# UFC goes after individuals posting streams



## pgebhard25 (Dec 31, 2006)

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news;_y...g=mmajunkie-UFC_anti-piracy_Justin.tv_Ustream



> The world's largest pay-per-view content provider shows no signs of slowing its anti-piracy efforts.
> 
> Ultimate Fighting Championship officials today announced they have subpoenaed Justin.tv and Ustream.tv - two sites with user-provided live video content - due to their broadcasts of illegally uploaded content, including the UFC's pay-per-view events.
> 
> ...


hopefully none of our members will be doing time. I usually pay or go watch the fights at BWW or the casino here. Some of the lesser cards or the ones that are in Europe/UAE I have looked to stream but usually can't find a working one anyway.


----------



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

I can understand Zuffa is pissed - it is basically stealing a product they pay to create and make money from selling to the consumer...

I feel lucky to live in a country where all UFC PPV's are live on free TV  Only problem is when UFC goes live it's 4AM here


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

> "This is a fight we will not lose."


It's illegal and imoral no doubt. But it's also imoral to sometimes offer some realy bad cards and demand money fot them, or to have one of your champion disrespect his opponent and the fans in the main event of a PPV. (i'm not gonna go there...)
All in all i think something in the middle would be more suitable for the UFC and the streamers.
This is a fight the UFC won't win.



Budhisten said:


> I can understand Zuffa is pissed - it is basically stealing a product they pay to create and make money from selling to the consumer...
> 
> I feel lucky to live in a country where all UFC PPV's are live on free TV  Only problem is when UFC goes live it's 4AM here


You get live events for freee?!!!!?? 
WOW! No wonder Denmark is in the TOP 5 Happiest countries in the World!


----------



## monkey024 (Apr 6, 2010)

They WONT win the fight...they are going after the internet. When one stream goes down another one will pop up and then when that one goes down another one will pop up...all they have to do is use a proxy. 

Then they have to deal with the people uploaded the PPV to a 3rd party site OUTSIDE of the US...then what now? The only thing they can do to those guy sis take down the content that someone will just upload again in 10 minutes.


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

They can't win. They can spend a lot of money and sue a few people, but much larger companies than UFC are failing at these same battles. Whenever there is progress on their side, the problem only gets larger.

A lot of people actually find out about these streams through these statements they put out.


----------



## footodors (Aug 26, 2007)

Wow,they're probably streaming from Denmark, then. Ha! Unless Dana wants an axe in the forehead, good luck going after streamers there- isn't that where Vikings are from?


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

Budhisten said:


> I can understand Zuffa is pissed - it is basically stealing a product they pay to create and make money from selling to the consumer...
> 
> I feel lucky to live in a country where all UFC PPV's are live on free TV  Only problem is when UFC goes live it's 4AM here


How does that work? why is it OK for Denmark to do that? And how is it illegal for you to stream what you get from a free broadcast?

I understand ufc's position but I have paid thousands over the years for ppv and tickets. I don't feel bad at all for an occasional stream.


----------



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

Sorry - I didn't mean free TV but basic cable, still awesome though  And yes, the Vikings were from Denmark (Among other Scandinavian countries)

I think that the point of people acting respectless or talking down to the fans on the PPV isn't that valid... You don't pay to have guys saying what you want them to, you pay to see what they have to say (And the fights of course )

And if you don't want to pay for a card then don't, doesn't mean it should be legal to DL it...

Selling a box of dead leaves for 199$ doesn't make it any more legal to steal it


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

> Selling a box of dead leaves for 199$ doesn't make it any more legal to steal it


:shame02: now I'll have to buy the next one 4 times.


----------



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

I think Dana would literally come to your house and kiss your ass if you did


----------



## MikeHawk (Sep 11, 2009)

LOL! Does Dana really think this is a battle he's gonna win? What a moron. If the movie industry can't even dent piracy problems how does he think he will.

Even Joe Rogan says you can't stop the internet


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

MikeHawk said:


> LOL! Does Dana really think this is a battle he's gonna win? What a moron. If the movie industry can't even dent piracy problems how does he think he will.
> 
> Even Joe Rogan says you can't stop the internet





> Noun
> zuffa f (plural zuffe)
> a short but intense fight
> a brawl
> Category: Italian nouns


 - wiktionary


Dana ain't scared.


----------



## JimmyJames (Dec 29, 2009)

They are stupid in saying it's cost them money. 

The reason myself and others watch streams is because I refuse to pay $50 to watch TV for 2 or 3 hours. It's ******* stupid logic, as if all the "illegal" streamers are now gonna pay for events. 

The internet shall always prevail.


----------



## HaVoK (Dec 31, 2006)

Spending the companies time and money on online piracy is a waste of money and resources. This is a battle they will indeed lose and be worse off because of it. Sure you take the standard measures. Such as, having people searching the net during Live shows and getting streams shut down. But once you go legal you are just wasting your time and a lot of money. Especially by going after one Joe Public at a time. Wanting them to go to jail is one thing but in reality it just isnt going to happen.

Just ask Video Game Publishers and anyone in Hollywood. There is just too many technical loopholes and red tape. Good luck Dana...because this is a fight you will indeed loose in the end. No human can defeat the Beast that is the internet!


----------



## evzbc (Oct 11, 2006)

*Dana White is the new Metallica*

I'm starting to dislike this guy...

...what a greedy bastard.

He should be *stoked *people want to watch his content, and will even suffer through a shit feed to see it.

The fact of the matter is, not everyone has access to order the fights. His company works hard, but just because someone watches it for free DOESN'T mean if it wasn't free that they would pay $50 for it.

Dana you're saying you want to send me to JAIL because I couldn't afford your expensive ppv in this shit economy. **** off.

If anything it would have won them more fans if they left that can of worms unopened. And at this stage of growth, the UFC is needs all the fans it can get.

I'm losing interest in that company...


----------



## Ivan (Feb 24, 2007)

Like you got Fedor Dana?.. Yes it is illegal.. but there are worst things then that.. go save some starving kids first will ya?.. of course you will.. you good human you..


----------



## phiya (Feb 18, 2010)

We all already knew Dana White was a douche, he just continues to prove it. There is no way he is going to shut down all of the streams. UFC wants to be a worldwide organization, then you have to deal with worldwide problems. Good luck going after people in countries where your US copyright laws don't mean squat. Why don't you instead work on marketing your product so that you can get TV deals in countries that allow you to stop charging PPV for every freaking event... You know, like Football, baseball, etc? You think you're so damn main stream prove it. 

I imagine the UFC needs a new face if they want to gain enough fans to get that deal...too many people are sick of Dana.


----------



## ESPADA9 (Oct 13, 2006)

Either way I’m not going to buy most of the UFC cards.
They spread their fight schedule too thin, ask too much for a PPV and half the time the top fighters get injured and you get a high level fighter against a has been who is probably doped up on painkillers and just needs next months rent money.


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

...Interesting. From the mumbers posted in that blog, there were 114,000 uploaded views. Each PPV is 45 bucks a pop. That's $5,130,000 dollars getting ripped off from Zuffa. Not chump change. I agree with them going after these pinhead thieves. Since I pay around 450 bucks a year on UFC PPV's through DirecTV, I hope Zuffa does win their case against these crooks. It's a nice low-blow to all of the folks who pay for these events legally as well...


----------



## Ground'N'Pound5 (Aug 7, 2009)

they must hate pirates


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

ESPADA9 said:


> Either way I’m not going to buy most of the UFC cards.
> They spread their fight schedule too thin, ask too much for a PPV and half the time the top fighters get injured and you get a high level fighter against a has been who is probably doped up on painkillers and just needs next months rent money.


...Good post. To add a note- What I've been saying for a while now how the UFC will cram in 2 PPV's a month multiple times per year. Not to take back my post about Zuffa getting ripped off but maybe they should stop spreading events only 3 weeks apart in the same month and the stealing might slow down. Food for thought...


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

Alright, this is how it goes down: 
-Zuffa pursues Justin.tv, justin.tv gets in trouble and so do the broadcasters. 
-Justin.tv permanently bans broadcasting of any UFC material. 
-Many more websites pop-up with servers in different parts of the world that stream higher quality stuff with zero advertisements than JTV ever did. 
-Zuffa tries to pursue these websites but cannot.
-One year from Zuffa taking action more people will be streaming online than there was before they started and Zuffa will give up

Same thing happened with Napster, supernova.org etc. etc. Everytime companies try stopping this people just come up with more clever, more efficient ways of pirating, in the end this will only end up hurting the UFC by making it easier to watch streams than ever before. People did go to jail for pirating music, and look how well that slowed down music pirating.


----------



## Calibretto9 (Oct 15, 2006)

I'm mixed on this issue. I almost always purchase the event or go to a location to view it, and I'm definitely against pirating in almost all cases. I do understand that this is stealing of the UFC product.

On the other hand, I think the ability to queue up some Youtube videos of fighters, to get familiar with them, to see some of their past important fights, or to just watch some good ole' UFC is good for the sport. People can so, "Who's this Silva guy? Let me hop on Google vids and check him out." I think that is, in a way, good for the growth of the sport.

I also dislike that despite paying for an event, I basically lose all access to it after the event is over. I don't have some code that allows me to go back and watch those fights 5-6 months from the event. I basically have to buy the fight, then either buy the UFC on Demand on their website or buy the DVD. That's a lot of cheddar.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Im finding those who are calling DW a douche for defending is own interest (and the company he works for) kind of... meh!

Isn´t that what we all do?
If you´re saying that DW is a douche, then propably you wont defend yourself in life matters, so i see myself calling you a douche!

Anyway, those comparisons with the hollyood and music rips are pointless.

It´s nearly impossible to know who are ripping video and music stuff, but it´s very easy for them to know the ip of the original streamers as even the proxy owners are forced to provide conection details if legally obligated.

The biggest problem for UFC it´s if the broadcaster or proxy are from a country with lack of legislation on the matter!


----------



## JimmyJames (Dec 29, 2009)

rabakill said:


> Alright, this is how it goes down:
> -Zuffa pursues Justin.tv, justin.tv gets in trouble and so do the broadcasters.
> -Justin.tv permanently bans broadcasting of any UFC material.
> -Many more websites pop-up with servers in different parts of the world that stream higher quality stuff with zero advertisements than JTV ever did.
> ...


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Best post in this thread so far......:thumb02:

reps:thumbsup:


----------



## phiya (Feb 18, 2010)

AmdM said:


> Im finding those who are calling DW a douche for defending is own interest (and the company he works for) kind of... meh!
> 
> Isn´t that what we all do?
> If you´re saying that DW is a douche, then propably you wont defend yourself in life matters, so i see myself calling you a douche!
> ...



It's really not the fact that DW wants to go after these people that makes him a douche. It's the fact that he thinks he'll win. It's that he doesn't realize he's only making the problem worse by publicizing it. It's the fact that he's wasting his energy on this rather than growing the sport and trying to make it more instead of less accessible. He's not a logical thinker, he wants UFC to be worldwide, but then doesn't realize he can't stop people from viewing it for free due to the complex legal systems in the many countries UFC has become popular. Concentrate on growing and spreading the sport so that you can afford to make it more accessible, that protects your interest in the company you "work for." Going after fans who either aren't big enough fans to pay for your product, don't think your product represents enough return on their investment, or can't afford to pay for it doesn't protect your interest whatsoever, it only alienates potential future event purchasers, or ideally, ratings driving fans that will bring larger TV contracts to air your events for *FREE* (GASP)!


----------



## JimmyJames (Dec 29, 2009)

Dana needs to stop paying these Lawyers and start paying his fighters better.


