[SirCastor]

Okay folks. Before I get into the discussion here, I want to be clear what this thread is and is not about.
This thread is about Television shows available OTA (Over the Air) being distributed over p2p networks.

This thread is not about films available only in theaters or on cable television, nor is it about music, etc.

That out of the way, my base question is apparent in the Title: Is sharing of broadcast television shows over p2p networks wrong?
The basis of what may be considered wrong (IMO) should be taken from the standpoint of a work requiring a fee to view otherwise. For instance, I consider downloading theatrical release films or ripped DVDs to be wrong because my viewing for free is (likely) denying my viewing for a fee. If I watch a movie without paying for it, I will likely not pay to go see it in a theater. While this is not always the case, and it excludes situations like libraries, the fundamental idea exists there. For me, there aren't movies that I want to see that I'm not willing to pay for (Whether it be a dollar at the dollar theater or $8 at the regular one, checked out from the library paid by tax dollars, or a buck at Redbox).

In the case of broadcast television, there is a hope, but not a requirement that you will be exposed to the ads. You're not paying the network for the privilege to view. It is easy enough to get up when the ads come on, or ignore/mute them. And Tivo has created an acknowledged market for timeshifting, just as the VCR did two decades ago.

So the question comes up to how it is wrong? I'm not arguing for a specific side at this point, just looking for some discussion about it. I'm not making an argument for legality, just searching for opinions on the matter. If it were cable, that'd be a different situation. Since this is freely available to anyone with an antennae, what are the ethical/moral dilemmas in terms of free, online distributions? I'm also interested in the sub-questions involved. If wrong, what is it that makes it wrong? Is it watching the show while not watching the commercials? Is it time-shifting the show? Is it distributing the show (and in that, is it okay to share among friends, but not strangers?)

thanks

[PaperNotes]

No it's not OK. If you download anything you should be duly emptied of all your life saving so execs can give it to themselves as a bonus at Xmas after they butt rape you and take away all reason for living.

[Dakarʒ]

Odd, I thought I made a post here, but it didn't show up.

[ort888]

Because making TV shows costs money. They make a profit by selling ads and selling DVDs. P2P distribution removes any capability to make profit from their hard work and creativity. Is it really that hard to understand?

[starman]

It's wrong. See you on page 17.

[Dakarʒ]

Anyway, what I typed up the first time is there's probably some law against redistributing the show, even if it available over the air for free. Whether that makes sense... isn't of any concern to law makers or corporate bigwigs.

Edit: Out of curiosity, are we talking about an unedited broadcast (replete with ads) or an edited one more commonly found on P2P (So I hear...)

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

Anyway, what I typed up the first time is there's probably some law against redistributing the show, even if it available over the air for free. Whether that makes sense... isn't of any concern to law makers or corporate bigwigs.

Edit: Out of curiosity, are we talking about an unedited broadcast (replete with ads) or an edited one more commonly found on P2P (So I hear...)

Oddly enough since both the show and all the commercials are all copyrighted, you would technically violate more rules (well the same copyright rule, but more times) by uploading a show complete with commercials.

I think I'll ask my cyberlaw professor tomorrow to see if this is correct.

[SirCastor]

We're talking about all kinds of P2P sitautions. That's the question involved. The way television shows are paid for is changing as well. Suppose an advertiser pays for product placement within a television show rather than for an ad between commercial breaks? That advertiser gets his money's worth (perhaps even moreso considering the audience is greater than the anticipated 'live' viewing) and the network has their show paid for.

Does including the ads make it more acceptable? What is the difference between a version with no ads (whether they're skipped using a smart technology on a VCR or Tivo, or they are edited out) and simply walking away from, muting ads during a broadcast?

[Dakarʒ]

Originally Posted by SSharon 

Oddly enough since both the show and all the commercials are all copyrighted, you would technically violate more rules (well the same copyright rule, but more times) by uploading a show complete with commercials.

Ah, the world we live in.

Originally Posted by SirCastor 

What is the difference between a version with no ads (whether they're skipped using a smart technology on a VCR or Tivo, or they are edited out) and simply walking away from, muting ads during a broadcast?

The amount conscious effort required, I imagine.

[reader50]

Skipping the legal viewpoint and just addressing the moral one, I suspect TV show redistribution would be OK if the ads were included. Yes, the commercials are copyrighted. But they WANT those ads to be distributed as widely as possible. The commercial owners would likely only use their (C) to prevent competitors from reusing the footage to mock them in competing ads.

[Doofy]

Combination of factors here.

1) Because we get the shows so late (i.e. we're still on series one of Heroes), if I didn't torrent my favourite shows I'd more than likely have them spoiled by someone on the 'net.

2) I pay my TV licence and the shows will be on eventually. So I'm effectively just time-shifting. Like a VCR, but the other way in time.

3) Advertising is pointless to me, since I'm not affected by it at all. I'm extremely eclectic in my tastes and like what I like (for example, there's no point in advertising towels to me unless you're an Egyptian craftsman who probably can't afford TV advertising).

4) I'm something of a collector. If I like a TV show, I'll buy the box set of each season (which, due to point 1, will be about two years after the season first airs in the US).

5) Advertising in TV shows is paid for by purchase of the product whether I watch the ads or not. So if I am going to buy something which is advertised, I've paid for the ads (and thus the show).

These factors combined makes me cool with torrenting TV shows.

[olePigeon]

If you're already paying for cable TV, I see nothing wrong with downloading television shows that you've already payed for. It's no different than using a Tivo, except you didn't buy a Tivo.

I can cope with the commercials between shows, not a problem, but I draw the line when they start doing commercials during the show. I'll get my shows commercial free, thank you very much.

[Dakarʒ]

That's an interesting point. What's the difference between a p2p and a DVR other than method of delivery (assuming you've paid for cable).

[starman]

You're paying for the cable SERVICE, not the TV show.

[Dakarʒ]

Doesn't the tv show come with the service? Because I keep it on my DVR forever.

Edit: Let's be clear here, I'm not interested in the legal side of this. I know its illegal, case closed.

[SpaceMonkey]

No, because distribution over-the-air doesn't imply that the network is giving you permission to distribute the content yourself. They are giving you a service, not the content.

[Dakarʒ]

As I suspected.

[starman]

That's the biggest misconception about TV and radio. People think that because you can GET it for free that it IS free to distribute.

[Dakarʒ]

Sports seem to be the biggest on clearing that up to. Can't watch any telecast without the 30 second spiel crammed in a 10 second disclaimer about dissemination.

[Laminar]

Peter Griffin: Brian, tape this for me.
Brian Griffin: Oh, sorry. The VCR hasn't worked since you tried to tape Monday Night Football.
[Flashback: FBI Agents burst in just as Peter is about to tape]
FBI Agent: Do you have the expressed written consent of ABC Sports and the National Football League?
Peter Griffin: Just ABC.
[FBI Agents blow the VCR to bits]

Yep, I'm quoting Family Guy

[Dakarʒ]

*cue complaints about Family Guy*
I hope

[hyteckit]

Tivo and skipping commercials is wrong.