5 ms·

When my son was younger he liked Paw Patrol, so we bought several season of Paw Patrol, I now have a duaghter that is the same age and likes Paw Patrol. I pulle

When my son was younger he liked Paw Patrol, so we bought several season of Paw Patrol, I now have a duaghter that is the same age and likes Paw Patrol. I pulled up my handy Youtube subscription, went into my bought movies and found out that the Paw Patrol season I had bought and paid for was no longer available because it was now only available on KidsToons+ or PreimerParenting or some other bull hockey like that. I decided at that point if they can yank away media I had already paid for on a whim, we no long had a contract. Now I am working on buying myself a fine sailing ship, and unfurling the jolly roger to sail the high seas seeking booty and plunder and buried treasure.

gamblor956 3y ago
YouTube does not remove purchased videos, those are yours to keep watching for as long as YouTube retains the right to keep distributing them (which is separate from the right to rent/sell them; generally the rightsholder agrees to indefinite distribution rights for sales as a basic contractual provision since it would otherwise render the "sales" right meaningless). Note that it is the exceptional case that YouTube would lose the right to show Paw Patrol to purchasers. Given the popularity of the show, something like that would have made national news. Politicians would be talking about it right now.
- xp84 3y ago
  All that sounds reasonable, but you have much more faith than I do that the studios won’t just do whatever they want anyway. This is the same YouTube which will demonetize or take down any content for having seven seconds of a song overheard in the background just because the rightsholder asks them to. YouTube’s very existence is only at the mercy of content rightsholders to not sue them into oblivion like they almost did 15 years ago. In my experience, those entities will do whatever the fuck they want and YouTube will happily comply.
  - gamblor956 3y ago
    I have faith that large corporations will not openly do things that would cause them billions of dollars in direct damages and billions of dollars in reputational harm, in addition to the criminal charges they would be facing in the E.U. for such an act. Simply put, the story doesn't make any sense, and a deep dive into the Paw Patrol reddit forums didn't reveal any other person having this issue.
    - xp84 3y ago
      Nobody’s paying billions of dollars because they made someone’s TV show disappear. If anyone sued over it class-action the end result would be a small settlement paid in the form of coupons (and yes, money for lawyer fees). And how did you know anyone in EU was affected? Anyway I have no way of knowing if that person had that exact thing happen, or if he forgot which account it was bought under, but it’s hilarious to suggest there are ironclad legal protections here for us mere “licensees” of IP. Read the terms and conditions on any site that “sells” content to find all the giant loopholes they created for themselves, including the final “we reserve the right to change this whole deal without notice at any time and you agree that that is okay and waive your rights to sue.”
rendaw 3y ago
Bandcamp does this too, which surprises me. Individual record labels can yank releases whenever, and bandcamp purges it so thoroughly I'd think they were trying to convince me I never bought it in the first place. Not in my collection, not in my purchase history, etc. They don't mention this happening on their "where did my music go FAQ" page. I only confirmed it by searching my email history to find the receipt. Sure, there's stolen music, but some record labels just delete and recreate the product pages for no reason (or maybe to prevent purchasing individual tracks? not sure why that would require a replacement). There's another option, to mark a release as private, where purchasers can still view/download their music.
stuaxo 3y ago
Do you even get a refund ?
op00to 3y ago
Kids TV episode naming ESPECIALLY Paw Patrol is horribly inconsistent when sailing the seas, which leads to child revolt when they want to see a specific episode and the file names are all wrong.
westpfelia 3y ago
Its a good time to get into it with Black Friday deals on usenet providers. Can snag year long subscriptions on the cheap.
- sva_ 3y ago
  Or just pay $5 to Mullvad per month and torrent like everyone else.
  - skyyler 3y ago
    Usenet is so nice though. Once you try it, it's kinda hard to go back to caring about seed ratios and whatnot.
  - russelg 3y ago
    Not good for us seeders anymore due to port forwarding being dropped.
  - JamesSwift 3y ago
    As the other commenter mentioned, they dont support port forwarding which kills torrenting ratios. Share ratios are extremely important for private trackers, which is where almost all the value in torrents are. Its _much_ more straigtforward to get a couple usenet indexers, hook up a VPN (or dont even bother since its over SSL anyways), and call it a day with full internet bandwidth available and no fuss about share ratios.
    - GoblinSlayer 3y ago
      You can't have nonzero share ratio on private trackers anyway, because seedboxes will inevitably steal all your leechers.
overtomanu 3y ago
plunder and buried treasure == pirate bay?
- beebeepka 3y ago
  Pianola Bot: Delilah runs a house of ill repute in back. Fry: "Ill"? You mean a hospital? Pianola Bot: I mean a cathouse. Fry: A pet store? Pianola Bot: A brothel. Fry: A soup kitchen?! Pianola Bot: Yeah... A soup kitchen.
AlexandrB 3y ago
Consumer rights have taken a huge hit with digital distribution. For example, it's not possible to resell most "digital goods" as you could with physical media. Losing access to stuff you paid for with no recourse is another example. It's closer to a rental than a "purchase".
- gustavus 3y ago
  And it's closer to independent backup than "piracy"
  - KMag 3y ago
    Are you implying there aren't masses of roving scoundrels lying in wait on the high seas, just waiting for cargo ships with holds full of DVDs to wonder by? Certainly, the very word "piracy", the terrorism of its day (the days when "piracy" was first used to describe copyright infringement), wasn't used to get sympathy and support for tyrannical measures, was it?
    - rogual 3y ago
      I had always wondered, if they were going to try to give copyright infringement the name of a worse crime to dissuadde people, why would they pick something as cool and popular as PIRATES? I had no idea the usage was so old. It makes sense now, thanks!
      - KMag 3y ago
        It dates at least from the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Article 12 uses the word "piracy".) I presume the Berne Convention wasn't the first hyperbolic use of "piracy" to describe copying without permission. The Barbary Pirates were still somewhat operating until France took Algiers in 1830. I'm not sure which other pirates would have been around after 1830, but the real threat of piracy was within living memory in 1886. Murder and plunder on the high seas is so much more exciting to claim you're fighting, rather than admit you're cracking down on someone in a basement with a printing press.