----------



## MikeHawk (Sep 11, 2009)

There was some news story about how the government recently shut down 10 major movie pirating sites. But, guess what? I can still find any video that's out in the theaters with a simple google search.

Hell, there's tons and tons of foreign websites that they'll never even be able to shut down. It's really a pointless battle.

What Dana needs to do is find some innovative way to shut down these piraters. You can't go after them legally. It's been proven for years that it wont work.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

MikeHawk said:


> There was some news story about how the government recently shut down 10 major movie pirating sites. But, guess what? I can still find any video that's out in the theaters with a simple google search.
> 
> Hell, there's tons and tons of foreign websites that they'll never even be able to shut down. It's really a pointless battle.
> 
> What Dana needs to do is find some innovative way to shut down these piraters. You can't go after them legally. It's been proven for years that it wont work.


charge different rates. I go to a bar with my buddy and pay $10 at the door to watch the fight, and in all honesty I would rather chill at home in comfort with a Budweiser and watch the fights, but like many people I am just not shelling out the cash to order it. I would gladly pay $20 for a PPV but the rates they charge are absolutely insane and until every card has a championship fight with 2 legitimate top 3 fighters in the weight class I am not going to the bar for every card. So that leaves me in a bind, and apparently it's the same for a few hundred thousand other people. There is absolutely no way to shut down pirating asides from charging less for ppv or stopping the ppv broadcasts altogether. The worst part about it is more and more people are going to pirate as bandwidths increase and people can pirate more easily, just look at 8 or 9 years ago when the technology wasn't there to stream, now it is, but it's still lacking, in 1 more year all the streams will be high-def.



MikeHawk said:


> There was some news story about how the government recently shut down 10 major movie pirating sites. But, guess what? I can still find any video that's out in the theaters with a simple google search.
> 
> Hell, there's tons and tons of foreign websites that they'll never even be able to shut down. It's really a pointless battle.
> 
> What Dana needs to do is find some innovative way to shut down these piraters. You can't go after them legally. It's been proven for years that it wont work.


charge less for the PPV's. I go to a bar with my buddy and pay $10 at the door to watch the fight, and in all honesty I would rather chill at home in comfort with a Budweiser and watch the fights, but like many people I am just not shelling out the cash to order it. I would gladly pay $20 for a PPV but the rates they charge are absolutely insane and until every card has a championship fight with 2 legitimate top 3 fighters in the weight class I am not going to the bar for every card. So that leaves me in a bind, and apparently it's the same for a few hundred thousand other people. There is absolutely no way to shut down pirating asides from charging less for ppv or stopping the ppv broadcasts altogether. The worst part about it is more and more people are going to pirate as bandwidths increase and people can pirate easier, just look at 8 or 9 years ago when the technology wasn't there to stream, now it is, but it's still lacking, in 1 more year all the streams will be high-def with no advertisements and 100% reliability. That's not good for the UFC and they need to lower ppv rates before this happens, and honestly how much of my money do they need, it's not like I haven't been loyal, I just can't afford that $50/month for the UFC.


----------



## SpoKen (Apr 28, 2007)

UGH! looks like I'll have to spend another 2 minutes looking for a new stream.

THANKS A LOT DANA!!!


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

JimmyJames said:


> Dana needs to stop paying these Lawyers and start paying his fighters better.


In Danas mind 78,000 x $45 = 3,500,000. That alone would pay the fighters in a whole event. Of course hes going after them. I think the guys who think Dana is a 'douche' for going after these sites dont have businesses, because if they did they would understand that the company is losing huge revenue because of it. 

One poster said Dana should be happy about it. Theres being 'cool' and then theres reality. Nobody is going to be happy about getting stolen from whatever business your in. Just because the ufc is big and has cash doesnt make them any less justified in trying to stop this. And I can guarantee if anybody here was head of the UFC like Dana and realised how much money it was costing the company they would be doing the same things. 

Personally I think they will make good progress on the live streams. The pirate bay etc is impossible, but I dont think thats what he's worried about. I think live streaming is ok if you dont have any other option to see the fights/game or whatever it is but if its pay per view and your in the USA then you should be paying for it. 
The bottom line is if everybody decided to stream the ufc wouldnt exist because they wouldnt get any revenue, and then we wouldnt have the UFC at all...and there would be no ufc forum on www.mmaforum.com!


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

well sorry but this is a waste of time, you cant beat the internet, sooner or later dana will give in and accept it, the music industry had to, UFC will have to also

its not just stream, if im going to get my ppv from the internet i always download, stream is crappy quality, just a couple of hours after the event you can download it in HD really fast

and he cant stop that, even if he stops all the streaming sites he cant stop every1 from uploading the ppvs on all torrent sites, its impossible

now nowadays i usually pay for the ppvs because my friends are into MMA now and they'll come over and chip in, its a lot funner to watch with friends and drink, but when no1 can come i rarley buy it unless its a BIG event that i really want to see live, but if im alone ill usually download it later because its too expensive here, not only that but the commentating is repulsive, seriously, its the worst most uninformed biased commentating i have ever seen! this really ruins the event, they dont even give me the option to watch it listening to joe, its ridiculous

UFC without joe, no friends, and paying all that money for a couple of hours just really isnt worth it

aaannnd here in brazil MMA isnt big enough that bars have the ppv on, if there were ppvs at bars i would seriously go there for all of them, must be fun to watch a UFC event at a bar, but no luck there also =/


----------



## Can.Opener (Apr 8, 2009)

Just like the music, movie and video game industry the sports sector should be responding via different avenues.

You cannot directly combat online media piracy. With the ease of anonymity via proxies and international borders the problem never diminishes.

They need to look at delivering content online via cost effective measures and subsequently pass on the saving to consumers.

itunes, steam, authorised streamers. It amazes me these crack anti piracy teams are still hammering away with the same intimidation tactics that have failed so miserably in the above listed industries.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

ACTAFOOL said:


> well sorry but this is a waste of time, you cant beat the internet,
> 
> o =/


Your right you cant beat the torrent sites BUT for me its much more enjoyable watching it live then even a couple of hours later. So that makes it a bit different from the music industry etc


----------



## xeberus (Apr 23, 2007)

> "This is a fight we will not lose."


good luck


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

The vast majority of the people who watch streams wouldn't pay for the PPV if you managed to take all the streams down (and they won't). The profit loss accusation is really a complete fallacy. People would just avoid watching ESPN for 10 hours and download it or buy a bootleg dvd and watch it in better quality than the a stream and the UFC can't do anything about it. People who aren't paying to watch it live and in better quality aren't doing so because they can watch a shitty stream. They either don't have the money to buy the PPVs, access to buying PPVs, or they don't like the product enough to pay for it. 

50 dollars for every show isn't affordable for most people and lowering it to 20 is unrealistic. They would have to more than double their sales to make the same amount. They pull in a lot of money but they have very high expenses for their events. When you add up renting the building, insurance, advertising, all of the labor costs with setting up and running the show, satellite feed rental, lodging and transportation, fighter pay and bonuses, and all of the hidden costs we don't know about it eats up a huge chunk of the profits. We also don't know how much they get for each PPV buy because the distribution companies get a percentage. 

It isn't like we are talking about a company that has been financially viable for a long time or brings in an exorbitant amount of money. They have turned a profit for what 3-4 years of their history. They really couldn't raise the average pay or lower ppv costs much and still maintain a solid yearly profit.


----------



## Admz (Sep 15, 2009)

This is so stupid it's not even worth an explanation on why it's stupid, so I'll just leave a cool movie quote here.
*
"You may stop this individual, but you can't stop us all."*


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

osmium said:


> The vast majority of the people who watch streams wouldn't pay for the PPV if you managed to take all the streams down (and they won't). The profit loss accusation is really a complete fallacy. People would just avoid watching ESPN for 10 hours and download it or buy a bootleg dvd and watch it in better quality than the a stream and the UFC can't do anything about it. People who aren't paying to watch it live and in better quality aren't doing so because they can watch a shitty stream. They either don't have the money to buy the PPVs, access to buying PPVs, or they don't like the product enough to pay for it.
> 
> 50 dollars for every show isn't affordable for most people and lowering it to 20 is unrealistic. They would have to more than double their sales to make the same amount. They pull in a lot of money but they have very high expenses for their events. When you add up renting the building, insurance, advertising, all of the labor costs with setting up and running the show, satellite feed rental, lodging and transportation, fighter pay and bonuses, and all of the hidden costs we don't know about it eats up a huge chunk of the profits. We also don't know how much they get for each PPV buy because the distribution companies get a percentage.
> 
> It isn't like we are talking about a company that has been financially viable for a long time or brings in an exorbitant amount of money. They have turned a profit for what 3-4 years of their history. They really couldn't raise the average pay or lower ppv costs much and still maintain a solid yearly profit.


actually 2 hours after the event you can already find the event to download usually haha

but i agree with everything you said, i just dont understand something, sure UFC has only really started getting big and making tons of money after TUF right? but right now they make a lot money and MMA is very mainstream, look how many games, movies, is being made about mma or have an influence from it, my point is UFC is huge right now isnt it?

so how can NBA or NFL have free events but UFC cant? it must cost a lot to do a game also, how do they get money? just from sponsers? is it possible for the UFC to put on live events that are free?:confused02: 

maybe now its too hard since they are still growing and still need more years to really have enough money to do that but at least in 5 years i think it should be possible right?


----------



## js9234 (Apr 8, 2007)

I'm actually on Dana's side. It is taking a lot of money from the company they could be giving to the fighters. Even though I do know if they were receiving all that money it prolly still wouldn't really go to the fighters, but it's possible.


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

ACTAFOOL said:


> actually 2 hours after the event you can already find the event to download usually haha
> 
> but i agree with everything you said, i just dont understand something, sure UFC has only really started getting big and making tons of money after TUF right? but right now they make a lot money and MMA is very mainstream, look how many games, movies, is being made about mma or have an influence from it, my point is UFC is huge right now isnt it?
> 
> ...


Because they make more in a year just from television rights than the total amount the ufc brings in before costs. Whether or not they are "huge" is relative to what you are comparing them to. If the UFC can ever get a major television rights agreement you will see fighters getting paid more and a lot more shows on free tv. Right now they are dealing with smaller stations like Spike and Versus so the shows aren't that frequent and don't have top talent.


----------



## SpoKen (Apr 28, 2007)

I don't feel bad about ripping off Dana White since there are still fighters in the UFC making 7k a fight.


----------



## js9234 (Apr 8, 2007)

You're ripping the fighters off to though. Just sayin... :thumb02:


Spoken812 said:


> I don't feel bad about ripping off Dana White since there are still fighters in the UFC making 7k a fight.


----------



## JustLo (Oct 7, 2009)

Dana isn't losing anything (except direct money from lawsuits/lawyers going after people who won't be able to pay him a penny even if he does go to court). He never had the money from the people watching pirated UFC to begin with.

It's a bad argument. It's like saying well he's also loosing billions of dollars because the UFC isn't as established in other markets and all those potential viewers arn't ordering his events.

You can't stop piracy so good game. Microsoft can't do it. The music industry can't do it.


----------



## Evo (Feb 12, 2007)

So by Dana White going after people stealing his product, he's a douche bag that doesn't care about his fans?

The fans are the ones paying mind you, maybe with all the extra money they would be making from the free streamers they could afford to pay the fighters better? Oh, don't like it when it's turned around on you, do you?

"I don't feel bad about ripping off Dana White since there are still fighters in the UFC making 7k a fight."

