County ranger wrote:

Jonesy3 wrote:I think some of the comments miss the point by some margin.
There is nothing in that article about people in the same household watching ifollow together being a problem - because it isn't.
The issue is with people who use illegal sticks/streams to watch ifollow for free. Just look at social media on a match day at the moment - full of links to 'free' streams.
The people who use these dodgy links aren't proper fans in my opinion. I'd give them the motto - County Till I Have To Pay.

Absolutely agree - not real fans - it is theft.

Of course it's theft. But County fans are angry because of who is the victim. As I said above, if you ever read a book which belongs to another, ever taped an album you will have done exactly the same thing as You now complain about.

Uncomfortable thought isn't It?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:Is the problem that people pay for one stream but watch on two devices under the same roof? Can you even do that on a technical level? Or that they watch but pay nothing?

If the sons don't live at the same address as dad, of course they should pay for their own stream. If they do, the basic commercial model is one stream for one tenner.

George,

If you have never borrowed a book, if you never taped an album, if you never went around a friends house to watch a game your package didn't show then I admire your moral compass and accept you are a better, well certainly more honest, person than me.

However if you did any of the above, get real.

The analogy is superficial. It only works in a situation where the artist you are taping is within weeks of financial ruin, as many L2 clubs are reported to be.

On libraries, there is a mechanism to pay authors.

Agree there should be no streams. But find it funny that foxhall is bumping his gums when he has been doling out hospitality to his chums. So what is the difference?

Seen that welsh fa woman by his side in the chairman box loads of times. Next thing you know foxhall is on the welsh fa and her kid is playing for us lol.

I'll be honest I've watched illegal streams of Premier League games because to me it's a victimless crime - these clubs owned by billionaires that are seeking an even bigger slice of the football pie deserve to be treated with the contempt they treat clubs further down the pyramid with.

I've not used ifollow before this season but have now watched 5 games on the system. I'm happy to pay £10 a game because I would have spent at least twice that to attend a home game if we were able to attend. And I don't object to some of that money going to opposing sides as they are in a similar situation to County during Covid.

Project Big Picture should be a line in the sand to football fans to reclaim the game from the billionaires that are ultimately slowly killing the game. Time we all persuaded our Premier League supporting family members, friends and work colleagues to stop their support for the over-promoted garbage at the top of the food chain. The EFL leagues generally all end up going down to wire for both Promotion and Releagtion in all leagues. The Premiership is a yearly procession of the same (usually) 4-5 clubs for the crown and relegation is often pretty much on the cards weeks before the end of the season. It's rubbish. Don't subscribe to it.

Of course the answer to illegal streaming would be for clubs to allowed to sell streams of all their games directly to their fans rather than the collective bargaining that currently exists.

Sure County may not be able to produce enough content for something to compete with LIverpool TV or Man Utd TV but a joint venture with the other Welsh clubs could work.

George Street-Bridge wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:Is the problem that people pay for one stream but watch on two devices under the same roof? Can you even do that on a technical level? Or that they watch but pay nothing?

If the sons don't live at the same address as dad, of course they should pay for their own stream. If they do, the basic commercial model is one stream for one tenner.

George,

If you have never borrowed a book, if you never taped an album, if you never went around a friends house to watch a game your package didn't show then I admire your moral compass and accept you are a better, well certainly more honest, person than me.

However if you did any of the above, get real.

The analogy is superficial. It only works in a situation where the artist you are taping is within weeks of financial ruin, as many L2 clubs are reported to be.

On libraries, there is a mechanism to pay authors.

Theft is okay so long as the victim is rich. I doubt somehow that people watching illegal streaming is any great factor in clubs going busy. However for many musicians who lead a hand to mouth existence the theft of their intellectual property is significant. Sorry mate but your hypocrisy is boundless. When you read borrowed books, when you tape music you are doing exactly the same thing as those who use pirate streams. You can protest that it's a superficial analogy as much as you please but your protest is bollox and you know it is.

I know that authors are paid for library loans. I said so above.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:Is the problem that people pay for one stream but watch on two devices under the same roof? Can you even do that on a technical level? Or that they watch but pay nothing?

If the sons don't live at the same address as dad, of course they should pay for their own stream. If they do, the basic commercial model is one stream for one tenner.

