OS. They can be used as intended OR they can be modded and filled with programs that allow the user to do unethical things. Doesn't reflect on how good "or" bad the OS is. But people will always find a way to do what they want. As long as Kodi is open-sourced, that will always be a thing. Unfortunately, Idiot-Box users will continue to flood the forums looking for help with "finding sources."
Reply
#48
Another way to look at it: The add-ons aren't shunned because of piracy. They're shunned because they make it look like Kodi is for piracy. That and many of them are poorly made/buggy and/or have poor quality/broken links. I mean, if ya gonna pirate, at least pirate a good copy...

If someone uses Usenet to get a movie, and they watch that in Kodi, they know that Kodi didn't provide the copy. They understand that they made the choice to use Usenet and understand what they're doing. With many of these add-ons (or more accurately, the people who market cheap devices that use the add-ons/Kodi), most of those users don't understand. They think it's a Kodi thing. That's the issue.
Reply
#49
(2016-05-02, 15:22)Ned Scott Wrote: Another way to look at it: The add-ons aren't shunned because of piracy. They're shunned because they make it look like Kodi is for piracy. That and many of them are poorly made/buggy and/or have poor quality/broken links. I mean, if ya gonna pirate, at least pirate a good copy...

If someone uses Usenet to get a movie, and they watch that in Kodi, they know that Kodi didn't provide the copy. They understand that they made the choice to use Usenet and understand what they're doing. With many of these add-ons (or more accurately, the people who market cheap devices that use the add-ons/Kodi), most of those users don't understand. They think it's a Kodi thing. That's the issue.

Yeah and I can definitely understand how frustrating that can be. I won't name-drop, but there are soooo many guys profiting off of selling Kodi as a piracy thing. I know you are aware this, but I never thought it'd be this bad after it went mainstream. I was on Amazon trying to find a simple Android box capable of HEVC decoding without shelling out $200 for Shield. I came across so many "fully loaded" boxes that I just got off. I miss when nobody knew Kodi/XBMC existed, but I'm sure it has brought along many new supporters and coders since going mainstream. So, there's some good in it.
Reply
#50
(2016-05-02, 18:02)RamboUnchained Wrote: but I'm sure it has brought along many new supporters and coders since going mainstream. So, there's some good in it.

I wish.
Reply
#51
(2016-05-02, 08:41)RamboUnchained Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 07:45)greenbag Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 07:23)RamboUnchained Wrote: So you're telling me that more than half of the users use Quasar for something that doesnt involve viewing and/or storing copywritten material?. I have no stake in any of this either way. I understand that Kodi would rather not be associated with the "hey, free movies here" guys, but at the same time, hosting Pulsar/Quasar, couch potato, and any other paid service that utilizes Usenet and torrents in the official repo make it all questionable is all I'm saying. The route to the end goal may be different with blacklisted addons, but the end goal doesn't change: free media streaming/downloading of copywritten product. Just my thoughts on the matter.

As long as you aren't actually storing the material, giving access to someone else's links isn't illegal. Open Bing or Google right now, and click the video tab.. search for star wars full.. see what pops up. They have multiple copies that can be viewed right there. That's no different.

I never said it was different. However, I feel that it's...unethical to shun "piracy" addons from 3rd party hosts when we have our own special breed of piracy addons right in the official repo. Also, it's not possible to watch stored media without caching bits of the file itself. It may not be "download and keep" illegal, but it's still illegal. Giving someone access to the link is what makes it illegal lol. The moment you rip and redistribute copywritten material you're a piracy advocate. They get bigger fines than the people that just download the stuff. Personally, I couldn't care less. The actors and studios are worth millions and billions respectively and I still buy actual discs for movies I really enjoyed in theaters. I've hosted multiple movie showings with 50+ attendees in my back yard. In the court's eyes, I'd be just as bad as someone that shared a movie on a torrent site with 50 people. Maybe even worse, because I charge for food and drinks as well lol.

In my country, merely watching it is NOT illegal. It used to be completely legal to download as well.. just illegal to upload. The download part seems to have changed recently, but they still only give a letter. The only fines, are for those actually uploading.

So as far as I'm concerned.. it's not illegal.
Reply
#52
If you live in Europe, the law seems to be the same...

