Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Bans Sale of Piracy-Enabling Set-Top Boxes

Posted by BeauHD on from the times-they-are-a-changin' dept.

Lirodon quotes a report from Variety: Facebook has joined the fight against illegal video-streaming devices. The social behemoth recently added a new category to products it prohibits users to sell under its commerce policy: Products or items that "facilitate or encourage unauthorized access to digital media." The change in Facebook's policy, previously reported by The Drum, appears primarily aimed at blocking the sale of Kodi-based devices loaded with software that allows unauthorized, free access to piracy-streaming services. Kodi is free, open-source media player software. The app has grown popular among pirates, who modify the code with third-party add-ons for illegal streaming. Even with the ban officially in place, numerous "jail-broken" Kodi-enabled devices remain listed in Facebook's Marketplace section, indicating that the company has yet to fully enforce the new ban. A Facebook rep confirmed the policy went into effect earlier this month. In addition, the company updated its advertising policy to explicitly ban ads for illegal streaming services and devices.

61 comments

  1. Do not worry. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A new portal will appear. Amazon will only loose that sales that is not much for them, but will open the door for someone to make a new business.

    1. Re:Do not worry. by sexconker · · Score: 2

      You mean eBay? I hate eBay, but if I wanted an HDCP 2.whatever stripper or a pre-built piratestream box, it's the first place I'd look.

    2. Re:Do not worry. by crow · · Score: 2

      I read it as Amazon because so many of the devices are FireTV Sticks. It's so brain-dead easy to install apps on them that I wonder why people pay someone else to do it.

  2. Better way to stop piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If your want to stop piracy, take a reasonable approach with consumers. But that's not happening.

    I have Spectrum, in an area that formerly was Time Warner Cable. TWC abused the hell out of the CCI flag, with a general policy of setting most channels to copy once whether they want it or not. In my market, they've even set channels like NASA TV, C-SPAN2, and C-SPAN3 to copy once. Even a couple of the local over the air channels are set to copy once. I called Spectrum to try to get the issue addressed and I was told that my HD Homerun Prime is the problem and the cable company does nothing to copy protect channels. It was an outright lie, and they're violating FCC rules.

    This is why people turn to piracy. The DRM is completely unreasonable, and only Windows Media Center on Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 can play the channels that are set to copy once. I have no intention of sharing content that I record, but the restrictions are completely absurd. Sadly, I don't even trust the FCC to do the right thing any longer, under its current leadership.

    1. Re:Better way to stop piracy by crow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even though you don't trust the FCC, file an FCC complaint. That will get the attention of the cable company in a way that you otherwise can't get as an individual.

    2. Re:Better way to stop piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I didn't even know anyone did that. I almost bought a HD Homerun Prime and a cable package (would have been my first time with cable ever) last week, but, decided to say fuck it, and just pirate MLB.tv (pay for it and use a VPN). I was drawn to the legitimacy of the cable package. Glad I made the right choice.

    3. Re:Better way to stop piracy by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Sucks if you can't even "pirate" C-SPAN...

      And yes, unreasonable restrictions are exactly why people turn to piracy. Piracy is pretty widespread here, and the perpetrators often have subscriptions to Amazon, Netflix and/or HBO as well as a cable package; they pirate because of convenience or lack of access, not because they want to save a buck. And nobody thinks it terribly unethical either. As some else on /. said a while back: pirates are just unserved customers.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Better way to stop piracy by crow · · Score: 2

      Yup, that same FCC. I filed a complaint once and it got my problem resolved.

    5. Re:Better way to stop piracy by sixsixtysix · · Score: 1

      Exactly. We have the most basic of cable subs with like 20-some channels and the HBOs, SlingTV (orange+blue), Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus. There are still a few cases, where I had fell behind and torrented a show, that falls under one of those subscriptions. Neither AMC nor FX(X) will let me use my SlingTV credentials to activate their respective apps, which have a lot more episodes on demand than SlingTV offers. #goodfaithcopyrightinfringement

      --
      ...
  3. Dear Pandora by Zemran · · Score: 2

    Please put your stuff back in your box.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  4. Why sell these? by crow · · Score: 1

    What's the point of buying these devices? It's terribly trivial to buy an Amazon FireTV Stick and install Kodi on it. I did it to play with it as a frontend for my MythTV system, but setting it up for pirate streaming can't be any more difficult. It's not like it requires rooting the device or anything like that.

    1. Re:Why sell these? by donaldm · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's the point of buying these devices? It's terribly trivial to buy an Amazon FireTV Stick and install Kodi on it. I did it to play with it as a frontend for my MythTV system, but setting it up for pirate streaming can't be any more difficult. It's not like it requires rooting the device or anything like that.

