Home » online streaming » Recent Articles:

Canadian Telecom Cos. Raid Montreal Software Developer’s Home, Interrogate Him for 9 Hours

6A group of five men representing Bell, Rogers, and Vidéotron burst into the private home of a Montreal man at 8 a.m. on June 12 without notice and interrogated him for nine hours about his involvement in a search engine that helps Canadian viewers circumvent geographic restrictions on online TV shows and movies.

The lawyer representing Canadian telephone company Bell and two of the country’s largest cable companies — Rogers and Vidéotron, was backed by a bailiff and independent counsel who informed Montreal software developer Adam Lackman, founder of TVAddons and a current defendant in a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by the telecom companies, that he was “not permitted to refuse to answer questions” posed by the companies under threat of additional criminal and civil penalties.

Lackman was instructed he had one hour to locate an attorney, but was forbidden to use any electronic or telecommunications device to contact one. He was also not allowed to leave the designated room in his home where he was held unless accompanied by a corporate lawyer or court official. The men also warned Lackman’s attorney he could not counsel Lackman on his answers to their questions and had to remain silent.

“I had to sit there and not leave their sight. I was denied access to medication,” Lackman told TorrentFreak. “I had a doctor’s appointment I was forced to miss. I wasn’t even allowed to call and cancel.”

Lackman was eventually placed in a room in his home and interrogated almost continuously for nine hours, but was given a brief break for dinner and time to finally talk privately with his attorney. By the time the bailiff, two computer technicians, the independent counsel and the corporate attorney left, it was 16 hours later and after midnight. The men left with Lackman’s personal computer and phone, along with a full list of usernames and passwords to access his email and social media accounts.

“The whole experience was horrifying,” Lackman told CBC News. “It felt like the kind of thing you would have expected to have happened in the Soviet Union.”

Lackman

The telecom giants gained access to Lackman’s home with the use of a Anton Piller order, a type of civil search warrant that gives private individuals and companies acting as plaintiffs in a lawsuit full access to a defendant’s home with no warning. The order was designed to allow searches and seizure of relevant evidence at high risk of being destroyed by a defendant.

The Canadian companies were upset because of Lackman’s involvement in Kodi, an open source home theater platform that allows viewers to access stored and online streaming media. Lackman produces apps, known as add-ons, that help Kodi users access live TV streams and recorded content. Unfortunately, that sometimes occurs in contravention of geographic and copyright restrictions imposed by the Canadian companies on Canadian viewers. As a result, several large telecom companies filed suit against Lackman for copyright infringement.

“Approximately 40 million unique users located around the world are actively using infringing add-ons hosted by TVAddons every month, and approximately 900,000 Canadian households use infringing add-ons to access television content,” claims the lawsuit. “The amount of users of infringing add-ons hosted TVAddons is constantly increasing.”

The Honourable B. Richard Bell (Image: Keith Minchin)

On June 9, a Canadian Federal Court judge handed the telecom companies a victory in the form of an interim injunction and restraining order against Lackman prohibiting him from engaging in any activity that could further violate the companies’ interpretation of copyright law. The ruling also included an Anton Piller order, which critics contend often allows private companies to engage in extended fishing expeditions looking for additional evidence to further their case.

The order included the right to seize any and all data surrounding the alleged offense, including equipment, paper records, bank accounts, and anything else in Lackman’s possession that plaintiffs could argue was connected to the lawsuit. It also permitted a bailiff and computer forensics experts to assume control of many of Lackman’s internet domains including TVAddons.ag and Offshoregit.com, as well as his social media and web hosting accounts for a period of two weeks. Since the case was handled ex parte (open to only one side) by the Federal Court, Lackman was not informed or given the opportunity to present a defense.

The ruling evidently allowed the companies to believe they had carte blanche to question Lackman.

When the corporate attorney was not grilling Lackman about his own involvement in Kodi add-ons, he demanded Lackman disclose any and all information he had on an additional 30 individuals that might also be involved in services like TVAddons. That demand fell squarely outside of the range of the court order, which is designed to protect existing evidence, not permit plaintiffs to fish for new evidence to bolster their case.

After the search ended, Lackman and his attorney went to court to challenge what they believed to be one of the most shocking instances of corporate intimidation and legal abuse ever seen in a copyright case. Lackman’s attorney had little trouble convincing the Honourable B. Richard Bell, who presided over a Federal Court hearing on the matter.

Bell found multiple egregious violations of the court order, including a limit on any search to between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. but instead lasted until at least midnight. The judge also found ample evidence Lackman’s rights were violated and he was subjected to an intimidation campaign designed to destroy his software business, leave him financially unable to mount any defense against the lawsuit, and get him to both incriminate himself and others against his will.

A court transcript reveals the real motives of Canadian telecom companies: to “neutralize the guy” that is hurting their businesses.

