Back

Fujitv - Japanese television streaming

#26
FWIW, you can extend your trial indefinitely each time you visit the page by adding a breakpoint at the line:
Code:
if (!PlayerCtx.uinfo_id) {
(main.html:480) and setting PlayerCtx.uinfo_id to a non-zero value in the console, such as 50. That way, the trial won't time out and give you a message about registering, at least for the web version.
#27
Certain (most?) people commenting on this thread so far seem to raise no ethical issues whatsoever with the idea of paying money to one company that is stealing the content that other companies worked hard to produce. I suggest people think about the implications of that and take a hard look in the mirror.
#28
(2017-08-12, 12:36 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Certain (most?) people commenting on this thread so far seem to raise no ethical issues whatsoever with the idea of paying money to one company that is stealing the content that other companies worked hard to produce. I suggest people think about the implications of that and take a hard look in the mirror.

Meh, I'm sure most people would choose the more ethical option if it existed. The problem is that it doesn't because Japan is living in the past instead of capitalizing on the demand.
August Sale (14th - 25th): 30% OFF Premium PLUS - 25% OFF Premium
JapanesePod101
#29
Pretty much what TheVinster said.

If you combine the fact that it is either legally unavailable at all, or available at such exorbitant price and jumping through such hoops the person would not obtain it legally anyway and the fact that it is NOT stealing (IP and stealing don't mix well together), it's not that surprising that people do it.
#30
(2017-08-12, 12:36 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Certain (most?) people commenting on this thread so far seem to raise no ethical issues whatsoever with the idea of paying money to one company that is stealing the content that other companies worked hard to produce. I suggest people think about the implications of that and take a hard look in the mirror.

If Japanese TV companies were offering a legal option to watch their stuff overseas, I'd subscribe to such an offering in a heartbeat. But they don't, so expats and Japanese students living abroad do what they need to do.

I took a hard look in the mirror this morning. I look AMAZING.
#31
(2017-08-12, 12:36 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Certain (most?) people commenting on this thread so far seem to raise no ethical issues whatsoever with the idea of paying money to one company that is stealing the content that other companies worked hard to produce. I suggest people think about the implications of that and take a hard look in the mirror.

Intellectual property rights are a valuable concept, when they help the creator of a product by protecting his ability to sell his stuff. That's the only time they help.

When the creator has no intention to sell his product in a given market, "intellectual property" is pointless. It's like those silly schemes where you buy a piece of the Moon. You're welcome to pretend that you're helping a Japanese broadcaster by not watching it, but it's an objective fact that you're not.

I like to choose my own moral values rationally, rather than be mindlessly dogmatic and obey rules that make no sense. There's no mirrors involved, just logic.
#32
Pretty disappointing stuff. Just shows how people are willing to twist logic into any shape to serve our own self interest.

Maybe my Japanese will suffer, but I won't be subscribing to this service.
#33
(2017-08-12, 5:05 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Pretty disappointing stuff.  Just shows how people are willing to twist logic into any shape to serve our own self interest.

Maybe my Japanese will suffer, but I won't be subscribing to this service.

Sure buddy, whatever you say.
#34
(2017-08-12, 5:05 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Pretty disappointing stuff.  Just shows how people are willing to twist logic into any shape to serve our own self interest.

Maybe my Japanese will suffer, but I won't be subscribing to this service.

Why don't you look up some studies on the effects of piracy? You'll find that it's much more benign than the MAFIAA makes it out to be.
Points to be aware of:
1.) One pirated watch doesn't equal one lost sale and certainly doesn't equal one lost product (a.k.a. it's not theft). Studies that use this metric to estimate real loss are a laughing stock and usually produced by heavily biased interest groups.

2.) Related to the first point, pirates usually aren't customers. While there are people who have money and would buy some portion of what they end up pirating, more likely, pirates won't purchase their goods. This point doesn't really apply to payed services like this one, but it's important to keep in mind when reading things; it's further reason that the one pirate view equals one lost sale thing is bull.
The positive effects are also ignored, such as product attention gained through easy access to the material increasing the number of actual sales. This isn't to say that pirating itself is good for sales, but this effect offsets some amount of sales loss (assuming a sale would be made in the first place).

