6 ms·

Ustream hands over user IPs to UFC

32 points by ujeezy 16y ago

jim_h 16y ago
The people watching those streams were probably not going to pay to watch it anyways. They didn't lost much profit. If anything they probably gained more viewers who might pay to see the next event.
talbina 16y ago
I wonder what Justin.tv would have done.
- ujeezy 16y ago
  Justin.tv was also subpoenaed, but hadn't gotten a comment back to NewTeeVee when that post was published. I'm curious as well.
- noarchy 16y ago
  My guess would be that Justin.tv would be among the first to give in. They've been pretty militant about taking down sports streams, particularly for PPV events.
mistermann 16y ago
Watching UFC over streaming sucks big time, but I've done it as paying ~$50 when its just me watching is just too much. I wonder what kinda revenues they'd make if they did their own low quality streaming for say $10 - this way, if you have friends over, you'll opt for the $50 HD version, but for a single person, $10 is reasonable. I'd bet there's a huge segment of the market they are missing out on.
- rewind 16y ago
  The UFC has contracts in place with their PPV partners. They aren't legally able to undercut them by running cheap streams.
  - RK 16y ago
    Why wouldn't the PPV partners get some of the streaming money?
    - rewind 16y ago
      I have no idea, but if their business model is selling PPVs for $50 and keeping $25, I don't think they'd be thrilled at the prospect of the UFC selling streams for $10 and giving them $5. My guess is that it's not the UFC that has a problem with it. I'm sure they'd be happy to throw a $30 stream on the Web and keep all the revenue. But keep in mind that they would be nothing without their PPV partners, and they will need them for a long time still, so there are a lot of issues. Also, keep in mind that the PPV partners are in the same group as the music industry, newspapers, book publishers, etc. They are going to try to hold on to this model as long as they can instead of embracing the new one that's obviously coming at them a lot faster than they'd like. The UFC might not like it, but they still need to play their game for the foreseeable future. I'm just speculating though.
- jim_h 16y ago
  If the viewer (of the stream) got interested enough and got 4 other friends interested in UFC, they would only need to throw in ~$10 each to watch the next event. It's probably not all that fun to watch a live event over a laggy stream with friends. Seems like a plausible situation and a win for UFC.
jacoblyles 16y ago
There's actually a cottage industry that's popped up selling discount PPVs. They sell a low-quality internet stream for $5 or so. From an economic perspective, it's an interesting phenomenon. You can see the demand that fails to clear at the market price. For a sport still struggling for a cultural foothold, the aggressive anti-piracy actions of the UFC may eventually do it more harm than good. The pay per views are an expensive product, and the free cable shows aren't available in as many homes as the internet. In the long run the promotion would almost certainly benefit from being more open with their footage, especially that of older fights, until Georges St. Pierre is as popular a name as Lebron James.
- ja27 16y ago
  They do at least stream all the back episodes of The Ultimate Fighter for free.
niekmaas 16y ago
Even though I understand that the UFC wants to protect their revenues I'm disappointed by their actions. I don't watch UFC streams but I do watch soccer streams when my favorite teams in The Netherlands. I do this because I live in the United States and watching an illegal stream is the only way possible for me to watch those games. If this is the beginning of the end for illegal sports streams than a lot of people living abroad are going to be hurt by it.
- noarchy 16y ago
  I have a similar problem when wanting to watch pro cycling events, admittedly a bit of a niche market. Living in North America, you're pretty much out of luck, except when the Tour de France is running. Most of the pirate streams for cycling are Eurosport streams. I've seen that Eurosport, along with a few other networks, offer paid streaming, but they don't want my money since I live in North America. So this will keep me hunting for streams wherever I can find them.
kierank 16y ago
I'm surprised Ustream capitulated so easily. In the UK release of IP addresses would have required a court order afaik.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- ScottWhigham 16y ago
  I don't think it is 'capitulating'. UStream's service was being used against its TOS by these users whose actions threatened the health of UStream. UStream can't afford a $500k-$2m legal battle with {UFC | WWE | whoever does PPV}. This is win-win-lose for UStream IMO: * Win #1 - users who were causing harm to the company are no longer allowed in * Win #2 - UStream has served notice that they won't allow this sort of behavior. * Lose - a small percentage of people who are not really the target market for UStream's advertisers and who actually read the press release are put off by this action

