Post history

History for ConanTroutman

Getting rid of Sky Sport 101

Back to topic

Current version

Posted December 13, 2016 04:28 · last edited December 13, 2016 04:38

chopah wrote:

"It's not stealing, because stealing implies the removal of something from one person's possession and into another's. What it is is copyright violation - making copies of or accessing information that someone else has legal rights over. If I steal your car, you go from having a car to not having a car. If someone illegally streams a football game then Sky is not materially worse off than if they hadn't. You could make an argument that they lose potential income but only if the streamer was willing to pay in the first place"

Sorry making my own quoting as it sucks on this app with my phone.

Just on this point above, you are still stealing, in this case your stealing revenue if you are the person who posted up the stream.  Harder to argue for those who view the stream.

Some people won't care about loss of revenue for a big company like SKY or duco but in the eyes of the law it dosnt matter if it's Nana's Smith's golf or The Parker fight, it's stealing.

If the law viewed copyright violation and theft as categorically similar then copyright violation would be a criminal matter rather than a civil one.

Edit: had a quick look and there are provisions for criminal prosecution in NZ copyright law, but looks like only if you profit off it. So viewing an illegal stream would not carry a criminal conviction, just payment for damages

Previous versions

1 version
ConanTroutman edited December 13, 2016 04:38
chopah wrote:

"It's not stealing, because stealing implies the removal of something from one person's possession and into another's. What it is is copyright violation - making copies of or accessing information that someone else has legal rights over. If I steal your car, you go from having a car to not having a car. If someone illegally streams a football game then Sky is not materially worse off than if they hadn't. You could make an argument that they lose potential income but only if the streamer was willing to pay in the first place"

Sorry making my own quoting as it sucks on this app with my phone.

Just on this point above, you are still stealing, in this case your stealing revenue if you are the person who posted up the stream.  Harder to argue for those who view the stream.

Some people won't care about loss of revenue for a big company like SKY or duco but in the eyes of the law it dosnt matter if it's Nana's Smith's golf or The Parker fight, it's stealing.

If the law viewed copyright violation and theft as categorically similar then copyright violation would be a criminal matter rather than a civil one.