      My desktop PC runs Fedora Linux with a KDE UI and it is very easy to install Kodi (it's part of the rpmfusion-free-updates repository). For those running a Debian based distro you just need to install the appropriate repository and install (google is your friend :-) here). Of course, you can always go to the Kodi website and install that way but for us Linux users a repository install is so much better since you will automatically get updates which you can install at your convenience.

      Personally, I prefer VLC to Kodi although Kodi IMHO looks more polished but to each their own.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    2. Re:Why sell these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The advantage Kodi has is that if you hook up a device with Kodi to a traditional television and remote, you have a remote-friendly interface with artwork for all of the content. I have a relatively cheap Chinese ARM System-on-Chip (SoC) device called a Khadas Vim that's the size of a Raspberry Pi but somewhat more powerful. It was $50, and comes with Android 6.0. I installed Kodi on it paired that with an Amazon Fire TV remote - again, just the remote. I connected it to my television with HDMI.

      Now I can browse my entire ripped DVD and Blu Ray collection just using the remote and watch what I want with my family in the living room. It's fantastic.

      For the record, I don't pirate anything. If I love a film, I'll buy it on DVD or Blu Ray right after release. Otherwise, I wait a few year and get it in the bargain bin from a retailer or off Ebay.

    3. Re:Why sell these? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      Another advantage, to which you are undoubtedly benefiting from is Kodi doesn't enforce the Cinevia copy protection that is on a crapload of Blurays.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    4. Re:Why sell these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use MakeMKV to rip my Blu Rays, then ffmpeg to reencode them, and then stream that way. MakeMKV has beaten the Blu Ray encryption on everything I've thrown at it.

    5. Re:Why sell these? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      Cinevia isn't Bluray encryption.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  5. Already being adjusted for. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most places that sell set top boxes now are learning to never include such plugins/addons to kodi or what have you themselves. They do however include a convenient shortcut for users that choose to install them themselves.

    Nothing in the base hardware is "meant for infringement" unless the user takes it upon themselves to click the "install this obviously" links.

  6. Wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's a facebook marketplace?

    1. Re:Wait... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      That surprised me, too. I never log onto Facebook so maybe I just missed it.

      Or maybe I'm not missing anything. I think I'll go with that theory.

    2. Re:Wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every now and then there are better prices than craigslist. You could buy there and relist elsewhere to make a buck.

  7. Combat piracy with better licensing by crow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One thing that would really help cut down on piracy is better licensing for streaming. What if we had mandatory licensing for streaming just like we do for music for radio stations? Then suddenly instead of having to subscribe to half a dozen services and then still not having access to everything, you could subscribe to one and really have everything.

    There are a number of ways this could work.

    One model that I have in mind is to go back to the original NetFlix model where they buy physical media. Let them stream to one customer per disc that they own per day. Or even every three days (to simulate mailing the disc back and forth). Of course, instead of physically buying the discs, they would buy a license (same as buying a digital copy today), but the end result is the same--anything released for purchase would be available through streaming service subscriptions. Perhaps for new releases, you would have to reserve a stream ahead of time, but you would never have to worry about which service has what older movie or TV series.

    You still might subscribe separately for sports. This wouldn't stop companies from creating their own content and only providing it on their own network--for as long as they don't sell it outside their network.

    All that said, I'm still a cable subscriber, and I use MythTV to record everything using HDHomerun Prime with a cable card. (Apart from HBO, FiOS is nice about copy restrictions.)

    1. Re:Combat piracy with better licensing by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Want to 100% get rid of piracy, too bloody easy, get rid of copyright and you are done. Besides they already break the law with copyright as none of the content is adjudged to be of public worth and that is not about printing money, that is about the public worth of the content. As it stand most copyright is copy theft because that content has not proven it's public worth and thus failed to prove worth protecting at public expence, not juts buying that content but also paying for it's protection.

      Message to the pigopolists, fuck off, your time is done, more than enough content can be created without copyright protection so you are not needed any more, suck it the fuck up.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Combat piracy with better licensing by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Moderated "funny" but I kind of agree. At the very least it would be good if copyright were modified to bring it in line with the purpose for which it was created: to promote the proliferation of creative works. No to protect the "rights" of the artists: the granting of a temporary monopoly to them is a means, not an end.

      So what would actually happen if we limited copyright to 15 or 20 years? If we set some hard limits on the restrictions you're allowed to attach to a distribution license? Or what if we do away with distribution rights altogether, and only allow per-play or per-sale fees? What if copyright would only be granted if you actually made your work available? I.e. if it isn't available to you legally under terms deemed reasonable, you are free to pirate it (that was actually the law's stance on piracy here until recently, but I guess we had to prepare to conform with TTIP and the like).