3.) From the second point (and what was told to you above), excessive pirating is generally a market indicator that a demand is not being met in that market. In the case of the music industry, it was quick, cheap access to the songs you wanted and none of the ones you didn't (this is why services like iTunes and, more recently, streaming services took off; it was a demand that was previously only met by piracy). Similar thing happened with anime, because most series weren't released overseas, dubs generally sucked, and releases stopped mid series (same thing happens with LNs and manga); CR isn't that good, IMO, but it's better than nothing, and that shows through their success.
There is pretty much nothing for dramas or other television programs (as I type this, there's a Japanese dub of Modern Marvels playing from YouTube; if there was a better option, I'd use it, especially if it was a cheap subscription or ad-based system).

4.) From the third point: most people prefer legal options, so long as they meet demands. Today, this is usually streaming or download access. Why does Netflix do so well if everyone could just pirate that stuff and save a few bucks per month? Because it provides easy access.


Equating piracy with theft is fallacious (the act, losses, and damages are nowhere near equal) and a big loss to companies that don't use it as a market indicator. The music industry suffered losses for years by being too stupid to partner with sites like YouTube or license their music to sites like Pandora, and they're the ones telling everyone that piracy equals theft. I don't think they're the best people to listen to, given the results of their attitude, do you?

Anyway, don't use it if you don't want to, but don't be a judgemental jerk to people that do (or at least do so in your head instead of on the forum).
#35
An aspect that should be considered is, if you stream something illegally and they catch you, could they sue you for damages in court and win?  I believe this happened in the US with music downloads (Napster?), where a bunch of people who got caught had to agree to settle their case by paying so much $ per song.

So...if you watch Japanese TV illegally, could it be traced to you and is there a possibility you'll be invited to settle in order to avoid going to court?
#36
(2017-08-12, 11:57 pm)sholum Wrote:
(2017-08-12, 5:05 pm)ayu_modoki Wrote: Pretty disappointing stuff.  Just shows how people are willing to twist logic into any shape to serve our own self interest.

Maybe my Japanese will suffer, but I won't be subscribing to this service.

Why don't you look up some studies on the effects of piracy? You'll find that it's much more benign than the MAFIAA makes it out to be.
Points to be aware of:
1.) One pirated watch doesn't equal one lost sale and certainly doesn't equal one lost product (a.k.a. it's not theft). Studies that use this metric to estimate real loss are a laughing stock and usually produced by heavily biased interest groups.

2.) Related to the first point, pirates usually aren't customers. While there are people who have money and would buy some portion of what they end up pirating, more likely, pirates won't purchase their goods. This point doesn't really apply to payed services like this one, but it's important to keep in mind when reading things; it's further reason that the one pirate view equals one lost sale thing is bull.
The positive effects are also ignored, such as product attention gained through easy access to the material increasing the number of actual sales. This isn't to say that pirating itself is good for sales, but this effect offsets some amount of sales loss (assuming a sale would be made in the first place).

3.) From the second point (and what was told to you above), excessive pirating is generally a market indicator that a demand is not being met in that market. In the case of the music industry, it was quick, cheap access to the songs you wanted and none of the ones you didn't (this is why services like iTunes and, more recently, streaming services took off; it was a demand that was previously only met by piracy). Similar thing happened with anime, because most series weren't released overseas, dubs generally sucked, and releases stopped mid series (same thing happens with LNs and manga); CR isn't that good, IMO, but it's better than nothing, and that shows through their success.
There is pretty much nothing for dramas or other television programs (as I type this, there's a Japanese dub of Modern Marvels playing from YouTube; if there was a better option, I'd use it, especially if it was a cheap subscription or ad-based system).

4.) From the third point: most people prefer legal options, so long as they meet demands. Today, this is usually streaming or download access. Why does Netflix do so well if everyone could just pirate that stuff and save a few bucks per month? Because it provides easy access.