gamblor956 3y ago

YouTube does not remove purchased videos, those are yours to keep watching for as long as YouTube retains the right to keep distributing them (which is separate from the right to rent/sell them; generally the rightsholder agrees to indefinite distribution rights for sales as a basic contractual provision since it would otherwise render the "sales" right meaningless). Note that it is the exceptional case that YouTube would lose the right to show Paw Patrol to purchasers. Given the popularity of the show, something like that would have made national news. Politicians would be talking about it right now.

xp84 3y ago
All that sounds reasonable, but you have much more faith than I do that the studios won’t just do whatever they want anyway. This is the same YouTube which will demonetize or take down any content for having seven seconds of a song overheard in the background just because the rightsholder asks them to. YouTube’s very existence is only at the mercy of content rightsholders to not sue them into oblivion like they almost did 15 years ago. In my experience, those entities will do whatever the fuck they want and YouTube will happily comply.
- gamblor956 3y ago
  I have faith that large corporations will not openly do things that would cause them billions of dollars in direct damages and billions of dollars in reputational harm, in addition to the criminal charges they would be facing in the E.U. for such an act. Simply put, the story doesn't make any sense, and a deep dive into the Paw Patrol reddit forums didn't reveal any other person having this issue.
  - xp84 3y ago
    Nobody’s paying billions of dollars because they made someone’s TV show disappear. If anyone sued over it class-action the end result would be a small settlement paid in the form of coupons (and yes, money for lawyer fees). And how did you know anyone in EU was affected? Anyway I have no way of knowing if that person had that exact thing happen, or if he forgot which account it was bought under, but it’s hilarious to suggest there are ironclad legal protections here for us mere “licensees” of IP. Read the terms and conditions on any site that “sells” content to find all the giant loopholes they created for themselves, including the final “we reserve the right to change this whole deal without notice at any time and you agree that that is okay and waive your rights to sue.”