Quote:On those grounds, the Court (Fourth Chamber) hereby rules:

Article 5 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the copies on the user’s computer screen and the copies in the internet ‘cache’ of that computer’s hard disk, made by an end-user in the course of viewing a website, satisfy the conditions that those copies must be temporary, that they must be transient or incidental in nature and that they must constitute an integral and essential part of a technological process, as well as the conditions laid down in Article 5(5) of that directive, and that they may therefore be made without the authorisation of the copyright holders.

Code:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=153302&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=399092
Reply
#53
(2016-05-02, 20:17)greenbag Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 08:41)RamboUnchained Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 07:45)greenbag Wrote: As long as you aren't actually storing the material, giving access to someone else's links isn't illegal. Open Bing or Google right now, and click the video tab.. search for star wars full.. see what pops up. They have multiple copies that can be viewed right there. That's no different.

I never said it was different. However, I feel that it's...unethical to shun "piracy" addons from 3rd party hosts when we have our own special breed of piracy addons right in the official repo. Also, it's not possible to watch stored media without caching bits of the file itself. It may not be "download and keep" illegal, but it's still illegal. Giving someone access to the link is what makes it illegal lol. The moment you rip and redistribute copywritten material you're a piracy advocate. They get bigger fines than the people that just download the stuff. Personally, I couldn't care less. The actors and studios are worth millions and billions respectively and I still buy actual discs for movies I really enjoyed in theaters. I've hosted multiple movie showings with 50+ attendees in my back yard. In the court's eyes, I'd be just as bad as someone that shared a movie on a torrent site with 50 people. Maybe even worse, because I charge for food and drinks as well lol.

In my country, merely watching it is NOT illegal. It used to be completely legal to download as well.. just illegal to upload. The download part seems to have changed recently, but they still only give a letter. The only fines, are for those actually uploading.

So as far as I'm concerned.. it's not illegal.

Interesting. I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with why most movie sites and file-hosting companies are hosted everywhere but America it seems lol.
Reply
#54
(2016-05-02, 22:38)RamboUnchained Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 20:17)greenbag Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 08:41)RamboUnchained Wrote: I never said it was different. However, I feel that it's...unethical to shun "piracy" addons from 3rd party hosts when we have our own special breed of piracy addons right in the official repo. Also, it's not possible to watch stored media without caching bits of the file itself. It may not be "download and keep" illegal, but it's still illegal. Giving someone access to the link is what makes it illegal lol. The moment you rip and redistribute copywritten material you're a piracy advocate. They get bigger fines than the people that just download the stuff. Personally, I couldn't care less. The actors and studios are worth millions and billions respectively and I still buy actual discs for movies I really enjoyed in theaters. I've hosted multiple movie showings with 50+ attendees in my back yard. In the court's eyes, I'd be just as bad as someone that shared a movie on a torrent site with 50 people. Maybe even worse, because I charge for food and drinks as well lol.

In my country, merely watching it is NOT illegal. It used to be completely legal to download as well.. just illegal to upload. The download part seems to have changed recently, but they still only give a letter. The only fines, are for those actually uploading.

So as far as I'm concerned.. it's not illegal.

Interesting. I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with why most movie sites and file-hosting companies are hosted everywhere but America it seems lol.

I agree that it's a grey area, and sometimes questionable ethically. But in this day and age, where the consumer has had their rights written out by big business, mostly by deregulating, then there's something to be said about civil disobedience. Some of these movie corporations are owned by the same groups that were involved with the US mortgage scams which ended in foreclosures, as well as receiving massive bailouts from Congress. And as I mentioned before, when they make a movie in your city.. they literally take it over. How about having to move your car from in front of your house for a week, because they need the space for their trucks. You don't get reimbursed for that. Walking down the sidewalk going to work, and there's a security guy at the entrance to an alleyway.. telling you you to be quiet, and you have to wait. I have to be at work in 10 minutes.. and you wind up waiting for 5. There's even a cop standing there to back the guy up. We don't get reimbursed for that. And as I said about the tax levy on blank media.. some countries pay a tax on every blank dvd they buy.. even if it's for a wedding video, or just burning the newest version of Ubuntu. Hollywood still gets theirs in the end.
Reply
#55
(2016-05-02, 23:03)greenbag Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 22:38)RamboUnchained Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 20:17)greenbag Wrote: In my country, merely watching it is NOT illegal. It used to be completely legal to download as well.. just illegal to upload. The download part seems to have changed recently, but they still only give a letter. The only fines, are for those actually uploading.

So as far as I'm concerned.. it's not illegal.

Interesting. I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with why most movie sites and file-hosting companies are hosted everywhere but America it seems lol.