Rofl I didn't even get to read that before I posted. So stealing (yes it's stealing, no matter what form of twisted logic one would try to apply) his product, the product he uses to pay his fighters, doesn't hurt those fighters? It's nice that you have justified theft for yourself though, really.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

i only steam the cards that don't look great, eg 115(which turned out pretty good)


----------



## Machida Karate (Nov 30, 2009)

SJ said:


> They can't win. They can spend a lot of money and sue a few people, but much larger companies than UFC are failing at these same battles. Whenever there is progress on their side, the problem only gets larger.
> 
> A lot of people actually find out about these streams through these statements they put out.


 
Good point, LOL they probably got my Stream watchers now after bringing it up again...

It probably is getting some people curious that cant afford to pay full price each PPV...


----------



## FrodoFraggins (Oct 25, 2009)

BrutalKO said:


> ...Interesting. From the mumbers posted in that blog, there were 114,000 uploaded views. Each PPV is 45 bucks a pop. That's $5,130,000 dollars getting ripped off from Zuffa.


You're assuming all of the people getting it for free would be willing to pay for those views if pirating wasn't available. That's not very realistic. I'd guess less than 5% of people watching streams would fork over $45 if there were no streams


----------



## FrodoFraggins (Oct 25, 2009)

Dana can certainly win his fight against JustinTV and Ustream, but as others said he'll lose the streaming battle in the end.

Even if they are able to stop 100% of live streams, people can get the entire card in HD in torrents and such soon after the card ends.

If I was him I'd be fighting them too though. I just wouldn't expect to ever WIN.


----------



## Majortom505 (Jun 23, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> In Danas mind 78,000 x $45 = 3,500,000. That alone would pay the fighters in a whole event. Of course hes going after them. I think the guys who think Dana is a 'douche' for going after these sites dont have businesses, because if they did they would understand that the company is losing huge revenue because of it.
> 
> One poster said Dana should be happy about it. Theres being 'cool' and then theres reality. Nobody is going to be happy about getting stolen from whatever business your in. Just because the ufc is big and has cash doesnt make them any less justified in trying to stop this. And I can guarantee if anybody here was head of the UFC like Dana and realised how much money it was costing the company they would be doing the same things.
> 
> ...


The problem with this post is that it assumes that everyone streaming would pay for the event if they couldn't stream. No way.

I'm guessing that 90% of the people streaming would just not watch rather than pay for the event. All that would do is make for less fans for MMA.

It seems like pissing into the wind to me.


----------



## MikeHawk (Sep 11, 2009)

Dear god, no! Now I have to go to the 2nd page of google instead of the first.


----------



## thedoctor199 (Sep 3, 2009)

I think the UFC are using scare tactics on this, if they can get the guy who streamed to _'36,000 and 78,000 non-paying viewers'_ and send him down, they're hoping it will at least make it a lot harder to find a stream online.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

I am with the general consensus here. There is no way that Zuffa is going to win this fight. People have tried it with videos, movies, tv shows, and music. They have all has lawsuits and attemted to curb the illegal downloads, but it is still just as accessible and just as many people, if not more do it. I honestly don't know many people that get all of their music/movies legally. People have been thrown in jail for this, doesn't stop everyone else. That is just one less person queued in front of you to get the song.

The problem is, there is so many people all over the world that illegally stream UFC events, that Zuffa will never get them all. As soon as sites start going down, others will surface. It is just how the internet is. Short of shutting down the internet (which will never happen) this stuff will be out there, and people will continue to do it.

As for Zuffa demanding the "identities" of the people on the sites hosting streams, it is a longshot that they would even get those. It is not hard at all to hide yourself on the internet. There are proxies and ways to change your IP address. It's not like they can count on the name put on their account on the site to be correct.

They are fighting a losing battle and Dana being so sure that they will win is a bit ignorant. It sucks for Zuffa that they are losing money, but it happens. It is a part of owning a broadcasting business.


----------



## Light_Speed (Jun 3, 2009)

They havent lost 1 million Plus from the 35,000 streamers because most people who watch streams arent likely to buy a ufc card...

Personally Ima Hardcore MMA guy but havent ever bought ONE ufc card in my life ... i used to have the hacked direct tv back in the pride days so i started watching in those days..after the direct tv went down , i pretty much hit the bars..theres like 2 million bars showing ufc in toronto..... or buy the dvd the next day from the chinese store. But pay 50 bucks ?? by myself for a payperview... dats just crazy

and if its a shitty card i wont even bother.. mma-core for single fights

regardless the internet will allways win.. no one can do anything about it


----------



## Couchwarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

I can't blame Dana and Lorenzo for being mad because people are offering the product they are trying to sell for free, but the real problem is that PPV just isn't a business model that could ever work 100%. There are just too many people who think it's too expensive, and I'm convinced that the majority of people who stream or download illegally wouldn't be watching at all if they couldn't get it for free, or at least for a significantly lower price than the PPV.


pgebhard25 said:


> hopefully none of our members will be doing time. I usually pay or go watch the fights at BWW or the casino here. Some of the lesser cards or the ones that are in Europe/UAE I have looked to stream but usually can't find a working one anyway.


They're looking to prosecute uploaders, not downloaders.


oldfan said:


> How does that work? why is it OK for Denmark to do that?


Probably beacause they wouldn't sell that many PPVs in Denmark anyway since MMA isn't very big there yet, and because they want more people to start following it, which is easier if it's free. It just makes more sense in the long run. Besides, it's not shown live anyway in Denmark, right? It would be at 4am in the morning in that case.


----------



## mmaswe82 (Feb 22, 2010)

Well lucky for us swedes its available free on tv here in the basic chanels that i dont pay for  great thx ufc

Edit: Couchwarrior, yes it is probably live for them @ 4am like it is here.


----------



## G_Land (Aug 11, 2009)

Yeah we see how that war on drugs is going too....I mean nobody smokes crack anymore lol


Ive never streamed a PPV from the UFC (Ive been tempted but chickened out) Ive watched a couple SF shows just because I refuse to buy Showtime


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

mmaswe82 said:


> Well lucky for us swedes its available free on tv here in the basic chanels that i dont pay for  great thx ufc
> 
> Edit: Couchwarrior, yes it is probably live for them @ 4am like it is here.


I´ve got a couple swede channels on my tv package.
In wich channel is the UFC broadcasting there?


----------



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

UFC events are LIVE here in Denmark which means either getting up at 4AM and watching or staying up until they start... It's a pain but we can't complain since it's free as I mentioned earlier... It's on basic cable so we do pay for the channel but very, very little... So I think the channel itself purchases the right to broadcast the show in Denmark from the UFC... With the limited audience here it wouldn't be worth ot to set up PPVs yet because that simply wouldn't attract any kind of audience


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Budhisten said:


> UFC events are LIVE here in Denmark which means either getting up at 4AM and watching or staying up until they start... It's a pain but we can't complain since it's free as I mentioned earlier... It's on basic cable so we do pay for the channel but very, very little... So I think the channel itself purchases the right to broadcast the show in Denmark from the UFC... With the limited audience here it wouldn't be worth ot to set up PPVs yet because that simply wouldn't attract any kind of audience


I think its a clever strategy from the UFC. Im based in the philippines and I get it for free as well. Starts on a sunday morning at 10am, not bad to wake up to at all!
The reason I got into the ufc in the first place was Sky started playing highlights on a thurseday night. After that initial response Setanta bought it and having been doing the pay per views ever since with decent success I think. I expect they'll wait for X number of viewers in each country and then it wont be free anymore...


----------



## Whitehorizon (May 27, 2009)

evzbc said:


> I'm starting to dislike this guy...
> 
> ...what a greedy bastard.
> 
> ...


So, you can't get the event on ppv. You can illegally watch online though, but you cant go to the website to buy it properly? 

Shit cards or no shit cards, bad economy or good economy, who cares? Im sorry I can't say much, I downloaded the Silva vs Maia card. I bought the event got to drunk to watch it (actually i watched it but forgot what happened) and downloaded it three weeks later though, to see what all the rabbling was about. I understand its still illegal but I dont agree with buying the event to watch once and a replay once. If you buy it, it should be yours.

It is stealing from the man to watch a free stream though. If you offered something up for money and someone was stealing it from you, you would be pissed and you know it. I think the cards are expensive, sometimes they have bad fights I understand that. Thats why I invite over 5 or six buddies and we split it up. Dana considers this stealing to though im sure. That is my issue with this.

I don't know I agree he is being greedy about it, but I don't disagree with him for doing it. He will not win, but if it makes him feel better than whatever let him try and make his own day. To say you are losing interest in the company because of this is one of the dumbest things ive heard before though.

I don't like Dana, I dont like how he acts or things he says either, but I can't fault him for this.


----------



## Sousa (Jun 16, 2007)

evzbc said:


> I'm starting to dislike this guy...
> 
> ...what a greedy bastard.
> 
> ...


See its people like you that don't understand things. I bet you think downloading movies and music are all ok?Well in reality they're not. Its all stealing no matter what and its illegal. Most epople would rather not pay money if they had a great enough stream. You DO in fact lose money. Think about it form his perspective. What if everyone stops buying the PPVs?Thats a big chunk of their profit alone. Where would they get their money from then?I understand 50 bucks is expensive I think maybe 30 should be the right price but its a business, if you let people take money out of your pockets you'll eventually go bankrupt, then what?People will complain that they did nothing to stop the internet etc. Either way people will complain about the opposite no matter what happens. 

To say they'd lose fans is ridiculous because virtually everywhere in NA you can watch fights for free at a bar or sports restaurant. Like many others will say, its ok until something gets stolen from you that you worked hard for,i bet then you'd be pissed off.


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

Just so people understand, it is actually legal for you to download an event if you paid for the ppv broadcast. (it is not legal for the sharer) 

It is also LEGAL to own a copy of an event after it has been broadcast on tv (you could have theoretically recorded it for personal use). You are allowed to have personal backups of any media you own, which also applies to recorded television and paid for broadcasts. 

This has nothing to do with streaming, I just thought I'd mention that. It's good to keep these things in your mind so you know what your story is should you ever be confronted about piracy.

So WhiteHorizon^^ you are in the clear! You paid for the broadcast, so theoretically you could have recorded it for yourself and converted to digital media format for storage. (CANADIAN LAW, call my lawyer)

Again though, this has nothing to do with streaming, just another issue completely.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Whitehorizon said:


> I think the cards are expensive, sometimes they have bad fights I understand that. Thats why I invite over 5 or six buddies and we split it up. Dana considers this stealing to though im sure. That is my issue with this.


No, he actually uses the "invite a few buddies and split it" reasoning as one of his advertisment flags. I´ve seen it often.


----------



## Whitehorizon (May 27, 2009)

AmdM said:


> No, he actually uses the "invite a few buddies and split it" reasoning as one of his advertisment flags. I´ve seen it often.


Thanks for the clarity. I know at restaurants around me they are charged per seat they have available in their restaurant. Just to get it so I assumed, but I guess that is because the restaurants make money off all the people so he wants his share.



SJ said:


> Just so people understand, it is actually legal for you to download an event if you paid for the ppv broadcast. (it is not legal for the sharer)
> 
> It is also LEGAL to own a copy of an event after it has been broadcast on tv (you could have theoretically recorded it for personal use). You are allowed to have personal backups of any media you own, which also applies to recorded television and paid for broadcasts.
> 
> ...



Thanks man, I can't rep you anymore it says haha. 

The thing about it is I have recorded it before. After I watch it once it deletes it self. Maybe this is DirectV's doing though :sarcastic12:


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Whitehorizon said:


> Thanks for the clarity. I know at restaurants around me they are charged per seat they have available in their restaurant. Just to get it so I assumed, but I guess that is because the restaurants make money off all the people so he wants his share.