Equating piracy with theft is fallacious (the act, losses, and damages are nowhere near equal) and a big loss to companies that don't use it as a market indicator. The music industry suffered losses for years by being too stupid to partner with sites like YouTube or license their music to sites like Pandora, and they're the ones telling everyone that piracy equals theft. I don't think they're the best people to listen to, given the results of their attitude, do you?

Anyway, don't use it if you don't want to, but don't be a judgemental jerk to people that do (or at least do so in your head instead of on the forum).

This isn't people getting something from a pirate because it otherwise would not be available.

Nor is it people getting something from a pirate because they don't feel like paying for it.

It's people paying a pirate for someone else's property. 

The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently). Truly the more unjust our actions are, the greater the lengths we go to justify ourselves.
#37
(2017-08-13, 12:39 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently).

Well, our 'attempt' on argument is long and convoluted, because we, unlike you, actually bothered to make an argument. You did not.
#38
(2017-08-13, 12:55 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:39 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently).

Well, our 'attempt' on argument is long and convoluted, because we, unlike you, actually bothered to make an argument. You did not.

Surely it is self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y.
#39
(2017-08-13, 1:28 am)ayu_modoki Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:55 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:39 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently).

Well, our 'attempt' on argument is long and convoluted, because we, unlike you, actually bothered to make an argument. You did not.

Surely it is self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y.

Sure, but it is NOT self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X to make you a copy of intellectual property that belongs to a person Y. especially if the person Y is not willing / able to sell you a copy directly.
#40
(2017-08-13, 1:44 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 1:28 am)ayu_modoki Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:55 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:39 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently).

Well, our 'attempt' on argument is long and convoluted, because we, unlike you, actually bothered to make an argument. You did not.

Surely it is self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y.

Sure, but it is NOT self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X to make you a copy of intellectual property that belongs to a person Y. especially if the person Y is not willing / able to sell you a copy directly.

How does this interesting system (paying someone to steal something for you) work for example say you want to buy your neighbour's house but he refuses to sell it to you?
#41
(2017-08-13, 2:14 am)phil321 Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 1:44 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 1:28 am)ayu_modoki Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:55 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 12:39 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: The argument for refraining from such an action is so plain it hardly needs stating, while the attempt to justify it is long, convoluted, and reliant on ends justifying means (as well as name-calling, apparently).

Well, our 'attempt' on argument is long and convoluted, because we, unlike you, actually bothered to make an argument. You did not.

Surely it is self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y.

Sure, but it is NOT self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X to make you a copy of intellectual property that belongs to a person Y. especially if the person Y is not willing / able to sell you a copy directly.

How does this interesting system (paying someone to steal something for you) work for example say you want to buy your neighbour's house but he refuses to sell it to you?

THANK YOU
#42
(2017-08-13, 2:14 am)phil321 Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 1:44 am)Robik Wrote:
(2017-08-13, 1:28 am)ayu_modoki Wrote: Surely it is self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y.

Sure, but it is NOT self-evident that it is wrong to pay person X to make you a copy of intellectual property that belongs to a person Y. especially if the person Y is not willing / able to sell you a copy directly.

How does this interesting system (paying someone to steal something for you) work for example say you want to buy your neighbour's house but he refuses to sell it to you?

Look, I acknowledged the point that 'it is wrong to pay person X for property they stole from person Y'. Probably not clearly enough, given your reaction.

I dispute that this is the same case as we are talking here, nor it is your example with stealing houses, for that matter.
#43
If you argue from the idea that piracy is equal to theft, there'll be no agreement. Your argument (what little of it exists) completely misrepresents the situation.

While I personally don't want to pay for pirated content, there is little difference between that and getting something from a site covered with ads.
#44
Selling pirated material is theft. People who sell pirated material are stealing sales. Not the RIAA's spook "theft" when you download a song from a public torrent tracker. Actual theft.

Not only that, but it keeps users away from peer sharing, makes things more scarce, and requires you to spend money, which are the only justifications for piracy.