I agree that it's a grey area, and sometimes questionable ethically. But in this day and age, where the consumer has had their rights written out by big business, mostly by deregulating, then there's something to be said about civil disobedience. Some of these movie corporations are owned by the same groups that were involved with the US mortgage scams which ended in foreclosures, as well as receiving massive bailouts from Congress. And as I mentioned before, when they make a movie in your city.. they literally take it over. How about having to move your car from in front of your house for a week, because they need the space for their trucks. You don't get reimbursed for that. Walking down the sidewalk going to work, and there's a security guy at the entrance to an alleyway.. telling you you to be quiet, and you have to wait. I have to be at work in 10 minutes.. and you wind up waiting for 5. There's even a cop standing there to back the guy up. We don't get reimbursed for that. And as I said about the tax levy on blank media.. some countries pay a tax on every blank dvd they buy.. even if it's for a wedding video, or just burning the newest version of Ubuntu. Hollywood still gets theirs in the end.

Personally, I've never had an issue pirating or with someone else pirating from a multi-billion dollar industry. Hollywood is ALWAYS going to get theirs. What I do hate is the torrenting of games, programs, and movies from small indie companies. Some of these guys depend on the kickbacks from the work they've put in. High profile actors and actresses are going to get paid millions if 5 people or 5,000 people download a movie they were in. Say a studio releases 12 movies in a year that rakes in a grosse of 2 billion in revenue. If 100k copies of a $20 blu-ray is pirated, They're still $198 million in the green lol. It's a drop in the bucket.
Reply
#56
(2016-05-02, 18:54)natethomas Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 18:02)RamboUnchained Wrote: but I'm sure it has brought along many new supporters and coders since going mainstream. So, there's some good in it.

I wish.

Ouch. Well, that's a bit of a heartbreaker.
Reply
#57
(2016-05-02, 23:15)RamboUnchained Wrote: Personally, I've never had an issue pirating or with someone else pirating from a multi-billion dollar industry. Hollywood is ALWAYS going to get theirs. What I do hate is the torrenting of games, programs, and movies from small indie companies. Some of these guys depend on the kickbacks from the work they've put in. High profile actors and actresses are going to get paid millions if 5 people or 5,000 people download a movie they were in. Say a studio releases 12 movies in a year that rakes in a grosse of 2 billion in revenue. If 100k copies of a $20 blu-ray is pirated, They're still $198 million in the green lol. It's a drop in the bucket.

I agree with that.. but I thought your argument was ripping and distributing "any" copywritten materials, including movies. "The moment you rip and redistribute copywritten material you're a piracy advocate." Sorry about that.

When it comes to apps and such.. I completely agree. Although I have tested a few in the past, and wish I could actually afford a real copy. Our laws used to allow that as well.. as long as we didn't upload. As for selling counterfeit replicas.. I completely agree as well.. that's outright bit-for-bit piracy. But a ripped sd copy is different. Who's to say the film was actually ripped from dvd, and not a paid ppv from their local provider, then pulled off their pvr hard drive? You're allowed to record a tv program, using dvd recorders, for personal use. That personal use extends to family and friends. It's not a full blown bit-for-bit hd copy, This is where personal rights and freedoms comes into play.. we can share in our immediate circle of family and friends, but why not with friends across the globe? Because big business tells us we can't.

On the other hand... you can actually "borrow" the latest copy of Star Wars, on Bluray... direct from my local library. For free. And completely legal. There's a lot of videos for use at the library. Smile

Code:
https://vpl.bibliocommons.com/search?q=star%20wars&t=keyword
Reply
#58
(2016-05-02, 07:23)RamboUnchained Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 04:57)Ned Scott Wrote:
(2016-05-01, 18:52)RamboUnchained Wrote: I agree with a lot of points on both sides, but Pulsar is supported here, so it makes a lot of you guys look hypocritical. I'd be willing to bet money that the average Pulsar/Quasar user is streaming illegally obtained movies and tv shows from torrent sites...There's nothing shady about a torrent streaming addon if it's in the main repo, right? Just because it's against the rules for people to talk about how they use it doesn't mean they arent using it in a way that's frowned upon here. The only reason those addons aren't banned is due to wording. They're used for the same things that many blacklisted addons are used for.

If things were banned on how "most" people used them then we probably wouldn't have Kodi at all. Or even things like the MKV file container.