      This would certainly boost the proliferation of creative works, but would it harm the creation of them? It might... if publishers fail to adapt. What publishers are only very slowly starting to grasp is that their role as distributor is finished; only our current copyright rules have allowed them to cling to that role, and it has perpetuated the old artificial scarcity instead of the cultural abundance we could have had... with the same or a better income going to the creators, if they play their cards right. But cracking down on piracy isn't it.

      Those in the entertainment business who complain about pirates and claim that every illegal copy constitutes a lost sale would do well to remember: every illegal copy is a sale that you lost by your own fault. Stop prosecuting pirates and figure out how to sell to them.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Combat piracy with better licensing by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      So what would actually happen if we limited copyright to 15 or 20 years?

      This is the first thing that should happen. Life + 70 years is a ludicrous term. Patents, which are (potentially) useful inventions have a term of 20 years, while entertainment media is life + 70.

    4. Re:Combat piracy with better licensing by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The corporations won't like it if they can't keep making money off of copyrighted works for decades and decades, especially Disney.

      My solution, which I've written about here for years when this comes up, is variable copyright terms, which copyright owners can pay for. So, if you create something, you get 5 years for free, for instance. After that, it has to be registered, and you have to pay. The next 5 years will be somewhat cheap, maybe $10k, but after that it gets progressively more expensive, like orders of magnitude (for instance, $1M for 15 years, $10M for 20, $100M for 25, $1B for 30, etc.). Maybe that's a bit high, but the idea is that you'll only renew the copyright if you're making a lot of money on the thing. The second 5-year term shouldn't be too much because lots of smaller copyright holders might want that 10-year term, but if you really want 25+ years of total protection, that work should be making a LOT of money so the cost should be high. And the benefit to this is that the copyright office will rake in lots of money from the copyright holders. (So the fees should be designed for maximizing revenue from the megacorps like Disney, not for freeing Steamboat Willy into the public domain as soon as possible. My goal is to get more stuff in the public domain sooner, especially stuff that's more obscure or not very commercially successful, *before* it gets lost from bitrot, not to get every old work in the public domain. I really don't care if Steamboat Willy stays locked up forever if Disney wants to help fund our government in exchange for that, but I want, for instance, old 80s games that everyone's forgotten about to be freed.)

  8. Facebook is a store now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure how to feel about Facebook banning what I can and cannot sell.
    I wonder if Twitter is banning me from driving my car.
    I can't imagine what I'll do when Google bans me from reading books.

    1. Re:Facebook is a store now? by Lirodon · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how to feel about Facebook banning what I can and cannot sell.

      I think it's talking about pages for vendors and such.

  9. I can't be the only one who thought the title was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook Bans Sale of Privacy-Enabling Set-Top Boxes

  10. TIL that people are selling stuff on Facebook by rrohbeck · · Score: 2

    Why?

    --
    thegodmovie.com - watch it
    1. Re:TIL that people are selling stuff on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FB exists to push adverts to its users^Wproduct.

    2. Re:TIL that people are selling stuff on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not?

    3. Re:TIL that people are selling stuff on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

      craigslist isn't convenient, ebay is a complete and utter ghetto with compulsory paypal and amazon marketplace is increasingly off limits to small sellers?

    4. Re:TIL that people are selling stuff on Facebook by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why not is the better question.

      I've sold stuff on facebook before, no marketplace required.

  11. They're setup with pirate streaming services by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    out of the box. Stuff like Popcorn Time where it's not just easy but has a good enough UI you might mistake it for legit content. And if you're in your 50s and paying $80/mo for internet it might not occur to you that you don't have the right to download anything you see. Hell, if you know what it costs to provide internet ($9/mo last I heard from Comcast's SEC filing) you might not care...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:They're setup with pirate streaming services by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I would believe the Kodi devs are the ones behind it, because the piracy box sellers are the main issue. As they have stated, these boxes cause nothing but problems for the developers - when the plugins stop working (as they promptly do), the customers then flood the Kodi forums with angry posts about their boxes that stop working.

      Of course, the Kodi devs have nothing to do with it, other than banning all the posts But you can imagine the developers are highly annoyed by this behavior when they have nothing to do with it. It demoralizes the developers, and it tarnishes Kodi's name.

  12. Hypocrites! by Chuq · · Score: 4, Informative

    What a joke, considering Facebook profits enormously from freebooted videos which are taken from YouTube (where the content creator earns the ad revenue) and rehosted on FB (where Facebook themselves gets the ad revenue). Their algorithms also prefer FB hosted over YouTube hosted video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    - Chuq
    1. Re:Hypocrites! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook should return proper editing controls to the link title, description, caption, and preview image then. Remember when those worked? Remember when they took them out? Why do you think they did that?