“It is important to note that the Defendant was not permitted to refuse to answer questions under fear of contempt proceedings, and his counsel was not permitted to clarify the answers to questions. I conclude unhesitatingly that the Defendant was subjected to an examination for discovery without any of the protections normally afforded to litigants in such circumstances,” the judge said. “Here, I would add that the ‘questions’ were not really questions at all. They took the form of orders or directions. For example, the Defendant was told to ‘provide to the bailiff’ or ‘disclose to the Plaintiffs’ solicitors’.”

Bell also saw through the plaintiffs’ questioning of Lackman about 30 other individuals that might also be allegedly involved in copyright infringement.

Lose in one venue, win in another.

“I conclude that those questions, posed by Plaintiffs’ counsel, were solely made in furtherance of their investigation and constituted a hunt for further evidence, as opposed to the preservation of then existing evidence,” he wrote in a June 29 order. “I am of the view that [the order’s] true purpose was to destroy the livelihood of the Defendant, deny him the financial resources to finance a defense to the claim made against him, and to provide an opportunity for discovery of the Defendant in circumstances where none of the procedural safeguards of our civil justice system could be engaged.”

The judge ruled the Anton Piller order be declared null and void and ordered all of Lackman’s possessions to be returned to him.

To all observers, it was a withering repudiation of the tactics used by the Canadian telecom companies suing Lackman. But deep pockets always allow lawyers the luxury of a change of venue and the telecom companies promptly appealed Bell’s ruling to the Federal Court of Appeal, requesting a stay of execution of Judge Bell’s order. The court granted the appeal on behalf of the telecom companies and allowed the plaintiffs to keep possession of all seized items, domains, and social media accounts until a full appeal of the case can be heard this fall. However, the court found defects in the execution of the Anton Piller order, and ordered the telecom companies to post a security bond of $140,000 CDN and continue the $50,000 CDN bond in case sanctions are later warranted.

Lackman intends to continue his legal fight and is raising money to cover legal expenses on the fundraising site Indiegogo. He has also set up a new TVAddons website and Twitter account and has resumed the add-on development that got him embroiled in the copyright infringement lawsuit in the first place. But Lackman seems to have at least one judge on his side.

“The defendant has demonstrated that he has an arguable case that he is not violating the [Copyright] Act,” wrote Judge Bell, adding that by the plaintiffs’ own estimate, only about one per cent of Lackman’s add-ons were allegedly used to pirate content.

Updated 8/16: The website is now back under this new URL: https://www.tvaddons.co/

Charter Spectrum Introduces $19.95 Sports-free Online Cable TV Alternative

If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.

Charter Communications this week quietly announced a cord-cutters cable TV package that works on your tablet, smartphone, Xbox One, Roku, and Samsung Smart TVs.

Spectrum TV Stream ($19.95/mo) gives access to a sports-free, slimmed down basic cable TV package of popular cable networks and, rare among online streaming services, access to your local ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, and PBS stations. You also get access to Spectrum News (where available), a 24/7 local news service carried over from the days of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks.

The basic cable networks covered include:

  • CNN
  • Bravo
  • A&E
  • AMC
  • Discovery
  • Food
  • TBS
  • Lifetime
  • FX
  • National Geographic Channel
  • HGTV
  • The History Channel
  • Freeform
  • Hallmark Channel
  • Hallmark Movies
  • Animal Planet
  • E!
  • Lifetime Movie Network
  • Oxygen
  • TNT
  • TLC
  • USA
  • WGN America
  • Spectrum News

Remarkably, customers can buy premium movie channels in this package for less than what they would pay with Spectrum’s traditional cable TV package. For 36 months, customers can get HBO, Showtime, Starz, Starz Encore, and The Movie Channel for $15 more per month (or $7.50 each). Oddly, Cinemax and Epix are not included.

(Image courtesy of Ian Littman)

Customers who sign up will also be able to access Spectrum TV apps and have an authenticated subscriber login to access on-demand programming from the respective websites of the networks included in the package. Spectrum also will include about 5,000 free on-demand streaming titles.

There are some restrictions with the service. You must be a Spectrum broadband customer. We are uncertain if customers still holding on to their Time Warner Cable or Bright House packages will qualify. You must not owe any past due balance to Charter Communications (or TWC or BH), and it seems likely Spectrum will charge you the Broadcast TV surcharge (usually $4-7 a month depending on the market), plus taxes and fees.

There may be availability restrictions as well. We do know the service is available in parts of California and Texas, but you may need to call to ascertain availability in your area.

To protect the cable TV industry from any undue competition, the service is only being sold in Charter/Spectrum service areas, so if you thought this would help you cancel Comcast or Cox cable TV, forget it.

CBS All Access Offers Showtime Add-On for Existing Customers

Phillip Dampier May 11, 2017 Competition, Consumer News, Online Video 1 Comment

CBS is now offering CBS All Access and Showtime’s standalone service customers a bundled package of both services for up to $2 off.

Starting now, current customers who visit their account page on either service will have the option of adding either CBS All Access or Showtime to their account. CBS will expand the service to new subscribers at a later point, so if you have neither service today, you cannot get this offer yet.

Prices reflect a bundling discount. Showtime itself normally costs $10.99/month. CBS All Access costs $5.99 a month with commercials, $9.99 without.