rendaw 3y ago

Bandcamp does this too, which surprises me. Individual record labels can yank releases whenever, and bandcamp purges it so thoroughly I'd think they were trying to convince me I never bought it in the first place. Not in my collection, not in my purchase history, etc. They don't mention this happening on their "where did my music go FAQ" page. I only confirmed it by searching my email history to find the receipt. Sure, there's stolen music, but some record labels just delete and recreate the product pages for no reason (or maybe to prevent purchasing individual tracks? not sure why that would require a replacement). There's another option, to mark a release as private, where purchasers can still view/download their music.

stuaxo 3y ago

Do you even get a refund ?

op00to 3y ago

Kids TV episode naming ESPECIALLY Paw Patrol is horribly inconsistent when sailing the seas, which leads to child revolt when they want to see a specific episode and the file names are all wrong.

westpfelia 3y ago

Its a good time to get into it with Black Friday deals on usenet providers. Can snag year long subscriptions on the cheap.

sva_ 3y ago
Or just pay $5 to Mullvad per month and torrent like everyone else.
- skyyler 3y ago
  Usenet is so nice though. Once you try it, it's kinda hard to go back to caring about seed ratios and whatnot.
- russelg 3y ago
  Not good for us seeders anymore due to port forwarding being dropped.
- JamesSwift 3y ago
  As the other commenter mentioned, they dont support port forwarding which kills torrenting ratios. Share ratios are extremely important for private trackers, which is where almost all the value in torrents are. Its _much_ more straigtforward to get a couple usenet indexers, hook up a VPN (or dont even bother since its over SSL anyways), and call it a day with full internet bandwidth available and no fuss about share ratios.
  - GoblinSlayer 3y ago
    You can't have nonzero share ratio on private trackers anyway, because seedboxes will inevitably steal all your leechers.

overtomanu 3y ago

plunder and buried treasure == pirate bay?

beebeepka 3y ago
Pianola Bot: Delilah runs a house of ill repute in back. Fry: "Ill"? You mean a hospital? Pianola Bot: I mean a cathouse. Fry: A pet store? Pianola Bot: A brothel. Fry: A soup kitchen?! Pianola Bot: Yeah... A soup kitchen.

AlexandrB 3y ago

Consumer rights have taken a huge hit with digital distribution. For example, it's not possible to resell most "digital goods" as you could with physical media. Losing access to stuff you paid for with no recourse is another example. It's closer to a rental than a "purchase".

gustavus 3y ago
And it's closer to independent backup than "piracy"
- KMag 3y ago
  Are you implying there aren't masses of roving scoundrels lying in wait on the high seas, just waiting for cargo ships with holds full of DVDs to wonder by? Certainly, the very word "piracy", the terrorism of its day (the days when "piracy" was first used to describe copyright infringement), wasn't used to get sympathy and support for tyrannical measures, was it?
  - rogual 3y ago
    I had always wondered, if they were going to try to give copyright infringement the name of a worse crime to dissuadde people, why would they pick something as cool and popular as PIRATES? I had no idea the usage was so old. It makes sense now, thanks!
    - KMag 3y ago
      It dates at least from the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Article 12 uses the word "piracy".) I presume the Berne Convention wasn't the first hyperbolic use of "piracy" to describe copying without permission. The Barbary Pirates were still somewhat operating until France took Algiers in 1830. I'm not sure which other pirates would have been around after 1830, but the real threat of piracy was within living memory in 1886. Murder and plunder on the high seas is so much more exciting to claim you're fighting, rather than admit you're cracking down on someone in a basement with a printing press.