Boxing Fan Cracked With £85,000 Bill Over Illegal Facebook Stream

[Stuarty]

Is this the dude from Liverpool? He was on one of the podcasts talking bout it few months back if it's the same guy.

Wasn’t that the fella who streamed the first Eubank Jr PPV on ITV?

He did mate but as far as I'm aware he's been doing it since that fight. Wasn't sure if it was the same fella. He was talking about making a bit of dough from it on the podcast although he hadn't made any money from that fight.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Is this the dude from Liverpool? He was on one of the podcasts talking bout it few months back if it's the same guy.

Wasn’t that the fella who streamed the first Eubank Jr PPV on ITV?

He did mate but as far as I'm aware he's been doing it since that fight. Wasn't sure if it was the same fella. He was talking about making a bit of dough from it on the podcast although he hadn't made any money from that fight.

Yeh, that Eubank vs. Quinlan fight was streamed on FB, had a lot of viewers.

[Stuarty]

Wasn’t that the fella who streamed the first Eubank Jr PPV on ITV?

He did mate but as far as I'm aware he's been doing it since that fight. Wasn't sure if it was the same fella. He was talking about making a bit of dough from it on the podcast although he hadn't made any money from that fight.

Yeh, that Eubank vs. Quinlan fight was streamed on FB, had a lot of viewers.

It was highly amusing English would've been faaackin livid

[Ruthless-RKO]

It was highly amusing English would've been faaackin livid

Everyone bitched about the fight, but everyone tried to watch it.

[Stuarty]

It was highly amusing English would've been faaackin livid

Everyone bitched about the fight, but everyone tried to watch it.

Was a god awful fight for a PPV. I didn't watch it til the next day myself. Fukk paying for that tripe!

[leejonesjnr]

Meh, as per my usual stance, if I don’t want to see a PPV enough to pay the fee for it then stealing it and watching it would feel like a waste of my time.

[KiwiRider]

It's stealing, no matter what story you come up with.

I hate idiots like this who act better than everyone else but we all know they have watched a stream in the past themselves.

100% wrong, but thanks for your input
Obviously your so aufait with stealing, you automatically think everyone else is doing it too?

[skanksta]

Looks like it has been done and dusted, and the lad has sold his story to the papers, probably to recoup a bit of money.

He should be sent down for life, his reckless actions possibly mean Joshua only got £12m for a single night's work instead of £12.05 million

[samwbr]

4,250 watched the stream, at £19.95.. If those people bought it, it equates to £84,787.50

Add on another £5,000.

Them 4,250 were never going to pay for it regardless.

What about those that watch it in a lounge/cafe.. Again, only 1 person is paying for it.. and hundreds are watching it.

Sky ppv rate for pubs is astronomical

[TheLeprechaun]

It's stealing, no matter what story you come up with.

I hate idiots like this who act better than everyone else but we all know they have watched a stream in the past themselves.

100% wrong, but thanks for your input
Obviously your so aufait with stealing, you automatically think everyone else is doing it too?

Yeah you wouldn't watch joshua vs wilder on a stream if that was the only way you could watch it. You'd wait until you heard the result elsewhere. We believe you

[chinarich]

If I don't want to pay for a fight then I catch up with it on YouTube in the following days if it's worth watching. I can honestly say that I have never looked for a way to view a fight illegally that was available for purchase where I live.

I don't understand why a lot of people think content should be able to be freely taken when they wouldn't pinch a jacket from a clothes store or food from a supermarket. People in the Arts in general and music in particular suffer terribly from theft because it has been deemed acceptable to steal digital content as it's seen as a victimless crime...

[asdfjkl]

If this is true, I'll probably never pay for any AJ fight ever again, the Takam fight was already very disappointing, if he really wants this money this way he's just a sad guy. If Sky Sports is doing this behind AJ's back, I would sue Sky Sports for ruining my carreer if I was AJ. They are just making an example of the guy, the fight was streamed all over the place and this guy obviously wasn't trying to make money with it, unlike many other streams.