Find one vid for you...

He mentions the buddies thing at about 1:45


----------



## KillerShark1985 (Jan 6, 2010)

limba said:


> It's illegal and imoral no doubt. But it's also imoral to sometimes offer some realy bad cards and demand money fot them, or to have one of your champion disrespect his opponent and the fans in the main event of a PPV. (i'm not gonna go there...)
> All in all i think something in the middle would be more suitable for the UFC and the streamers.
> This is a fight the UFC won't win.


I disagree that the fans should demand action on the quality of the cards, as for the Silva/Maia incident who are you do decide what should and should not happen in any MMA fight, as long as the rules of the sport where followed then you have no cause to complain about how the fight turned out, if a card was bad then you need not buy it, if you buy a card you thought would be good but then the fights turn out to be boring then that is always the risk you take when you pay to watch any sport, there is always a chance you may not like the way the game turned out but still have to accept that.

But then I have no opinion what so ever because I dont pay PPV prices to watch the UFC, its at no extra cost over here in the UK as subscribing to ESPN, what I have to watch streaming is Strikeforce events since as far as I am aware there is no channel that broadcasts here in the UK that shows Strikeforce events live.


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

man why cant UFC just get on CBS, why do they hate better channels? imagine the ratings for a brock vs randy couture on CBS or some other channel i dont know

anyway, like many said the problem here is that ppl are forgetting who actually streams...i doubt most of the ppl are american

my friend uses a streaming site (its really my friend haha i hate streams) and he always says that most of the ppl on there are from...well...any other place that isnt america, im guessing those ppl dont have enough money to pay for an event, the economy might be bad in USA right now but there are other places in the world that are always crappy, like us:thumb02:

man here in brazil almost no1 buys the ppvs because if you want to buy the ppvs you have to have cable, and almost no1 does, cable is an elite thing here, its very expensive, so not only do you have to have cable but you gotta also pay a lot for the event, you really gotta be rich or a hardcore fan to do that

i still buy them from time to time, when its a huge event i do for example, especially if my friends come over, ill invite 4-5 friends, its a lot funner than to watch alone on the pc, you dont think every1 would want to watch on a tv with good quality and friends over? some ppl just cant buy the ppvs....but this next event im going to buy it, im stoked, i always buy anderson silva card, then download it again to watch it with joe rogan

oh another thing thats kinda ridiculous though, how can dana complain about the ppl getting the event on stream sites when there are places in the world who have the events for FREE ON TV!?!?!?

imagine how many ppl watch those events for free on tv, must be more than how many stream....why doesnt he charge in those places? if he can afford to have free ppvs on other countrys (bitch why not have free ppvs here in brazil? we're not overflowing with cash you know) then he can afford to have 50,000 ppl streaming an event...stop being a douche


----------



## Couchwarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

SJ said:


> Just so people understand, it is actually legal for you to download an event if you paid for the ppv broadcast. (it is not legal for the sharer)
> 
> It is also LEGAL to own a copy of an event after it has been broadcast on tv (you could have theoretically recorded it for personal use). You are allowed to have personal backups of any media you own, which also applies to recorded television and paid for broadcasts.


Doesn't this mean that if you download an event and get caught (however small the chance is), you can just say you downloaded or thought you downloaded (i.e. good faith) the Swedish broadcast, and they'll have nothing on you?


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

Just listening to Dana talk makes me want to go and stream every single UFC from now on.

His brash and cocky attitude isn't going to gain him much sympathy anywhere.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

vilify said:


> Just listening to Dana talk makes me want to go and stream every single UFC from now on.
> 
> His brash and cocky attitude isn't going to gain him much sympathy anywhere.


He's not asking for sympathy. He doesn't need to ask for sympathy. Streaming is illegal, and he's making people aware that they can, and in some cases, will be held responsible. If you want to stream, fine, but because 'you don't care' doesn't make you any less guilty of theft.

I'm glad someone is standing up for their business, even if it's Dana White.


----------



## TheNinja (Dec 10, 2008)

Dana White is just tryig to make a statement. Sometimes I really think that he honestly believes he is some sort of mob boss. He tries to indimidate every one including fighters, fans, most likely his own family. Dana White just needs a good ass kicking, because he is too cocky for his own good.

Like Joe Rogan has said numerous times. "Can't stop the power of the internet"


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

UrbanBounca said:


> He's not asking for sympathy. He doesn't need to ask for sympathy. Streaming is illegal, and he's making people aware that they can, and in some cases, will be held responsible. If you want to stream, fine, but because 'you don't care' doesn't make you any less guilty of theft.
> 
> I'm glad someone is standing up for their business, even if it's Dana White.


He is asking for sympathy, he's just trying to be slick about it. why else would they be giving us these stupid estimates of how much money they're "losing"?

Music artist do the same exact crap. they tell you how much work goes into it and how much they're losing if you dont buy their album and of course they remind you its illegal.

And for the record watching a stream isnt theft. :thumbsup:


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

Couchwarrior said:


> Doesn't this mean that if you download an event and get caught (however small the chance is), you can just say you downloaded or thought you downloaded (i.e. good faith) the Swedish broadcast, and they'll have nothing on you?


That's pretty tricky, I would say if you didn't have the swedish channel and proof that you have it, you would be assumed guilty.

They only go after uploaders and significant sharers anyway, so no worries in this case. 

There _is_ definite way that you need to carry yourself when confronted with piracy accusastions, or it can get bad really, really quick. Pleading ignorance might work on a face to face level, but not with the internet po-po.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

I can't blame DW for going after streamers. He isn't going to win, but I am also not going to sit here and claim he is wrong.


----------



## Inkdot (Jun 15, 2009)

I they didn't sell PPVs for an INSANE amount of money (50$ is unreal for 2-3 hours of TV) this problem wouldn't excist.

Happy I live in Sweden and get them free and legal  :thumbsup:


----------



## suffersystem (Feb 4, 2007)

Inkdot said:


> I they didn't sell PPVs for an INSANE amount of money (50$ is unreal for 2-3 hours of TV) this problem wouldn't excist.
> 
> Happy I live in Sweden and get them free and legal  :thumbsup:


So, you can stream and illegally get any PPV you deem to be over priced? 


I'm not innocent in any of this either, but I find alot of people just sitting here making excuses and trying to ok these things in their own mind. It's still theft and illegal, so you can't really use any of those defences if you were ever caught. I know it's illegal, you know it's illegal. Funny noone is mentioning WWE PPV, boxing PPV, hell, every PPV is a little costly.

I'm with Dana on this one, but I know myself they'll never shut it completely down, still doesn't mean he shouldn't atleast put some effort into it, he'd be a fool to not try. The music, movie, etc industry all know they'll never completely win, still doesn't mean they should just not do anything about it. Then you wonder why bands get dropped from their labels, and all these shit movies are made. you know why? Because it's a business to make money, and they will not do anything risky or that might not make them money. trust me, you don't want the UFC to go that far.


----------



## Inkdot (Jun 15, 2009)

suffersystem said:


> So, you can stream and illegally get any PPV you deem to be over priced?
> 
> 
> I'm not innocent in any of this either, but I find alot of people just sitting here making excuses and trying to ok these things in their own mind. It's still theft and illegal, so you can't really use any of those defences if you were ever caught. I know it's illegal, you know it's illegal. Funny noone is mentioning WWE PPV, boxing PPV, hell, every PPV is a little costly.
> ...


Dude, I didn't try to justify it. I just offered an explanation as to why it happens. :thumb02:

If I couldnt watch them for free (on a cable channel I pay a little money for) I would probaly not buy them for that price. Dosen't mean I wouldnt automatically pirate them though.


----------



## suffersystem (Feb 4, 2007)

I know, I may have gone a bit too far.

I am just saying that if things went bad, you could see alot of your fav fighters being cut in favor of fighters that just bring the crowds in, regardless of how good they were. It just seems sometimes that people forget that this is a business, and the UFC are doing their best to make it a worldwide phenomenon, but don't be blinded that if things start going sour for MMA again, you could see all your fav MMA companies doing some pretty silly things in order to keep a revenue going.


----------



## BobbyCooper (Oct 26, 2009)

It's just fair in my opinion! 

Just take a look on how much money these guys from the Music industry, Hollywood and Zuffa make. It's an rediculous amount of money.

Look at the Jay Z's, Madonna's, Justin Timberlake's, Tom Cruise's, Dana's.. these guys and there company get way too much money. And now take a look on the really hard workes out there. Like the roadbuilders for example or even the fighters and see how much these guys get paid.

Nothing is fair in this World and there is no justice. 

Little piracy here and there is just fair!


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

BobbyCooper said:


> It's just fair in my opinion!
> 
> Just take a look on how much money these guys from the Music industry, Hollywood and Zuffa make. It's an rediculous amount of money.
> 
> ...


So the streamers are Robin Hood?


----------



## Inkdot (Jun 15, 2009)

BobbyCooper said:


> It's just fair in my opinion!
> 
> Just take a look on how much money these guys from the Music industry, Hollywood and Zuffa make. It's an rediculous amount of money.
> 
> ...


Haha thats my BobbyCooper!! :thumbsup:


----------



## BobbyCooper (Oct 26, 2009)

cdtcpl said:


> So the streamers are Robin Hood?


The honorable people who upload streams and torrents are the modern Robin Hood's from the Internet yes


----------



## FatFreeMilk (Jan 22, 2010)

I usually watch the event after it has finished, I doubt Zuffa will try to fight this type of piracy.

Streaming, well I know it's illegal (Only ever watch one UFC stream) but I really don't think I'd pay to watch it PPV or through a TV deal anyway. TBH these illegal methods of viewing have increased my appetite for MMA so in the end they'll probably benefit from it.


----------



## Majortom505 (Jun 23, 2009)

rediculas
bluediculas
blackdiculas
greendiculas...... ridiculous!


----------



## footodors (Aug 26, 2007)

It's like sneaking into a movie theater without paying. Kind of fun. 
Never got caught either, he he!


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

There is one place in my town that shows PPVs, or is about to, and that's Applebee's. Cracka please.


----------



## marcthegame (Mar 28, 2009)

Yes it is illegal but IMO i think this is a ego move for Dana and the UFC. It is either that or there really greedy with there money. illegal wrestling streams has been around for years and they don't do anything about it. I think Dana needs to stop this bs lawsuit because its a fight he cannot win. I would rather use the money for the lawyers and pay the fighters more. Its the internet vs the ufc...there are hackers internet who gets thrills from battling big cooperation. One the Zuffa takes down a site more will pop up its a never ending loop.


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

...This thread seems to have no end. Most everybody has valid points. I think in the end because there is no regulation to the internet, Zuffa pretty much would end up chasing shadows. They may pull in a few but it's a big world out there and there will always be thieves and computer hackers galore. Again, this refers to the PPV cramming. I remember not too long ago when UFC PPV's were $29.95. Not only have they gone up 16 more bucks, I refer to the greed of event booking. They have an event August 1st( not PPV) gee...6 days later it's UFC 117 and again 3 weeks later on August 28th it's UFC 118. I truly believe the over-booking is contributing to the piracy. To say that Zuffa is trying to monopolize MMA is plausable... I think Dana's biggest wet dream would to see Strikeforce close shop. It would be a loss to us fans as well...