32 points by ujeezy 16y ago

jim_h 16y ago

The people watching those streams were probably not going to pay to watch it anyways. They didn't lost much profit. If anything they probably gained more viewers who might pay to see the next event.

talbina 16y ago

I wonder what Justin.tv would have done.

ujeezy 16y ago
Justin.tv was also subpoenaed, but hadn't gotten a comment back to NewTeeVee when that post was published. I'm curious as well.
noarchy 16y ago
My guess would be that Justin.tv would be among the first to give in. They've been pretty militant about taking down sports streams, particularly for PPV events.

mistermann 16y ago

Watching UFC over streaming sucks big time, but I've done it as paying ~$50 when its just me watching is just too much. I wonder what kinda revenues they'd make if they did their own low quality streaming for say $10 - this way, if you have friends over, you'll opt for the $50 HD version, but for a single person, $10 is reasonable. I'd bet there's a huge segment of the market they are missing out on.

rewind 16y ago
The UFC has contracts in place with their PPV partners. They aren't legally able to undercut them by running cheap streams.
- RK 16y ago
  Why wouldn't the PPV partners get some of the streaming money?
  - rewind 16y ago
    I have no idea, but if their business model is selling PPVs for $50 and keeping $25, I don't think they'd be thrilled at the prospect of the UFC selling streams for $10 and giving them $5. My guess is that it's not the UFC that has a problem with it. I'm sure they'd be happy to throw a $30 stream on the Web and keep all the revenue. But keep in mind that they would be nothing without their PPV partners, and they will need them for a long time still, so there are a lot of issues. Also, keep in mind that the PPV partners are in the same group as the music industry, newspapers, book publishers, etc. They are going to try to hold on to this model as long as they can instead of embracing the new one that's obviously coming at them a lot faster than they'd like. The UFC might not like it, but they still need to play their game for the foreseeable future. I'm just speculating though.
jim_h 16y ago
If the viewer (of the stream) got interested enough and got 4 other friends interested in UFC, they would only need to throw in ~$10 each to watch the next event. It's probably not all that fun to watch a live event over a laggy stream with friends. Seems like a plausible situation and a win for UFC.

jacoblyles 16y ago

There's actually a cottage industry that's popped up selling discount PPVs. They sell a low-quality internet stream for $5 or so. From an economic perspective, it's an interesting phenomenon. You can see the demand that fails to clear at the market price. For a sport still struggling for a cultural foothold, the aggressive anti-piracy actions of the UFC may eventually do it more harm than good. The pay per views are an expensive product, and the free cable shows aren't available in as many homes as the internet. In the long run the promotion would almost certainly benefit from being more open with their footage, especially that of older fights, until Georges St. Pierre is as popular a name as Lebron James.

ja27 16y ago
They do at least stream all the back episodes of The Ultimate Fighter for free.

niekmaas 16y ago

Even though I understand that the UFC wants to protect their revenues I'm disappointed by their actions. I don't watch UFC streams but I do watch soccer streams when my favorite teams in The Netherlands. I do this because I live in the United States and watching an illegal stream is the only way possible for me to watch those games. If this is the beginning of the end for illegal sports streams than a lot of people living abroad are going to be hurt by it.

noarchy 16y ago
I have a similar problem when wanting to watch pro cycling events, admittedly a bit of a niche market. Living in North America, you're pretty much out of luck, except when the Tour de France is running. Most of the pirate streams for cycling are Eurosport streams. I've seen that Eurosport, along with a few other networks, offer paid streaming, but they don't want my money since I live in North America. So this will keep me hunting for streams wherever I can find them.

kierank 16y ago

I'm surprised Ustream capitulated so easily. In the UK release of IP addresses would have required a court order afaik.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
ScottWhigham 16y ago
I don't think it is 'capitulating'. UStream's service was being used against its TOS by these users whose actions threatened the health of UStream. UStream can't afford a $500k-$2m legal battle with {UFC | WWE | whoever does PPV}. This is win-win-lose for UStream IMO: * Win #1 - users who were causing harm to the company are no longer allowed in * Win #2 - UStream has served notice that they won't allow this sort of behavior. * Lose - a small percentage of people who are not really the target market for UStream's advertisers and who actually read the press release are put off by this action