And no, it's not hypocritical. The Kodi project is not trying to stop piracy. The Kodi project is not trying to help movie producers or anyone else. The Kodi project doesn't allow people to give support on the forums for blatant pirate/bootleg content, for the sake of the Kodi project's image. Other than that, no one really cares much about the broken copyright system. As long as it doesn't involve Kodi's reputation, then do whatever you want.

Heartless and selfish, maybe, but not hypocritical.

So you're telling me that more than half of the users use Quasar for something that doesnt involve viewing and/or storing copywritten material?. I have no stake in any of this either way. I understand that Kodi would rather not be associated with the "hey, free movies here" guys, but at the same time, hosting Pulsar/Quasar, couch potato, and any other paid service that utilizes Usenet and torrents in the official repo make it all questionable is all I'm saying. The route to the end goal may be different with blacklisted addons, but the end goal doesn't change: free media streaming/downloading of copywritten product. Just my thoughts on the matter.

I've lead that discussion before. Viewing a copyrighted movie or tv show with a streaming addon is not okay. Viewing the same movie or tv show through a torrent addon is okay for whatever reason. The Quasar addon, supported in the forum, even has trakt support but most likely for home and holiday movies.
Reply
#59
(2016-05-03, 01:02)DarkHelmet Wrote: I've lead that discussion before. Viewing a copyrighted movie or tv show with a streaming addon is not okay. Viewing the same movie or tv show through a torrent addon is okay for whatever reason. The Quasar addon, supported in the forum, even has trakt support but most likely for home and holiday movies.

A plugin does not host the materials, they only provide access to the same links in google and bing search engines. There is nothing illegal about that. If it was, then bing and google would be just as guilty. If they can block twitter in China, and jh!hadist websites everywhere else, then they can block streaming sites just as easily. They don't.. therefore, they are just as guilty. Especially since that's where people find the links to begin with. Google.

I took 2 years of law. No, it doesn't make me a lawyer by any stretch. But I sure as hell understand it.



edit: In Canada, it's called freedom of information. It's up to the individual what they do with that information. It's not illegal to share or distribute that information. High Times magazine used to be illegal here, and we actually had to smuggle it into Canada from the US.. lol. That's how Marc Emery got his start.. a small bookstore here in Vancouver, with grow books. We won that court challenge, and it solidified our rights. Simply sharing links, to materials you are not hosting yourself, and as long as the links don't originate from Canada.. in our case, is completely legal.
Reply
#60
(2016-05-02, 23:53)greenbag Wrote:
(2016-05-02, 23:15)RamboUnchained Wrote: Personally, I've never had an issue pirating or with someone else pirating from a multi-billion dollar industry. Hollywood is ALWAYS going to get theirs. What I do hate is the torrenting of games, programs, and movies from small indie companies. Some of these guys depend on the kickbacks from the work they've put in. High profile actors and actresses are going to get paid millions if 5 people or 5,000 people download a movie they were in. Say a studio releases 12 movies in a year that rakes in a grosse of 2 billion in revenue. If 100k copies of a $20 blu-ray is pirated, They're still $198 million in the green lol. It's a drop in the bucket.

I agree with that.. but I thought your argument was ripping and distributing "any" copywritten materials, including movies. "The moment you rip and redistribute copywritten material you're a piracy advocate." Sorry about that.

When it comes to apps and such.. I completely agree. Although I have tested a few in the past, and wish I could actually afford a real copy. Our laws used to allow that as well.. as long as we didn't upload. As for selling counterfeit replicas.. I completely agree as well.. that's outright bit-for-bit piracy. But a ripped sd copy is different. Who's to say the film was actually ripped from dvd, and not a paid ppv from their local provider, then pulled off their pvr hard drive? You're allowed to record a tv program, using dvd recorders, for personal use. That personal use extends to family and friends. It's not a full blown bit-for-bit hd copy, This is where personal rights and freedoms comes into play.. we can share in our immediate circle of family and friends, but why not with friends across the globe? Because big business tells us we can't.

On the other hand... you can actually "borrow" the latest copy of Star Wars, on Bluray... direct from my local library. For free. And completely legal. There's a lot of videos for use at the library. Smile

Code:
https://vpl.bibliocommons.com/search?q=star%20wars&t=keyword

Eye opener lol. Sooo many loop-holes. My argument was that I don't feel Quasar is any different from blacklisted addons as far as the end goal is concerned. I did make it a bit circular, so I can see where the confusion lies lmao.
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
Interested in how add ons reimburse movie makers0