----------



## Wookie (Jul 20, 2008)

It's really a waste of time and resources to try and go after these "streamers". As has been pointed out they may catch a few and deter a few, but there will always be a demand so there will be people to provide for the demand. If Dana were smarter he would try and make the PPV's more affordable. If I'm not mistaken the main demographic that watches the UFC is the 18-35 year old range. People in that demographic don't usually have a disposable income to spend 50$ on 2-3 hours of entertainment. They should try and come up with a solution such as offering packages(at a discount), or finding a better venue to show their product on than Spike, or Versus. Because as was pointed out I can't afford to spend 100 bucks on two events in one month, but I damn sure want to watch 2 or 3 events a month.


----------



## pgebhard25 (Dec 31, 2006)

As OP (thanks for the rep) I was very curious what people would say. I have to admit I am stunned by all the DW bashing (although I shouldn't be, he gets bashed in most threads). He is going after people who are stealing from the company, and that is what streams, posting or watching, really is.

If a few guys go to jail or pay huge fines then I am sure it will deter a few people in the US from posting streams. The problem is that I am sure many streams are from outside US, making it harder to catch and punish people.

Like I said, I usually only stream when the PPV is in Europe/Asia. Otherwise, I feel obligated to buy it at home or go to a bar that pays the UFC to show it.


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

if dana actually manages the impossible and stops all streams and torrent this would hurt the UFC more, those ppl still wouldnt buy the ppvs AND they would just lose many fans and lose a easy way to gain new fans, you will be shutting your product down from the internet, this is terrible buisness, why the hell do some ppl get free ppv? i dont understand this, its ok for some ppl in europe to watch for free but some1 in africa who doesnt even have the option to buy the ppv on the tv cant watch it via stream? wtf...

dana is just old and doesnt realize how much these ''thieves'' are helping him


----------



## MMA-Matt (Mar 20, 2010)

an interesting e-mail I received recently; the portion I have pasted (cut out some parts) is what Zuffa sent my ISP which then sent me a letter telling me to "cease" such activities. 

Dear Sir or Madam:

BayTSP, Inc. ("BayTSP") swears under penalty of perjury that Zuffa, LLC has authorized BayTSP to act as its non-exclusive agent for copyright infringement notification. BayTSP's search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Zuffa, LLC copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the below report. 

BayTSP has reasonable good faith belief that Zuffa, LLC, its agents, or the law does not authorize use of the material in the manner complained of in the below report. The information provided herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, this letter is an official notification to effect removal of the detected infringement listed in the below report. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the Universal Copyright Convention, as well as bilateral treaties with other countries allow for protection of client's copyrighted work even beyond U.S. borders. The below documentation specifies the exact location of the infringement.

We hereby request that you immediately remove or block access to the infringing material, as specified in the copyright laws, and insure the user refrains from using or sharing with others Zuffa, LLC materials in the future.

Further, we believe that the entire Internet community benefits when these matters are resolved cooperatively. We urge you to take immediate action to stop this infringing activity. We appreciate your efforts toward this common goal. 


Regards,


Evidentiary Information:
Notice ID: ********
Initial Infringement Timestamp: 
Recent Infringement Timestamp: 
Infringers IP Address: ***************
Protocol: BitTorrent
Infringed Work: *UFC 115 Liddell vs Franklin*
Infringing File Name: UFC.115.Liddell.vs.Franklin.Full.PPV-FCZ
Infringing File Size: 1583702345
Bay ID: 
Port ID: 
Infringer's DNS Name: 
Infringer's User Name:


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

MMA-Matt said:


> an interesting e-mail I received recently; the portion I have pasted (cut out some parts) is what Zuffa sent my ISP which then sent me a letter telling me to "cease" such activities.
> 
> Dear Sir or Madam:
> 
> ...


wow, you should be more careful about what sites you get the ppvs from:confused02:

seems kinda fake though......but if not this still wont stop ppl from downloading their events


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

MMA-Matt said:


> an interesting e-mail I received recently; the portion I have pasted (cut out some parts) is what Zuffa sent my ISP which then sent me a letter telling me to "cease" such activities.
> 
> Dear Sir or Madam:
> 
> ...


Did you responde the email?
What was exactly that you did, if i may ask...just a simpl download or were you the original uploader?


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

ACTAFOOL said:


> wow, you should be more careful about what sites you get the ppvs from:confused02:
> 
> seems kinda fake though......but if not this still wont stop ppl from downloading their events


If it's fake, so be it. But, this is definately proof that they can, and will track down people downloading copywritten material.



AmdM said:


> Did you responde the email?
> What was exactly that you did, if i may ask...just a simpl download or were you the original uploader?


I believe he downloaded it by the information they've sent to him, but he may need to clarify.


----------



## mmaswe82 (Feb 22, 2010)

AmdM said:


> I´ve got a couple swede channels on my tv package.
> In wich channel is the UFC broadcasting there?


its called TV4 sport


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

Dana trying to stop streaming is like when Lars of Metallica tried to stop music downloading. You can't beat dat der inter-web.


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Nov 3, 2009)

VolcomX311 said:


> Dana trying to stop streaming is like when Lars of Metallica tried to stop music downloading. You can't beat dat der inter-web.


...and what Lars failed to understand is that downloading music actually helps musicians (but not so much the greedy and manipulative record companies). 

I saw an episode of 60 minutes a few years back featuring the Dixie Chicks. Not my taste in music, but the thing that struck me was that they had sold over 20 million records, yet none of them was a millionaire. All the money from record sales was sucked up by the record company, lawyers, distributors, etc. The main source of income for the band is playing live, so the more people that hear their music the better for them in terms of concert attendance. 

Another interesting example is something once said by Bill Gates about windows 3.1x. He stated that if not for the prolific pirating of this operating system he would not be where he is today. It put him on the map and he knows he could never have bought that kind of brand recognition. He essentially stole the GUI operating system anyway (from Apple who stole it from Xerox).

For Dana, the pirating increases his brand, gets the fighters more exposure and increases his fan base as many more people get to see the events, become fans and purchase the occasional card. If Dana really wants to battle this he should make all cards $9.95. Nobody would even bother to try and watch illegal feeds or download the cards. $9.95 sounds low, but it is better than 1000000 people watching pirated feeds and paying a grand total of nothing. 

I think this is going to hurt Dana if he goes through with it.


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

He can go through with it all he wants, it wont make a difference. you take one person down another pops up with a bigger and better idea to do it all over again. some of those guys do it as a free service just for the heck of it, while some do it for money. 

its already been said but the fact remains that majority of those viewers arent willing or capable to pay 50 bucks for a fight card that might have 1 or 2 worthy fights on it. also a significant portion of them are not in the US. Ive seen alot of these streams coming from Russia, UK and even the philippines. 

This streaming stuff is really just getting started, give it a little more time and you'll have mainstream sites dedicated to "illegal" streams, kind of like the torrent sites you have now which act as search engines.


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Nov 3, 2009)

vilify said:


> He can go through with it all he wants, it wont make a difference. you take one person down another pops up with a bigger and better idea to do it all over again.


Exactly, so Dana doing it is a waste of time, money and will have a negative effect on his reputation. Really, it is just a bunch of sabre rattling that makes him look like (more of) a jerk.


----------



## MMA-Matt (Mar 20, 2010)

ACTAFOOL said:


> wow, you should be more careful about what sites you get the ppvs from:confused02:
> 
> seems kinda fake though......but if not this still wont stop ppl from downloading their events


Trust me it's not a fake! I damn near crapped my pants when I got that e-mail. 

I downloaded the torrent from isohunt a few hours after the event.


----------



## Conjo (Jul 28, 2010)

Usually where I download UFC events as well. Thank the lord that I currently live in Norway. They can't touch me! 


Guess I'll have to find some new friends and start paying for my ppv's when I move to Hawaii in about a months time then.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

You guys do realise this forum has a multimedia section?


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Mr. Sparkle said:


> Exactly, so Dana doing it is a waste of time, money and will have a negative effect on his reputation. Really, it is just a bunch of sabre rattling that makes him look like (more of) a jerk.


No, it doesn't, it makes him look like a business man protecting his investment.


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

MMA-Matt said:


> Trust me it's not a fake! I damn near crapped my pants when I got that e-mail.
> 
> I downloaded the torrent from isohunt a few hours after the event.


man for wwe or any MMA ppv i suggest xtremewrestlingtorrents.net

they have bellator, dream, strikefroce, ufc, great quality, super fast and no risk of being caught, at least i have never gotten an email downloading anything from there hehe

leave normal torrent sites for movies or tv shows


----------



## MikeHawk (Sep 11, 2009)

Lol, you're not going to get in trouble for downloading a torrent. The only people they're going to heavily pursue are the ones that post live streams during the events and even then they'll fail at that. People who live stream the events aren't stupid, they know what they're doing and they know the steps to take in order to protect themselves.


----------



## monkey024 (Apr 6, 2010)

UrbanBounca said:


> If it's fake, so be it. But, this is definately proof that they can, and will track down people downloading copywritten material.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe he downloaded it by the information they've sent to him, but he may need to clarify.


He seems to have downloaded the PPV by TORRENT. I already stated that it's alot riskier to download by torrent then by straight downloading from a 3rd party upload site. 

This just shows that they are using torrents to find people that stream/download, but if you take away torrents then your in the clear. There are also programs to make torrenting a little safer .... I dont know if its ok to talk about that but it rhymes with beerblock. 

The guy should also take a look at his terms of service agreement with his ISP...because if there are NO websites specifically stated to NOT be accessed then he can file a lawsuit on the ISP for perjury.


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

He used a public tracker, he was basically asking to be caught. 

Also, FCZ releases are also notorious for being "yuppie" targets. Beware!


----------



## MMA-Matt (Mar 20, 2010)

So what are the best options to avoid being caught again?


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

MMA-Matt said:


> So what are the best options to avoid being caught again?


You're seriously willing to take that chance? :confused03:


----------



## MMA-Matt (Mar 20, 2010)

Gotta get my UFC fix somehow!!!


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

MMA-Matt said:


> an interesting e-mail I received recently; the portion I have pasted (cut out some parts) is what Zuffa sent my ISP which then sent me a letter telling me to "cease" such activities.
> 
> Dear Sir or Madam:
> 
> ...


I'm a regular torrenter. I typically refuse to pay for movies... even blue rays. I hate paying for something I don't know if I'll like or not.

I used to get letters like this all the time once I switched to Charter Cable. Ignore the letter. Don't write back because that will just give them more evidence if anything ever goes to court (the chances of that happening are slim... but still) Get VUZE and install the IP filter and you'll be all set. It doesn't matter where you download them from, it matters what kind of security you have against it.

Edit For Clarification:

I buy almost every UFC card. The only times I torrent them is if I have plans / work and can't watch them live.


----------



## Couchwarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

Back in the days when Suprnova still existed I got a similar email from somebody representing Universal Pictures, for downloading one of their movies. I didn't really know how to react and I don't live in the US, so I just ignored it. Haven't heard anything from them since. Never used Suprnova again though, and the site was shut down shortly after. But it's probably just some kind of mass mail companies send around hoping to scare at least someone into buying their stuff instead.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

um yeah I'm not paying more money so this bald guy and his casino gangster financiers can get their tenth jacuzzi and do twice as much hookers and blow in their stretch limos. You want me to pay you more, you prove to me first that you're paying the fighters the greater share of this money, whose money this actually is.

If you're stealing from the hard working people who make this money for you (by virtue of being a psuedo-monopoly in an immature market), then don't be surprised when people steal from you.


----------



## monkey024 (Apr 6, 2010)

MMA-Matt said:


> So what are the best options to avoid being caught again?


Either find a place with a really low covercharge....dog race parks have very low covercharges. 

Get something to filter out bad IP's if your deadset on torrenting...since it seems its ok to talk about these things...I personally use peerblock ...downloaded a Bluray-Iron man 7.9gigs and some other movies and not one notice. 

