Is It Impossible to Use Plex, Jellyfin Etc. ”Legally”? - Page 2 - Gen…

archived 16 Jan 2025 15:28:43 UTC
Jump to content
This Topic
  On 12/21/2024 at 7:21 PM, Needfuldoer said:
So far, ATSC 3.0's been a wet fart. Consumers don't know what it can do (if they're aware of it at all), and the stations are only rolling it out begrudgingly.
 
I think it's only going to see mass adoption in the US if the FCC forces everyone's hand by taking away even more OTA spectrum to sell to phone carriers.
If they are going to limit my ability to record by requiring me to have an internet connection to watch my recordings I rather if they just take all the spectrum and give it to the cellular providers. ALSO because not all the tech used in the ATSC 3.0 standard is open, LG has gotten sued by one of the companies who has a patent on some of the tech. LG basically said FUCK ATSC 3.0, so LG is no longer providing TV's with those tuners. I dont think ATSC 3.0 is going to do anything any time soon. I wouldn't be surprised is more companies walk away from the standard. 
I just want to sit back and watch the world burn. 
  On 12/21/2024 at 5:13 PM, LAwLz said:
Source?
 
And yes, it's bit open take. But that's how loopholes work. As it does say you are allowed to break DRM to consume, but getting software to specifically breaking DRM is not allowed. So what if my way of consuming means I need to watch my BD copy on my phone. Not seeing BD players coming to phones anytime soon.
^^^^ That's my post ^^^^
<-- This is me --- That's your scrollbar -->
vvvv Who's there? vvvv
  On 12/21/2024 at 7:44 PM, LogicalDrm said:
 
And yes, it's bit open take. But that's how loopholes work. As it does say you are allowed to break DRM to consume, but getting software to specifically breaking DRM is not allowed. So what if my way of consuming means I need to watch my BD copy on my phone. Not seeing BD players coming to phones anytime soon.
Please do keep in mind that these laws differ from country to country.
Just because something might be legal in Finland does not mean it is legal in other countries. It's therefore generally a bad idea to say things like "this is allowed", if it only applies to for example Finland unless you explicitly say it only applies to that country. 
 
It also seems like that article contains a lot of "ifs" and "buts". 
For example, the article states that you aren't allowed to break the DRM on for example CDs for the purposes of creating a copy... Then in the next sentence, it says it is allowed in order to listen or view recorded content.
 
To me, this sounds similar to the US copyright law. You are technically allowed to make copies, but you aren't allowed to circumvent DRM, and since you need to do that in order to make a copy it is in practice illegal.
  On 12/21/2024 at 11:15 PM, LAwLz said:
Please do keep in mind that these laws differ from country to country.
Literally first sentence of my post...
^^^^ That's my post ^^^^
<-- This is me --- That's your scrollbar -->
vvvv Who's there? vvvv
  On 12/22/2024 at 8:23 AM, LogicalDrm said:
Literally first sentence of my post...
 
In hindsight, I can see how the "our" in this sentence:
  Quote
There's interesting hole in our copyright protection system. 
might be intended to refer to "the country I live in". However, it could also reasonably be interpreted as "the world we live in" or "the country both OP and I live in", which is how I interpreted it.
 
I think your wording could have been clearer to specify the country you were referring to. It’s not as immediately obvious as you might have thought.
  • 4 weeks later...
  On 12/20/2024 at 1:35 PM, Altefier said:
I'm astounded virtually everyone nowadays is technically breaking the law just to have reasonable options to watch their purchased content
Remember, in the end, "laws" are just arbitrary rules imposed by people who happen to have more power than you and me. For example, this is the dude who we can "thank" for for the DMCA:
 
President of the United States of America Bill Clinton | Britannica
 
Who do you think they want to benefit most? Themselves or you and me?
 
They could just as well ban chewing gum if they wanted to.
Edited by Ertio
+ picture
If you use Firefox, go to about:config and enable browser.tabs.insertAfterCurrent. Thank me later.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now

0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%
word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word

mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1
mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1