George,

If you have never borrowed a book, if you never taped an album, if you never went around a friends house to watch a game your package didn't show then I admire your moral compass and accept you are a better, well certainly more honest, person than me.

However if you did any of the above, get real.

The analogy is superficial. It only works in a situation where the artist you are taping is within weeks of financial ruin, as many L2 clubs are reported to be.

On libraries, there is a mechanism to pay authors.

Theft is okay so long as the victim is rich. I doubt somehow that people watching illegal streaming is any great factor in clubs going busy. However for many musicians who lead a hand to mouth existence the theft of their intellectual property is significant. Sorry mate but your hypocrisy is boundless. When you read borrowed books, when you tape music you are doing exactly the same thing as those who use pirate streams. You can protest that it's a superficial analogy as much as you please but your protest is bollox and you know it is.

I know that authors are paid for library loans. I said so above.

Let’s hope that there is a County to watch next season - right now L2 clubs need all the money they can get there hands on.

Or even a County to watch for the rest of this season.

On a lighter note, when was the last time anyone taped an album? Late 90s?

Jonesy3 wrote:On a lighter note, when was the last time anyone taped an album? Late 90s?

Me and George Street Bridge are ludites. Although of late I am getting used to copying onto CD's.

County ranger wrote:

Jonesy3 wrote:I think some of the comments miss the point by some margin.
There is nothing in that article about people in the same household watching ifollow together being a problem - because it isn't.
The issue is with people who use illegal sticks/streams to watch ifollow for free. Just look at social media on a match day at the moment - full of links to 'free' streams.
The people who use these dodgy links aren't proper fans in my opinion. I'd give them the motto - County Till I Have To Pay.

Absolutely agree - not real fans - it is theft.

If they're not real fans then they won't pay money regardless.

Jonesy3 wrote:County Till I Have To Pay.

This 100 times over.

Newport County are pleased to announce we sold 0 Season Tickets for the 2020/21 season. We also announce that we sell 0 Match Day Passes to ifollow each week.

Would that be acceptable? Or are the people who pay considered mugs for doing so.

Papski2 wrote:

Jonesy3 wrote:County Till I Have To Pay.

This 100 times over.

Newport County are pleased to announce we sold 0 Season Tickets for the 2020/21 season. We also announce that we sell 0 Match Day Passes to ifollow each week.

Would that be acceptable? Or are the people who pay considered mugs for doing so.

Nobody is saying it's acceptable. What I am though saying is perhaps this is chickens coming home to roost. Anyone who has ever downloaded or taped an album without paying, or watched a film via a dubious website is guilty of exactly the same piracy as they/we are complaining about.

Intellectual property theft doesn't feel like theft until you're the victim. That may be uncomfortable for many, doesn't alter the fact is that it is true.

Marky wrote:

County ranger wrote:

Jonesy3 wrote:I think some of the comments miss the point by some margin.
There is nothing in that article about people in the same household watching ifollow together being a problem - because it isn't.
The issue is with people who use illegal sticks/streams to watch ifollow for free. Just look at social media on a match day at the moment - full of links to 'free' streams.
The people who use these dodgy links aren't proper fans in my opinion. I'd give them the motto - County Till I Have To Pay.

Absolutely agree - not real fans - it is theft.

If they're not real fans then they won't pay money regardless.

And that is fine if people wish to rip the club off but to call yourself a fan and rip the club I think is wrong.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:Nobody is saying it's acceptable. What I am though saying is perhaps this is chickens coming home to roost. Anyone who has ever downloaded or taped an album without paying, or watched a film via a dubious website is guilty of exactly the same piracy as they/we are complaining about.

Intellectual property theft doesn't feel like theft until you're the victim. That may be uncomfortable for many, doesn't alter the fact is that it is true.

I hear you but don't feel you.

Bottom line. If 200 people do this for the season at a cost of roughly £60k to the club.. I don't want to hear one of them complain we didn't sign a striker or we can't afford to sack Flynn.

We get what we pay for.

A tape recording of the top 40 will never sound as good as the vinyl.

And the team funded by illegal streaming will not be as good either.

I pay for my music piracy sins with an increase in gig ticket prices. Will we accept the same in football at our level for match tickets.