Try a third party website that uploads the videos...it might be on Sunday night when you see the fight but its better then paying and most people dont talk about the results unless you specifically look for them.

3rdparty sites I've seen have videos-veehd,stagevu or look up ovguide....would have a vast amount of places where they show these type's of programmings.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> um yeah I'm not paying more money so this bald guy and his casino gangster financiers can get their tenth jacuzzi and do twice as much hookers and blow in their stretch limos. You want me to pay you more, you prove to me first that you're paying the fighters the greater share of this money, whose money this actually is.
> 
> If you're stealing from the hard working people who make this money for you (by virtue of being a psuedo-monopoly in an immature market), then don't be surprised when people steal from you.


I'm getting the feeling you have some 'sense of entitlement' to the UFC because it's run by Dana and the Fertitta's. The card is well advertised ahead of time, and it's their _choice_ to spend their 'hard earned money' on it.

I'm tired of seeing excuses as to why people steal it. If you steal it, admit you steal it, and quit making ******* excuses.


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

^^^^ TBH I dont think its about sense of entitlement, its just not giving a rats ass how much money Zuffa will "lose" by me streaming instead of shelling out 50 bucks.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

vilify said:


> ^^^^ TBH I dont think its about sense of entitlement, its just not giving a rats ass how much money Zuffa will "lose" by me streaming instead of shelling out 50 bucks.


I'd rather see someone say, "I stream them and don't give a ****," rather than, "I stream them but it's because...".


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

Its just human nature to justify your actions regardless of the circumstances. We all do it and it makes us feel good


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

UrbanBounca said:


> I'm getting the feeling you have some 'sense of entitlement' to the UFC because it's run by Dana and the Fertitta's. The card is well advertised ahead of time, and it's their _choice_ to spend their 'hard earned money' on it.
> 
> I'm tired of seeing excuses as to why people steal it. If you steal it, admit you steal it, and quit making ******* excuses.


No it's not necessarily about Dana and Fertitta, it's about greedy people that screw the real talent by virtue of a monopoly/cartel, and then trying to pull morality on others. 

I feel the same about the recording industry... If I like an artist, I'll support them by buying their merchandise, concert tickets etc., or their CDs/mp3s if I know they're getting a good share of it. 

What I'm not gonna be made to feel guilty about is being lectured on morality by people who spend 10 cents production cost per CD and ask $20 from me so they can promote the next whored out pop icon or whatever and shove them down my throat while giving less than 1% to the guy whose music I actually bought.

Not to mention I'm not even sure of this whole idea that something is being "stolen" when I'm not taking something away that a person has. It was never "stealing" to record your favorite show or song on the radio, or watch some bard play in an inn in the middle ages etc. if you didn't toss him money first. It'd be nice if you did, but you wouldn't go to jail if you caught a whiff of them singing when walking into the room.

IMO Information is free, you can't cage it ... if I take someone's cow away, it's stealing because they have something less. If I listen to them sing, guess what, they still have the same shit they had before. The whole "you stole potential income" thing is notional. Throughout history, musicians have played for free, but when people liked their stuff they rewarded them on their own as they saw fit ... whether by tossing a coin into a hat, or a bag of gold from a king, or just a few claps.

Another example is if I listen to your song and play it on my guitar, most people would agree I'm not "stealing". But guess what, the RIAA goes and bans videos on YouTube with people teaching guitar tabs of songs... now even own tunes are owned even if the artist is not playing it. Next thing I'll get clocked for humming a song under my breath.

Are you telling me you don't have a single mp3 on your computer that you haven't paid for? Not one? How many do you have?


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

If you can believe it, my wife isn't aware of bit torrents and she buys all her music from iTunes. Poor thing. I get the feeling she wouldn't like my torrenting, so ignorance is bliss. All of her mp3's are paid and bought for, how's that for a three finger shocker.

That means I pay for half of all my music....


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> No it's not necessarily about Dana and Fertitta, it's about greedy people that screw the real talent by virtue of a monopoly/cartel, and then trying to pull morality on others.
> 
> I feel the same about the recording industry... If I like an artist, I'll support them by buying their merchandise, concert tickets etc., or their CDs/mp3s if I know they're getting a good share of it.
> 
> ...


I'm not playing this 'stealing' game with you, and you trying to justify it because you're 'not actually stealing something'. The fact of the matter is you *are* stealing, period. You're watching a product that was meant to be (a) paid for or (b) free in _some_ countries, and America ain't one of them.

There is a difference between stealing it and admit it, compared to someone such as yourself, that is stealing and refuses to admit what they're doing is in fact, illegal.

_In your opinion_, information is free, and can't be caged. The law doesn't give a **** about your opinion.



VolcomX311 said:


> If you can believe it, my wife isn't aware of bit torrents and she buys all her music from iTunes. Poor thing. I get the feeling she wouldn't like my torrenting, so ignorance is bliss. All of her mp3's are paid and bought for, how's that for a three finger shocker.


When I committed my life to becoming a police officer, I stopped downloading illegally for good. I haven't downloaded a single MP3 illegally since October, 2009.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

UrbanBounca said:


> I'm not playing this 'stealing' game with you, and you trying to justify it because you're 'not actually stealing something'. The fact of the matter is you *are* stealing, period. You're watching a product that was meant to be (a) paid for or (b) free in _some_ countries, and America ain't one of them.
> 
> There is a difference between stealing it and admit it, compared to someone such as yourself, that is stealing and refuses to admit what they're doing is in fact, illegal.
> 
> ...


The law can go take a hike when it's bought and paid for by a bunch of corrupt corporations and politicians. 

The law once said that you could whip the shit out of a black man if he so much as dared to think for himself. The law once said a guy tilling a field 15 hours a day 7 days a week had to give up all his food to some fat asshole in a castle while his family starved, because it would "be stealing" from his lord otherwise.

I don't give a crap about what laws corrupt people pass, I only care about universal moral laws of goodness.

And oh wow, no downloads since 9 months ago, you should be some kinda annointed saint by now officer. Shouldn't you be out tazing old ladies or something?


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> The law can go take a hike when it's bought and paid for by a bunch of corrupt corporations and politicians.
> 
> The law once said that you could whip the shit out of a black man if he so much as dared to think for himself. The law once said a guy tilling a field 15 hours a day 7 days a week had to give up all his food to some fat asshole in a castle because it would "be stealing" from his lord otherwise.
> 
> ...


Well, since you can compare piracy to slavery, you have an excellent point. :sarcastic12:

It's obvious you can't have a debate without making it personal.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

UrbanBounca said:


> Well, since you can compare piracy to slavery, you have an excellent point. :sarcastic12:
> 
> It's obvious you can't have a debate without making it personal.


Well ok sorry, I didn't want to get personal, but off topic I'm just really starting to dislike the prevalent heavy handed cop mentality in this country nowadays so that got me off. 

Think I've seen far too many of those angry cop tazing videos popping up lately, and it's given me a bad taste about the whole profession. And hearing from friends who are part time cops, even the training mentality of "Us Vs Them" instead of "Us serving/helping Them" is scary to me.

I'm sure there's good, responsible officers out there though and hopefully you're one of them, so nothing personal.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

I stream it and i don´t give a crap.
I not gonna excuse, but i´ll say that i just don´t have the money for it. The *minimum *wage here is around 2.20€ per hour while there in the U.S. is around 7.25§.
So im fine by you paying for it, if you can you should pay for it.
But im not gonna lay here and not enjoy my favorite sport, im gonna find a way to see it and im not gonna feel bad about it. The way i see it, UFC wouldn´t be getting 55$ from me anyway!


----------



## Ivan (Feb 24, 2007)

UFC is banned in germany which affects austria too since i watched it over that german channel.. They should be lucky we are breaking the laws to watch it.. but i am really losing interest in MMA anyway.. as soon as money becomes everything the whole thing becomes a joke.. like our european football.. money ruined the whole idea of sportmanship..


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

Ivan said:


> UFC is banned in germany which affects austria too since i watched it over that german channel.. They should be lucky we are breaking the laws to watch it.. but i am really losing interest in MMA anyway.. as soon as money becomes everything the whole thing becomes a joke.. like our european football.. money ruined the whole idea of sportmanship..


I see where you're coming from, but hording over money doesn't necessarily send a sport in one direction, automatically. Sure you may lose some sportsmanship or even some integrity of the sport, such as the philosophy as winning a fight vs winning a match. Two different approaches, like a Fedor fight vs a GSP fight, arguably, one fights to win the fight, the other fights to win the match. 

However, when there's more money involved, it tends to increase participation, which increase the volume of the talent pool, which ultimately increases the level of top talents, due to a greater pool to draw from.

I can see the turn off of being so money revolved, but it's not all bad; its a double edged sword.


----------



## BobbyCooper (Oct 26, 2009)

I don't even have to feel bad at all right now 

Because Dana is giving us the UFC events for free anyway. The only thing, the Quality online sucks. 

thats why I use torrents now!


----------



## Ivan (Feb 24, 2007)

Well in a perfect world it may produce real talents .. the way i see things being run where i come from that being former yugoslavia (or where i am now) is.. corrupt and greedy .. talent is not that important.. if ya wanna share your money with all kind of mobsters you are on the team or if you have good connections then you are on the team.. i better not talk about it.. most people wont agree but it is happening all over the world.. talent alone is not enough.. 

money makes the world go around .. look at the music today mainstream of course.. it sucks but it sells sadly.. and those really talented ones have less $ ..

maybe i did not express myself the way i would like to ... that can happen..


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

Ivan said:


> Well in a perfect world it may produce real talents .. the way i see things being run where i come from that being former yugoslavia (or where i am now) is.. corrupt and greedy .. talent is not that important.. if ya wanna share your money with all kind of mobsters you are on the team or if you have good connections then you are on the team.. i better not talk about it.. most people wont agree but it is happening all over the world.. talent alone is not enough..
> 
> money makes the world go around .. look at the music today mainstream of course.. it sucks but it sells sadly.. and those really talented ones have less $ ..


I can't relate to the mobster situation, but in that case, yeah. I can see how money does more to corrupt the sport then produce ever increasing talent.


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Well ok sorry, I didn't want to get personal, but off topic I'm just really starting to dislike the prevalent heavy handed cop mentality in this country nowadays so that got me off.
> 
> Think I've seen far too many of those angry cop tazing videos popping up lately, and it's given me a bad taste about the whole profession. And hearing from friends who are part time cops, even the training mentality of "Us Vs Them" instead of "Us serving/helping Them" is scary to me.
> 
> I'm sure there's good, responsible officers out there though and hopefully you're one of them, so nothing personal.


I see people say stuff like this a lot.I'm a police officer as well. Judging an entire profession because you watched some you tube videos is pretty ignorant. Especially for every bad cop there's countless good ones. If someone you tubed all the good things cops do in a day I'm sure your mindset would be different. The problem is you only see the bad. Reality is we risk our lives every day, and occasionally we die in the line of duty for a good cause.


----------



## monkey024 (Apr 6, 2010)

PheelGoodInc said:


> I see people say stuff like this a lot.I'm a police officer as well. Judging an entire profession because you watched some you tube videos is pretty ignorant. Especially for every bad cop there's countless good ones. If someone you tubed all the good things cops do in a day I'm sure your mindset would be different. The problem is you only see the bad. Reality is we risk our lives every day, and occasionally we die in the line of duty for a good cause.


I'm sorry but the mentality that MOST police officers have towards "Civilians," Is lacking in all aspects.