[TheLeprechaun]

I think its the injustice of putting garbage on PPV that caused this. People would feel comfortable paying for good fights. Even though quigg vs frampton was a snoozer I didnt mind paying for it. But its the likes of joshua molina and similar tripe tjat adam smith and hearn put on PPV that cause people to feel aggrieved and I can understand why they feel justified in viewing streams

[Oiky]

Very ott

[leejonesjnr]

I think its the injustice of putting garbage on PPV that caused this. People would feel comfortable paying for good fights. Even though quigg vs frampton was a snoozer I didnt mind paying for it. But its the likes of joshua molina and similar tripe tjat adam smith and hearn put on PPV that cause people to feel aggrieved and I can understand why they feel justified in viewing streams

Why watch a fight you think is ‘tripe’, even for free?

[jamamb]

If I don't want to pay for a fight then I catch up with it on YouTube in the following days if it's worth watching. I can honestly say that I have never looked for a way to view a fight illegally that was available for purchase where I live.

I don't understand why a lot of people think content should be able to be freely taken when they wouldn't pinch a jacket from a clothes store or food from a supermarket. People in the Arts in general and music in particular suffer terribly from theft because it has been deemed acceptable to steal digital content as it's seen as a victimless crime...

you take the supposed moral ground, but is it not stealing to watch copies up on youtube right after?does the ppv outlet authorize all those random channels to put the fight up?isnt it still in there interest to keep the fight iff yt for a week or so 4 replays?

thing with streams unlike food is that if i stream a fight i otherwise wouldnt have watched or paid for, the fights still there to be ordered by others. someone cant buy a store though for food i stole and ate...the food wont ge there.

[jamamb]

lets say 1 guy buys a ppv and has over 50 fight fan friends who watch it wo paying, even though several of them wouldve wo the get together. is that more or less moral than 1 fight fan 'stealing' and watching a stream alone? .are the friends stealing?

is watching fights on youtube on unofficial channels stealing? at what point is it not?

lets say i buy ppvs for fights im looking forward to and think r worth it. if i stream for ppv fights i wouldnt have watched otherwise, because i didnt think they were worth the price, who is losing? ppl in comparisons always mention tangible goods but something like a specific food item isnt there to be bought from a store if i steal and eat it. its a total loss. with ppv others can still buy the same fight freely

the best argument i see is that doing it might strengthen streamers/create more streamers/outlets who are watched by ppl who stream stuff they otherwise wouldve paid for.thats not trivial

but there are lots of ppl imo who stream fights, yet at the same time will pay for ones they deem worthy

[jamamb]

btw im pretty sure aj once tweeted a photo of himself streaming a fight . i dont think he realized that was apparent, but the url or site logo was right there

[coneye]

Way i look at it is ,, IF its a good fight and PPV worthy , a fight i would'nt want to miss ,, Say AJ -Fury , Canelo - GGG, 1 or 2 , then i'm not gonna piss about looking for a stream or any other way , simply because , i don't want it glitching or going off and spoiling it for me , so its simple i'll buy it .

But if its a out and out piss take , a Eddie Hearn and sky load of bollocks , that is'nt ppv worthy , then i'll look for a stream , watch it and if its glitching , or i lose it , well who cares really , catch up and watch it another day on U tube ,

Regards is it stealing , well people can argue all they want , everyone has different views , but i look at it this way , If Hearn and sky are trying to con me out of my hard earned , buy charging for shit fights that should be covered by my Sky subscription , well fook em , i'll stream and hope to god , they lose money on the said fight . Its simple really while people are willing to pay to watch shite , they will be more than willing to oblige and charge you .

Hearn loves to say if you want the fights , you have to pay above and beyond your sky subscription , but paying AJ 12-15 million to fight easy beats , while trying to screw the oppnent is a joke , so fook em , stream away

[emallini]

The fight was all over Facebook & Instagram live that night. Streams galore.