  • Showtime with CBS All Access Limited Commercial Plan: $14.99 (save $1)
  • Showtime with CBS All Access No Commercial Plan: $18.99 (save $2)

CBS CEO Les Moonves has promised a bundled offer since last year, and now it has arrived.

Once subscribed, customers can access both services on desktop computers, mobile devices, tablets, and streaming video boxes like Roku.

One benefit of CBS All Access is the option of live-streaming your local CBS station, available in about 90% of U.S. households. CBS is taking steps to broaden online distribution of CBS affiliated stations on other streaming platforms as well, which could make CBS the first network to offer wide access to local stations on emerging live streaming platforms like Hulu TV, YouTube TV, and DirecTV Now.

CBS claims about 1.65 million customers subscribe to Showtime’s online streaming service and almost the same number subscribe to CBS’ All Access Pass. In comparison, HBO Now, available on a standalone basis, has around two million subscribers.

Comcast Takes ‘XFINITY Instant TV’ Online Video Package Across National Footprint

Phillip Dampier March 29, 2017 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Consumer News, Online Video, Reuters Comments Off on Comcast Takes ‘XFINITY Instant TV’ Online Video Package Across National Footprint

The NBC and Comcast logo are displayed on top of 30 Rockefeller Plaza, formerly known as the GE building, in midtown Manhattan in New York July 1, 2015. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File Photo

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Comcast Corp is planning to rebrand and expand a streaming video option for broadband subscribers who do not want to pay for a traditional cable package, sources told Reuters on Monday.

The service, dubbed Xfinity Instant TV, will be priced as low as $15 a month to roughly $40 a month, sources said. It will include major broadcast networks as well as sports channels like ESPN and Spanish language channels such as Telemundo and Univision.

Xfinity Instant TV is expected to be available in the third quarter to more than 50 million homes within Comcast’s footprint, which includes cities such as Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Chicago.

The company is changing its video offerings to be more targeted as viewer habits evolve. Xfinity Instant TV will be aimed at high-speed Internet subscribers who cannot afford or do not want to pay for bigger cable bundles, sources said. The hope is that subscribers will eventually upgrade to Comcast’s X1 platform.

Comcast has already given a $15-a-month streaming video service known as Stream a trial run in Boston and Chicago, sources said. Xfinity Instant TV is a revamped version of that offering and will be rolled out nationwide in Comcast’s territories.

Other pay-TV providers including Dish Network Corp and AT&T Inc have started online streaming services for “cord cutting” consumers, or those who are dropping their cable packages for other options.

Comcast’s service is different in that it is limited to its territories and to its own broadband subscribers. It has yet to offer an over-the-top streaming service more broadly nationwide.

(Reporting by Anjali Athavaley; Editing by Bill Trott)

Comcast Securing Rights to Offer Nationwide Online Cable TV Replacement

Comcast could kick the door open on the traditionally closed cable-TV monopoly.

Comcast has a “Plan B” in case rival online-TV streaming providers start a major wave of cable TV cord cutting: the right to offer its own online cable TV replacement nationwide.

Bloomberg News reports Comcast is quietly acquiring national online distribution rights from cable networks, which gives the cable giant the right to sell cable TV-like packages outside of its cable company service area.

Comcast maintains “most favored nation” clauses in its contracts with cable programmers, which means if those networks agree to online distribution of their programming over online competitors like Sling TV, AT&T DirecTVNow and PlayStation Vue, those same rights are also available to Comcast.

For now, insiders claim Comcast has no immediate plans to start competing outside of its home service areas, but it wants to accumulate the necessary rights to hedge against online rivals.

“When you really try to evaluate the business model, we have not seen one that really gives us confidence that this is a real priority for us,” Matt Strauss, Comcast’s executive vice president for video services, said at a conference in November. “There is significantly more upside and profitability in going deeper and deeper into our base first versus following a video-only offering OTT,” he added, using the industry term for nationwide online video.

Comcast has been gradually picking up online distribution rights as it renews contracts with the networks it carries. A sign Comcast may imminently launch a competing product similar to DirecTVNow would come if it chooses to renegotiate contracts before they expire. Comcast last negotiated with CBS in 2010 and ESPN in 2012. Both contracts don’t expire until 2020. Without renegotiation, any online offering from Comcast would not include networks owned by those two companies.

Comcast is downplaying any interest in breaking the traditional cable television business model, which depends in part on friendly relations with other cable companies and staying out of their territories. The prospect of Comcast selling cable TV service in Charter’s service area would threaten a still lucrative source of revenue if a price war develops. Video represents about 50% of Comcast’s cable sales.

For now, Comcast’s most evident online competitor is AT&T’s DirecTVNow which has added 200,000 subscribers nationwide since launching in November. But that remains just a fraction of Comcast’s 22 million cable-TV customers, a reason why Comcast may be in no rush to enter the online streaming cable-TV business. That may change when two high-profile online video providers get into the business later this year. YouTube and Hulu are both expecting to launch cable-TV alternatives in 2017.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!