Having a run in with cops is usually a bad thing thats to be expected but besides those instances there are MANY instances where cops act well less than morale standing and this is not an isolated incident. 

I'm not putting down cops just due to me not caring at all for their profession and see them as just strangers...but the way that cops get away with certain things that "Civilians," Get taken down by as well as the whole "Ego," problems puts them in a very bad light for the population which is very prevalent now adays. 

EX: Women cop gets call of a hit and run, she speeds off to go help. Running a red light intersection without at least slowing down to give the other motorists time to stop and let her pass. Runs it and slams into another motorist. Find out later she has NO seatbelt on, and the motorist had I think a child in the car. 

What did she get? A fine, a suspension, maybe some jail time for assault with a deadly weapon? Negligence? 

Nothing but a slap on the wrist - PAID time off... 

When ''Police," Officers turn back into what they were suppose to be "Peace," Officers then people will start seeing them in a better light then what they do now since all they are would be glorified "Tax Collector Bullies."


----------



## monkey024 (Apr 6, 2010)

This is for a private message I go but cant send Pm's because of some dumb thing about having 50 posts before and I dont want to spam so I'll do it here.

Peerblock does what is basically sounds like...it blocks "Certain," Peers. 

The people that made peerblock have made lists to block out potential IP's that are specifically "Bad," For what we do which is download movies haha. 

Some IP's that "Seed," Are trackers to find out your IP and basically get you in trouble which is how they are finding people. 

Peerblock BLOCKS these IP's.

Yes peerblock is already set up just make sure you have it on when you start to torrent something and make sure HTTP says HTTP:Blocked. 

It should also say on the right side of HTTP how many IP's are actively being blocked right now while it's on..mine says like a billion.

You can also ADD certain lists to get even MORE protection...I added a couple.

To add a list go to list manager-ADD- and Add URL- Then add one of them that you think you might need...it also has the website to check out what the list do.

This should help with being caught downloading..I downloaded a 7.8gig file (BR-Ironman) and noone came knocking or a letter. 

Good luck need any more help just send a message...and again keep peerblock on when you torrent and when your done you can exit it out if you want.

Hope I dont get in trouble just for helping out people save money.


----------



## attention (Oct 18, 2006)

err... getting side tracked from this thread a bit arent we?

... but since we are here... 

Ive had my run in with the police... and IMHO, they are under paid and under valued. I suppose it depends where you live, but in my neck of the woods I have the utmost respect and admiration for em.

Ive been busted for stuff and pulled over & searched... but I always had it coming.

I haven't had a problem with cops for over 12 years now, just the occasional ticket... they are regular guys like you and me... they can f'up every once in a while too... give em a break. I honestly dont have the patience like they do... they do a rough job with rules binding them at every turn... I respect the badge.

...back to the thread...

People who dl'd stuff... 'know' when its stealing... just like people who speed 'know' that they are breaking the law. 

Sheesh, I dunno how people can try to justify it by saying that 'they are rich already, so its not bad'.
... basically you're saying its alright to take stuff from people who have more than you because you have less :sarcastic12:



monkey024 said:


> I'm sorry but the mentality that MOST police officers have towards "Civilians," Is lacking in all aspects.
> 
> Having a run in with cops is usually a bad thing thats to be expected but besides those instances there are MANY instances where cops act well less than morale standing and this is not an isolated incident.
> 
> ...


It must suck to live where u do... honestly.

The police & RCMP where I live are respectful and courteous... they integrate into the community and actively participate.

They are intimidating to some, but are actually very approachable.

My run ins with the police have been crappy, but its not as if I didnt deserve it... sheesh... you break the law, you gotta be ready to pay the piper.

I goto my kids school and talk with the constable there... hes a cool guy... when I was younger I thought they were tools, but I was an immature kid... now that Im older, I realize what kind of crap they gotta deal with day in and day out... and acknowledge the crap pay they get for it... yuck man, you couldnt pay me enuf dough to deal with that stuff 24/7... gotta give props to them... just gotta.


----------



## michelangelo (Feb 1, 2009)

I'm not one to second guess Dana, but this is a stupid albeit predictable move. 

Dana and Zuffa are only going to encourage MORE CAREFUL STREAMING. Streaming won't end, but those engaging in uploading and downloading will become more careful in the process in the future. 

Second, are there any other major sports which crack down on it's fan base in the same way that Dana and Zuffa are? This will only antagonize fans and create more resentment, as is evident in this thread. 

Internet geeks and hackers will continue to do whatever they want; this scare tactic will not work.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

PheelGoodInc said:


> I see people say stuff like this a lot.I'm a police officer as well. Judging an entire profession because you watched some you tube videos is pretty ignorant. Especially for every bad cop there's countless good ones. If someone you tubed all the good things cops do in a day I'm sure your mindset would be different. The problem is you only see the bad. Reality is we risk our lives every day, and occasionally we die in the line of duty for a good cause.


Well I hate to continue this tangent, but since I started I guess I'll respond one more time ... it's not just because of YouTube videos, it's because of what I've personally witnessed in the last few years. Just a few choice examples from my very own noodle:

*1)* We had some riots in Ames, IA a few years back ... started out with police out busting college house parties with underage drinking during a college festival day that was supposed to be "dry". Now IMO that's a stupid law to begin with, 21+ to drink (but 18 to go die in Iraq) and I bet every one here has broken it, but ok whatever. But it was the sheer brutality of how they dealt with the kid whose house it was ... like no warrant nothing, walk right into his house, drag him out, brutally slam his face on the car deck and cuff him, all while he was perfectly courteous and non-confrontational. I personally witnessed it.

Ok so whatever, we moved outta there and went to some bars since I was of age, but apparently with these kinds of incidents all over the place the resentment had spread and there was some small scale rioting a lot of places... like crowds and tear gas etc, but not like any shops etc. got broken into. 

But what that means for us is, we step outta the bars in a completely different part of town, and IMMEDIATELY this girl I knew (who happened to be downright beautiful, but that has nothing to do with the sympathy factor of course ) got MACED right in her face... poor thing was in agony and had to be carried home while rabid cops were running around us with batons and tear gas. Same thing happened all night, innocent people got maced and beaten up all over the place, just stepping out of normal business establishments. It's not like we were in the middle of the "rioting crowd" either, they were just way over the top.

I've seen worse repeat performances at any peaceful protest nowadays ... sometimes with flimsy use of "Agent Provocateurs" ... plain clothes cops mingling with the crowd and starting shit so the uniformed ones can bust people exercising their legal right to protest peacefully. Talk about 1984. 

*2) *Spent three years in Iowa City, and the cops were the most power tripping arrogant pricks I'd ever met ... I mean I'd seen them come over to people's places who reported theft, and they were trying to intimidate THEM, the victims. WTF? I get it, the training is to be intimidating to the bad guys, but you're supposed to be courteous to the general public who haven't done anything wrong. But no, apparently everyone's just scum criminal hiding something... probably illegal mp3s. 

*3) *This buddy of mine is a part time cop at University Heights (a suburb of Iowa City), he details me the criteria they have for "reasonable doubt / threat" etc. and it gets downright flimsy at times. The training just fuels paranoia IMO, like everyone's out to getcha so taze/shoot first, whereas in reality Iowa City's a town with barely any real crime ... mostly just drunk kids to intimidate and traffic stops to boss over.

Well that's just my two cents to go along with the vids I've seen. But yeah it wasn't always like that, we've had some real nice sherrifs back in the day too, I just feel like these departments are getting very aggressive training lately including the "terrorist threat" stuff, and very little of the "Serve and Protect" type stuff.


----------



## funnyMMA (Jul 30, 2010)

UFC will lose this one. Sure they might shut a couple of sites down but new ones will appear.

Worst part for UFC is that things like this are free marketing for pirating sites and it will probably *increase* piracy.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Well that's just my two cents to go along with the vids I've seen. But yeah it wasn't always like that, we've had some real nice sherrifs back in the day too, I just feel like these departments are getting very aggressive training lately including the "terrorist threat" stuff, and very little of the "Serve and Protect" type stuff.


You hit the nail right on the head. I've recently completed a class, 'Police Response to Critical Incidents,' which uses _Homeland Security for Policing_ as the textbook. The entire basis of the book is police moving from the 'community era', which is an era based on pleasing the community and making friends, to the more recent, 'homeland security era'. You can thank George Bush and 9/11 for it.

So, in a sense, you're correct. They are being trained to be 'harder', as compared to the 90's. But, as PGI mentioned, there are bad apples in every profession.

I'm curious, what do you think about soldiers serving in the military?


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

UrbanBounca said:


> You hit the nail right on the head. I've recently completed a class, 'Police Response to Critical Incidents,' which uses _Homeland Security for Policing_ as the textbook. The entire basis of the book is police moving from the 'community era', which is an era based on pleasing the community and making friends, to the more recent, 'homeland security era'. You can thank George Bush and 9/11 for it.
> 
> So, in a sense, you're correct. They are being trained to be 'harder', as compared to the 90's. But, as PGI mentioned, there are bad apples in every profession.
> 
> I'm curious, what do you think about soldiers serving in the military?


Well I think the same general thing I said for the changing police attitude goes for soldiers in the military; I think they mean well and they're doing us all a big favor putting their lives on the line for us... but at the same time they're being mislead and tricked lately. These endless wars for profit are a waste of their lives, and they're being forced to fight on hate where there is no clear enemy. 

And then there's stuff like the WikiLeaks thing showing that our same money is sometimes ending up financing the enemy through Pakistan.. these times aren't like WWII where the cause was clear. No wonder guys like Gen. McChrystal who was the guy who actually won half of Afghanistan couldn't take it and resigned.

And I don't think it's a GW vs. Obama thing either, I think as far as the general direction of things goes, both parties are bought and paid for at the top by the same corporations anyway ... the sincere guys in either party never make it outta the primaries. Really, both have been horrible lying warmongers IMO, and both have played their promises false.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Well I think the same general thing I said for the changing police attitude goes for soldiers in the military; I think they mean well and they're doing us all a big favor putting their lives on the line for us... but at the same time they're being mislead and tricked lately. These endless wars for profit are a waste of their lives, and they're being forced to fight on hate where there is no clear enemy.
> 
> And then there's stuff like the WikiLeaks thing showing that our same money is sometimes ending up financing the enemy through Pakistan.. well these times aren't like WWII where the cause was clear. No wonder guys like Gen. McChrystal who was the guy who actually won half of Afghanistan couldn't take it and resigned.


Well, my point was that many people scream and yell at police for being 'corrupt', but they praise the military for 'fighting for our freedom'. The military is doing the same thing as police, but on a much bigger scale. They also have 'bad apples', but they never seem to catch any flack.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

UrbanBounca said:


> Well, my point was that many people scream and yell at police for being 'corrupt', but they praise the military for 'fighting for our freedom'. The military is doing the same thing as police, but on a much bigger scale. They also have 'bad apples', but they never seem to catch any flack.


Well they do have more than their fair share of bad apples and do catch flak for it ... the Abu Ghraib torture comes to mind. 

But I agree, people do tend to care less about such incidents in their case because it's less personal when the people being brutalized are halfway across the world, and it's easier to justify it with the "they're the enemy" crap. Which IMO is bs and it's never ok to stoop to that level no matter what. 

But it's more personal when it happens to you and the people around you, and so the police get more hate. Either way, trampling people's rights is wrong, especially innocent people ... the constitution and freedoms are what made this country great. But since you're having this discussion and seem aware of the dangers, I'm glad we have a good cop out there :thumbsup:.


