this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024

49 points (91.5% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54746 readers

191 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

sunbrothersco@lemmy.dbzer0.com

dataprolet@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com

RandomLegend@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Can we consolidate identical streaming sites under the same group? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by john89@lemmy.ca to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The streaming sites listed on https://rentry.co/megathread-movies-and-tv#streaming have plenty of duplicates. Essentially, they're the same sites with different names/skins but the exact same content.

It would be beneficial to the community if we could consolidate these down into groups according to which ones are the same.

We can still list all of them, but perhaps do it together so people don't waste their time trying out the same site under a different name.

top 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It would also be beneficial to the copyright enforcement, as they could just take it all down in one move.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca -5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So are you saying we shouldn’t group them together?

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Correct. Never put all your eggs in one basket

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago

Except there's already a list of all the sites.

[–] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

As the other person sarcastically implied, these sites are intentionally split to make it more difficult to take them all down at once. When one goes down another can pop up, and in the mean time the others are there, on and on forever.

[+] john89@lemmy.ca -7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

So are you saying we shouldn't group them together?

Do you know enough about copyright law to know whether or not an online list grouping them together will make it significantly easier for law enforcement to take them down?

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I feel like this is attempt of an "akswually" moment.

No. We don't know about copyright law (and I'm sure you don't either) but based on previous precedent, it's not wise to put a everything in one since if something "happens" there will be no alternatives since..the sole source will be gone due to everything being grouped into the sole source.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

it’s not wise to put a everything in one since if something “happens” there will be no alternatives since…the sole source will be gone due to everything being grouped into the sole source.

Umm, what? It's just a list grouping them together.

How are they going to identify the 'sole source' out of that?

I don't think you know enough about copyright law to know whether or not an online list grouping them together will make it significantly easier for law enforcement to take them down.

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You clearly know zero abt copyright law if you think law enforcement is legitimately getting involved. 9.99999999 times out 10 it's a letter from a lawyer.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago

I know right? Imagine doubling down on such an L take. And not even a good one

[–] john89@lemmy.ca -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So how does an online list grouping them together make it significantly easier for law enforcement to take them down? For reference, there is already a list of free streaming sites; it's the list in question. I'm merely mentioning adding further classification for duplicate streaming sites.

It's sad watching the upvote ratios, but I can't say I'm surprised. The internet is full of 🧩's.

[–] 6daemonbag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago

Way to go, turning a legitimate question with legitimate answers into an opportunity to insult an unrelated group of people 👍🏽

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's not a question of law. It's a question of logistics.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Grouping them together in a list will not affect those logistics.

[–] DesolateMood@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They're already grouped together in a list that you already linked in the original post

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

So what's the problem with adding another group for duplicates?

[–] gravitywell@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Isnt that basically what a number of kodi and stremio addons do?