[tigermoth87]

Way i look at it is ,, IF its a good fight and PPV worthy , a fight i would'nt want to miss ,, Say AJ -Fury , Canelo - GGG, 1 or 2 , then i'm not gonna piss about looking for a stream or any other way , simply because , i don't want it glitching or going off and spoiling it for me , so its simple i'll buy it .

But if its a out and out piss take , a Eddie Hearn and sky load of bollocks , that is'nt ppv worthy , then i'll look for a stream , watch it and if its glitching , or i lose it , well who cares really , catch up and watch it another day on U tube ,

Regards is it stealing , well people can argue all they want , everyone has different views , but i look at it this way , If Hearn and sky are trying to con me out of my hard earned , buy charging for poo fights that should be covered by my Sky subscription , well fook em , i'll stream and hope to god , they lose money on the said fight . Its simple really while people are willing to pay to watch shite , they will be more than willing to oblige and charge you .

Hearn loves to say if you want the fights , you have to pay above and beyond your sky subscription , but paying AJ 12-15 million to fight easy beats , while trying to screw the oppnent is a joke , so fook em , stream away

I do the same. Quigg Vs Frampton, yeah PPV quality fight so had no issue paying. Even though it was shit, on paper was a PPV worthy fight.

AJ Vs Wlad, ditto. Eubank Vs that guy he won the IBO belt off. Get the fornicate out.

[KiwiRider]

After what I have seen of file sharing, downloading songs and movies has done to the various industries and artists, I would hate that to happen to boxing as well.
That's why I'm quite anti it.
Boxing PPV lists the fights you are going to see, it's up to individuals to make the decision if it's worth the money or not, pay and watch or go whine on the interweb.

[chinarich]

If I don't want to pay for a fight then I catch up with it on YouTube in the following days if it's worth watching. I can honestly say that I have never looked for a way to view a fight illegally that was available for purchase where I live.

I don't understand why a lot of people think content should be able to be freely taken when they wouldn't pinch a jacket from a clothes store or food from a supermarket. People in the Arts in general and music in particular suffer terribly from theft because it has been deemed acceptable to steal digital content as it's seen as a victimless crime...

you take the supposed moral ground, but is it not stealing to watch copies up on youtube right after?does the ppv outlet authorize all those random channels to put the fight up?isnt it still in there interest to keep the fight iff yt for a week or so 4 replays?

thing with streams unlike food is that if i stream a fight i otherwise wouldnt have watched or paid for, the fights still there to be ordered by others. someone cant buy a store though for food i stole and ate...the food wont ge there.

If I watched Joshua - Takam three weeks after on YouTube (I haven't) I don't consider that I am depriving the provider of PPV money. Legally should the fight be available on YouTube as it's presumably still the property of Sky? No, in the strictest sense it shouldn't be as it remains copyrighted material but its presence there is tolerated because the owner deems it inviable to police video sites when it is no longer affecting their income stream.

This thread was about livestreaming, YouTube and similar video sites are another question entirely but viewing a stream is theft and the defence that you wouldn't have watched it anyway is asinine...

[jamamb]

funny how ur admitting to being fine watching it just days later from ppl who ripped the content. but its not theres! stealing!

i dont think ppl should necessarily feel morally bad about watching streams of fights they wouldnt have bought or watched anyway w/o a stream. .its still there for others to buy if they want and no one is losing out on the money from that person directly because they wouldnt have paid anyway.

actually at least it gives the boxers and advertisers more exposure than if the person didnt watch.maybe im really impressed by someone and buy a ppv or ticket in the future because of what i saw.

ive got to think and see more about the issue but at this point im not seeing for sure that noses should turn up.

[jamamb]

also im interested in what ppl think:

lets say 1 guy buys a ppv and in his large house has over 50 fight fan friends who watch it wo paying, even though several of them wouldve paid w/o the get together. is that more or less moral than 1 fight fan 'stealing' and watching a stream alone, w/o all those lost payments? .are the friends stealing?