----------



## xRoxaz (May 6, 2010)

UrbanBounca said:


> Well, my point was that many people scream and yell at police for being 'corrupt', but they praise the military for 'fighting for our freedom'. The military is doing the same thing as police, but on a much bigger scale. They also have 'bad apples', but they never seem to catch any flack.


Yeah i agree, but the thing is the military is sent for the wrong reasons anyways, they wont be criticized because most of the society agrees to send troops to kill. They teach us in schools that violence doesn't solve problems, yet they go fight and kill.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> But it's more personal when it happens to you and the people around you, and so the police get more hate. Either way, trampling people's rights is wrong, especially innocent people ... the constitution and freedoms are what made this country great. But since you're having this discussion and seem aware of the dangers, I'm glad we have a good cop out there :thumbsup:.


Well, I'm not a cop, yet. But, I'm working on it. I want to be a cop because I enjoy helping people. It's not about having authority, and definately not the pay (police officers start at only around $31K around here), but I find fulfillment in helping people. There are a lot of things about police work that I _don't_ agree with, but IMO, police do much more good than bad.


----------



## RWMenace (Aug 10, 2008)

> "When people start going to jail, people will stop doing it," White said.


:laugh:


----------



## xRoxaz (May 6, 2010)

RWMenace said:


> :laugh:


yes just like all other crimes ppl stopped doing


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

monkey024 said:


> I'm sorry but the mentality that MOST police officers have towards "Civilians," Is lacking in all aspects.
> 
> Having a run in with cops is usually a bad thing thats to be expected but besides those instances there are MANY instances where cops act well less than morale standing and this is not an isolated incident.


Yes there are. But I can personally guarantee you for every once incident that moral standing is lacking, theres over 1000 that go completely un-noticed. Think about how many cops there are in the united states. On average (at least for our department) we go on about 25-30 calls a day per person. Only once in a great while have I seen power abused. I'm not justifying it. But, I am saying it's not as often as you are making it seem.



> I'm not putting down cops just due to me not caring at all for their profession and see them as just strangers...but the way that cops get away with certain things that "Civilians," Get taken down by as well as the whole "Ego," problems puts them in a very bad light for the population which is very prevalent now adays.


Keep in mind we deal the worst of the worst... ever day. People and crimes that you've probably only ever seen in movies. People that you have probably never dealt with in your life.

We have to show dominance and control in every situation we go to. If we don't it could mean our lives. A lot of times it's tough to switch from dealing with some gangster who just shot someone, to a pure victim who still has an attitude. We're not perfect. But I promise you I do my best to protect and serve... as do the vast majority of my co-workers.



> EX: Women cop gets call of a hit and run, she speeds off to go help. Running a red light intersection without at least slowing down to give the other motorists time to stop and let her pass. Runs it and slams into another motorist. Find out later she has NO seatbelt on, and the motorist had I think a child in the car.


I say this at work a lot. There's three sides to every story. Your side, my side, and somewhere in the middle is the truth. The fact is you don't know the circumstances of the call, or what the Officers mindset was at the time.

What kind of hit and run was it? If there was an injury involved you have a felony, and should get there as fast as possible (obviously with due regard to public safety). Police Officers (at least in Ca) are exempt from wearing their seatbelts in the line of duty for safety reasons. This is a whole different story I can explain if you would like. But I won't unless you want me to.



> What did she get? A fine, a suspension, maybe some jail time for assault with a deadly weapon? Negligence?
> 
> Nothing but a slap on the wrist - PAID time off...


Assault with a deadly weapon for getting in a car accident!? Really!? I highly suggest you look up what that means. An Officer got in a car *accident* because she was going somewhere to help someone else and you want her to do jail time? How does that make sense to you?

I would also like to know what the "slap on the wrist" punishment is. As someone who's had my fair share of punishments in the past, I've never heard of that.



> When ''Police," Officers turn back into what they were suppose to be "Peace," Officers then people will start seeing them in a better light then what they do now since all they are would be glorified "Tax Collector Bullies."


No offense, but this is a very un-educated view on the job. I wish I could take you for a ride-a-long with me for a couple days. I'm sure it would change your mind.

FYI my city averages about 12 homicides a year. Thats roughly one a month for a 7 square mile city. I wish I could be a "Tax collector bully" and work for the IRS. That would be a lot safer.



Liddellianenko said:


> Well I hate to continue this tangent, but since I started I guess I'll respond one more time ... it's not just because of YouTube videos, it's because of what I've personally witnessed in the last few years. Just a few choice examples from my very own noodle:
> 
> *1)* We had some riots in Ames, IA a few years back ... started out with police out busting college house parties with underage drinking during a college festival day that was supposed to be "dry". Now IMO that's a stupid law to begin with, 21+ to drink (but 18 to go die in Iraq) and I bet every one here has broken it, but ok whatever. But it was the sheer brutality of how they dealt with the kid whose house it was ... like no warrant nothing, walk right into his house, drag him out, brutally slam his face on the car deck and cuff him, all while he was perfectly courteous and non-confrontational. I personally witnessed it.


Like I said, there's three sides to every story. I'm not calling you a liar but at least in CA the way you make this sound is HIGHLY illegal on our part. You can't enter a residence without a warrant or probable cause that a crime is being committed which warrants your entry. Probably cause is not merely suspicion either. You need a lot more than that legally.




> Ok so whatever, we moved outta there and went to some bars since I was of age, but apparently with these kinds of incidents all over the place the resentment had spread and there was some small scale rioting a lot of places... like crowds and tear gas etc, but not like any shops etc. got broken into.
> 
> But what that means for us is, we step outta the bars in a completely different part of town, and IMMEDIATELY this girl I knew (who happened to be downright beautiful, but that has nothing to do with the sympathy factor of course ) got MACED right in her face... poor thing was in agony and had to be carried home while rabid cops were running around us with batons and tear gas. Same thing happened all night, innocent people got maced and beaten up all over the place, just stepping out of normal business establishments. It's not like we were in the middle of the "rioting crowd" either, they were just way over the top.


I've never heard of this, and I'm sure it didn't go down just like that. With the way the media and camera phones are now-a-days you couldn't get away with large scale beatings / macing anyone at random. Your friend probably did get maced without deserving it, but at the same time you don't know the situation the cops were dealing with. You probably don't want to know either because of what your friend experienced.



> I've seen worse repeat performances at any peaceful protest nowadays ... sometimes with flimsy use of "Agent Provocateurs" ... plain clothes cops mingling with the crowd and starting shit so the uniformed ones can bust people exercising their legal right to protest peacefully. Talk about 1984.


I've never once heard of this. Could you back this up with any kind of evidence?



> *2) *Spent three years in Iowa City, and the cops were the most power tripping arrogant pricks I'd ever met ... I mean I'd seen them come over to people's places who reported theft, and they were trying to intimidate THEM, the victims. WTF? I get it, the training is to be intimidating to the bad guys, but you're supposed to be courteous to the general public who haven't done anything wrong. But no, apparently everyone's just scum criminal hiding something... probably illegal mp3s.


Not all cops are like this. I'm willing to bet my city has far more crime than Iowa. Our residents are very happy with us as well.



> *3) *This buddy of mine is a part time cop at University Heights (a suburb of Iowa City), he details me the criteria they have for "reasonable doubt / threat" etc. and it gets downright flimsy at times. The training just fuels paranoia IMO, like everyone's out to getcha so taze/shoot first, whereas in reality Iowa City's a town with barely any real crime ... mostly just drunk kids to intimidate and traffic stops to boss over.


You do have to have the mindset that everyone is out to get you. That is taught from the academy. If you don't have that mindset it could mean your life or your partners lives. Taze / shoot first is completely ridiculous. With the way internal affairs and the media head hunts, you won't last a day using that policy. Everything you do you have to not only justify on paper, but justify in front of a damn good lawyer who's trying to rip you apart on the stand. I've seen fully justified shootings be made look like murder with a good lawyer. Taze / shoot first won't just get you fired, it will land you in jail.



> Well that's just my two cents to go along with the vids I've seen. But yeah it wasn't always like that, we've had some real nice sherrifs back in the day too, I just feel like these departments are getting very aggressive training lately including the "terrorist threat" stuff, and very little of the "Serve and Protect" type stuff.


We don't get much training on terrorist threats at all. Thats more of the FBI / homeland security / higher government level who handles that stuff. We need to be aggressive when it's called for, and a lot of times its tough to just turn the aggression off within the 5 minutes it takes you to get to the next call. It's not an easy job by any means.

----


I know that was a long post. I just don't like it when I see people say things like "**** the Police" and dis-respect a job they know next to nothing about. This job is something that is very unique, and until you're in that black and white with the gun belt on, you'll never understand what cops go through day to day. Have you ever seen a person die right in front of you who was shot in the neck? Have you ever seen bodies on fire burning right in front of you? Those bodies eventually were so charred they had to use the teeth and dental records to identify them. Have you ever seen a kids face when you tell them that their parent was murdered? I have... and it's not easy. I don't care if you don't like the police. I know I at least deserve respect.


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Nov 3, 2009)

> I've never once heard of this. Could you back this up with any kind of evidence?


You've never heard of the use of agent provocateurs...are you serious? Here is an example in Montreal. Don't say, "well, that's Canada" as it has, does and will continue to be used in the States (I have provided a reference below). 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1nHvvkzvA


And here is a link to the Quebec police admitting and defending their actions.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/24/ot-montebello-sq-070824.html

Now here are some examples from the USA you can investigate:

"In the United States, the COINTELPRO program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had FBI agents pose as political radicals to disrupt the activities of radical political groups in the U.S., such as the Black Panthers, Ku Klux Klan, and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. New York City police officers were accused of acting as agents provocateurs during protests against the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City.
Denver police officers were also found to have used undercover detectives to instigate violence against police during the 2008 Democratic National Convention. This ultimately resulted in the accidental use of chemical agents against their own men."


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

Mr. Sparkle said:


> You've never heard of the use of agent provocateurs...are you serious? Here is an example in Montreal. Don't say, "well, that's Canada" as it has, does and will continue to be used in the States (I have provided a reference below).
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1nHvvkzvA
> 
> ...




Uhm... your first two links are to other countries and the last quote is talking about the FBI. The part where it talks about Denver police it says that they had chemical agents used against THEM.

Like I said, I has never heard of it until now. But this is FAR from an every day or even somewhat regular occurrence... especially in the united stats. Thats like saying: "I hate cops because once in Denver and a couple times in other countries they provoked violence against protesters."

I just wish that the people who are so outspoken against cops are half as much outspoken against the murderers, gangsters, rapist, robbers, and burglars we deal with. Is that too much to ask?

Edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

LOL. Straight from your source:

By country

United States

In the United States, the COINTELPRO program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had FBI agents pose as political radicals to disrupt the activities of radical political groups in the U.S., such as the Black Panthers, Ku Klux Klan, and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.

New York City police officers were accused of acting as agents provocateurs during protests against the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City.[4]

Denver police officers were also found to have used undercover detectives to instigate violence against police during the 2008 Democratic National Convention. This ultimately resulted in the accidental use of chemical agents against their own men

--

The United states has TWO records in all its history of Police Officers doing this!? Rest was FBI. Wow. That's definitely an issue and clearly a reason to hate all cops! :sarcastic12:


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

These posts are edifying and meritorious indeed, but we're getting a little off topic.


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

swpthleg said:


> These posts are edifying and meritorious indeed, but we're getting a little off topic.


I've said my peace. I'm back on track... and thanks for the edit.


----------



## Freiermuth (Nov 19, 2006)

I think they are doing some work towards blocking the streamers but at the end of the day, its not a good ROI....people who stream ain't gonna buy, just wait a day and DL it.


----------

