4 ms·
> The broadcasting of football matches in public places without a paid licence cost the game an estimated 150 million euros (£132m; $177m) a year, it said. Sou
by glitcher 8y ago
> The broadcasting of football matches in public places without a paid licence cost the game an estimated 150 million euros (£132m; $177m) a year, it said.
Sounds suspiciously familiar to the way questionable data have been represented about money lost due to piracy in other industries (software, movies, music). I am very skeptical about those types of claims.
- oh_sigh 8y agoThat's a bad one I agree. I think a better argument for enforcing their rights is the fact that if they don't, they are effectively punishing establishments that actually do pay to license the broadcast.
- admax88q 8y ago> I think a better argument for enforcing their rights I don't think anyone is arguing that they shouldn't be enforcing their rights. But that they shouldn't use use people's phones as listening devices to do so.
- oh_sigh 8y agoYes, but OP took umbrage to how the estimated losses were calculated, and a statement like: > The broadcasting of football matches in public places without a paid licence cost the game an estimated 150 euros (£132; $177) a year, it said. would not be anywhere near as convincing as a statement with monetary values multiplied by a million. Focusing on the unfairness of what unlicensed streamers are doing avoids that issue.
- Quarrelsome 8y agocould I as a fan not use a similar justification to tap phones of executives and agents to locate cases of gouging and fraud to prevent "costing the fans an estimated x million euros" through inflated ticket prices?