      I'll tell you why: they want your content on Facebook. They want it served from Facebook servers and displaying Facebook ads. Anything that links to third-party sites should look worse, have uncontrollable presentation, and appear suspect. Zuckerberg is planning to play media antitrust roulette, and he will lose.

  13. Odd considering to reach FB by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    millions of computers that can facilitate piracy are used by billions of people to access FB.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  14. They're setup with streaming services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My experience is most aren't even aware that copyright exists, let alone that they're potentially violating it. Seriously, when was the last time one even heard the word in public?

  15. "Piracy Enabling" by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 2

    So...anything that uses a keyboard? It's ok Facefarm, we will all soon be using computers that have to be connected to a Micro$oft or Google owned cloud to work and piracy or any freedom for that matter will be dead. Maybe you'll have your own mobile device one day, one that does even more than just backup all my photos, peak at my texts both on Messenger and regular text messaging, or listen to my microphone for sonic TV ad signals. I wonder what that also sounds like? Maybe block yourselves? This wouldn't happen to have anything to do with you guys having your own streaming service? Hmmmm...(tilts head sideways). All hail $uckerman for the suckered man.

  16. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they're going to ban sales of cellphones, video-recorders, security cameras, pretty much any and all kinds of cameras?

    Why not just ban all sales of everything because... wait...

    Facebook SELLS shit now? Sorry, I didn't notice that part. WTF?

  17. Do what now? by acidream · · Score: 2

    Am I the only one that didn't know you could sell things on Facebook?

    1. Re: Do what now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i didnt know either.

  18. Facebook is growing a conscience? by hyades1 · · Score: 0

    Too little, too late. They're hoping we'll forget their role in spreading right wing fake news in the run-up to Trump's election.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Facebook is growing a conscience? by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

      That must by why they never pull down all liberals death threats to conservatives... And why all those Jihad Accounts Never Get Banned...

    2. Re:Facebook is growing a conscience? by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      What "liberal death threats to conservatives" are these?

      And would you like to play the Mountain - Molehill game...the one where conservatives pretend if they can find one single incident it counts the same as a thousand similar or worse issues on their side?

      Do you con-trolls really think you can come to this place and run your usual tailored-for-morons bullshit and get away with it?

      Fake news is a conservative invention. Its foundation was laid by Joseph Goebbels and its modern avatar was carefully nurtured by Roger Ailes at Fox News...which isn't a news network, regardless of its name. In court cases it has admitted more than once it considers itself to be entertainment, not news. This frees it from any obligation to uphold professional standards.

      But you know this, of course. You simply aren't honest enough to acknowledge it.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    3. Re:Facebook is growing a conscience? by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

      You Defend really hard for what should be a bullet proof position according to you... And you can go look up facebooks COLLUSION with terrorism for yourself. I'm not LMGTFY... You Talk like a punk. And Act like one too. Pathetic.

    4. Re:Facebook is growing a conscience? by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      If you think that's "defending really hard", it's because you're a half-wit who considers any argument over five words long to be positively elitist.

      Back to your crib, punk.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    5. Re:Facebook is growing a conscience? by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

      Whatever helps you sleep better bub, Its a good thing your liberal fantasy is not my reality :-) Your weakness is showing... Better tuck that in... LoL!

  19. Coming soon by Krakadoom · · Score: 1

    Lets ban those pesky burglary enabling hammers.

  20. makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but its still easy as fuck to search the interwebs and find a torrent and guess what that will play in kodi too or search the web for those illegal addons or search the web for illegal streaming sites directly through your browser oh my lions tigers an bears.

  21. Meanwhile... by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

    The Majority of the world that doesn't buy their set top boxes from FACEBOOK, didn't care about this even a little bit... LOL!

  22. ROFLMAO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is every computer ever made ever will be made.
    The number one reason everyone not rich owns a computer.

  23. Effin' great by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Another market that goes to the Chinese. I bet Alibaba and Aliexpress are already rubbing their hands and I'd be very surprised if there weren't already vendors there that sell everything you might want to get.

    MAGA, my ass!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  24. so there banning everything by luther349 · · Score: 1

    being everything can run kodi.

  25. Killing is against the law as well . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except if you Facebook live stream, then it's free speech

  26. Re:I can't be the only one who thought the title w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was just about to comment the same.

  27. In other news by easyTree · · Score: 1

    Parrots have been banned because pirates are fond of them.

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  28. ffs, this is news for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yet these boxes are constantly called kodi boxes! they are quite simply android devices with kodi installed on them

    you can install kodi onto anything, in fact i have it running on my laptop that is connected to a 50 inch screen.

    Its like saying that your PC is a chrome box, or a firefox box... its just dumb and just makes the general public dumber!