It seems that a certain addon repository that suddenly went dark is back.
I won't post a link just in case it is not a subject that the Kodi team wish to discuss in detail but the story behind all the legal dramas and abuse of power is very fascinating in itself, setting aside the legitimacy of the site.
What I mostly keep from that article is that the guy lives off the site, and from the work of the addon developers to whom I doubt he pays anything, so he can hardly be seen as an impartial defender of freedom ...
His photo on his boat, like a dandy, talk to me in this matter.
Liberty and money never go along well
Interesting circular logic being used by the future defendants
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tvaddons...-1.4231340
"Now the companies are also targeting Lackman and TVAddons — a library of hundreds of apps known as add-ons. Once downloaded on the Android box or a computer with added software, some of the add-ons — such as Exodus and 1Channel — allow people easy access to pirated movies, TV shows and even live television.
The suit includes a long list of programming allegedly made freely available via TVAddons including Bell's Game of Thrones and Rogers' Sportsnet.
In his defence, Lackman argues TVAddons doesn't host pirated content but instead connects users to sources already available online, so it serves as nothing more than a search engine. "
What's circular about it?
It's not exactly the first time the argument's been made.
There's a difference between
1 - hosting 'that' content
2 - hosting software that's designed to point to that content
3 - hosting software that can access that content but isn't specifically intended to.
A filehosting site is 1. TVA is 2. Mozilla is 3. Kodi is 3 or none of the above, depending on your p.o.v.
1 is illegal in most places.
3 is legal in most places.
This is about the status of 2 in Canada.
An interesting defence of being a search engine because that firmly places Google, Microsoft etc in the spotlight.
If it can be shown that the same methodology to access content can be used by the popular search engines then it also places anybody wishing to bring suit to answer why they have not taken the same action against them.
TVA isn't a search engine. It picks and hosts software (addons), some of which their sole usage is to pirate streams.
Napster already tried this line of defense years ago, and at least they probably could say they didn't know what went on their network with a semi-straight face, but It still didn't went well for them.
(2017-08-02, 20:33)Bluesmanuk Wrote: [ -> ]An interesting defence of being a search engine because that firmly places Google, Microsoft etc in the spotlight.
If it can be shown that the same methodology to access content can be used by the popular search engines then it also places anybody wishing to bring suit to answer why they have not taken the same action against them.
Search machines remove search results upon a legitimate request by copyright holders. I very much doubt the addons in question have implemented a reporting system and remove links. That would make these addons useless while Google still remains very functional even after reports and deletes.
(2017-08-02, 20:50)Koying Wrote: [ -> ]TVA isn't a search engine. It picks and hosts software (addons), some of which their sole usage is to pirate streams.
Napster already tried this line of defense years ago, and at least they probably could say they didn't know what went on their network with a semi-straight face, but It still didn't went well for them.
But perhaps it could be argued that Google hosts software (Chrome) that is actively used to access the same kind of content.
(2017-08-02, 23:25)DarkHelmet Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-08-02, 20:33)Bluesmanuk Wrote: [ -> ]An interesting defence of being a search engine because that firmly places Google, Microsoft etc in the spotlight.
If it can be shown that the same methodology to access content can be used by the popular search engines then it also places anybody wishing to bring suit to answer why they have not taken the same action against them.
Search machines remove search results upon a legitimate request by copyright holders. I very much doubt the addons in question have implemented a reporting system and remove links. That would make these addons useless while Google still remains very functional even after reports and deletes.
Do search engines actually remove results based upon a legitimate request by copyright holders though?
Quite a few have complained about Google not being effective in removing copyright holders content from Youtube.
(2017-08-02, 23:55)Bluesmanuk Wrote: [ -> ]But perhaps it could be argued that Google hosts software (Chrome) that is actively used to access the same kind of content.
It's not the same.
Chrome searches everything - it's not designed with the specific intention of finding stuff that breaks copyright.
There's also the issue of takedown notices - although if TVA are to be believed they've never received one.
None of the above means those addons are illegal - just that the comparison with chrome / firefox etc is flawed.
(2017-08-02, 23:57)Bluesmanuk Wrote: [ -> ]Do search engines actually remove results based upon a legitimate request by copyright holders though?
Of course they do.
There are (even) plenty of complaints about stuff being removed that isn't actually infringing because rightsholders have sent a bunch of incorrect links.
Stick 'download game of thrones' in google and at the bottom of the page you'll see something like:
Quote:In response to multiple complaints that we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 8 results from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaints that caused the removals at LumenDatabase.org: Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint.
(2017-08-02, 20:50)Koying Wrote: [ -> ]TVA isn't a search engine. It picks and hosts software (addons), some of which their sole usage is to pirate streams.
Napster already tried this line of defense years ago, and at least they probably could say they didn't know what went on their network with a semi-straight face, but It still didn't went well for them.
Yes! Exactly my point earlier.. Calling it a "search engine" when in fact unless you use their specific addon, you wouldn't otherwise be able to stream the pirated content.
Regarding TVA and those "giants". There wasn't a single takedown request by any of them, which is required by law, to remove infringed content. So this reminds me of some unlawful tactics much in a same manner to what Kim DotCom suffered.
I argue also that it is a search engine, but not in the traditional manner of type-a text-and-get-results. A user wanted to watch live channels? Fine USTVNOW completely legit lets you do that. Available via a web interface and their indigo tool. Filmon was also legit as well. Even the popular "X-o-doos" had its legit side.
As a final note I am leaving this: TVA now only accepts completely legit addons. Some might argue, however, why not submitting them into official kodi repo instead? I would say there are a few reasons, for example support for older versions of Kodi (lets say FTMC & SPMC which have the latest security patches merged). Another example would be less strict guidelines & "rules" as to what code is contained (not talking content wise).
Regardless TVA will be completely banned for now and eternity. They can all die in a big fire.
Any one having it installed will get zero support unless they completely remove it from their system. There will be zero discussion on this matter. Any one sympathising with TVA will suffer from being banned.
(2017-08-04, 23:58)twilight0 Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding TVA and those "giants". There wasn't a single takedown request by any of them, which is required by law, to remove infringed content. So this reminds me of some unlawful tactics much in a same manner to what Kim DotCom suffered.
I argue also that it is a search engine, but not in the traditional manner of type-a text-and-get-results. A user wanted to watch live channels? Fine USTVNOW completely legit lets you do that. Available via a web interface and their indigo tool. Filmon was also legit as well. Even the popular "X-o-doos" had its legit side.
How do you know there was no takedown request? If tva wanted to change themselves to a "search engine" they would have to implement a reporting system that works and that would have made the site useless. Same goes for the addons themselves. An effective reporting system would just make them useless. If they really have their legit use like you say, there is no harm in a reporting system, right?