Streaming Cycling in UK - Discovery+ prices!

[Alex321]

Yeah, nobody is suggesting "the authorities" will do much about non-commercial bootlegging, but it'd not be much bother for SBS to send an automated complaint to a VPN provider when they add a restriction-evading IP address to their blocked list.

But your home taping example hasn't been illegal for most uses for ages.

It is still a breach of copyright law except when done solely for "time shifting" purposes.

 

[FishFright]

Pblakeney said:
Home taping is illegal,

It's killing music

Back in the 90s my mate made us cassette covers for our DJ mixes copying the style but with "Home DJs are illegal and they're killing Clubland." I should have a sheet somewhere, for a low value of somewhere.

 

[mjr]

Since some (all?) VPNs actually use this scenario as a selling point I don't think they are too bothered.

They usually say stuff like it's for accessing streaming services you subscribe to, while you're away from home, not for unauthorised access to georestricted streams from public broadcasters like SBS.

Why would they defend you? They told you not to do it in the T&Cs, they get brownie points with the complaining broadcaster, and they get to keep the rest of your payment without having to provide any service! Win, win, win, win.

But you'll probably get away with it if you don't take the pee. Just don't kid others about what is at risk, albeit a small risk.

 

[Pblakeney]

They usually say stuff like it's for accessing streaming services you subscribe to, while you're away from home, not for unauthorised access to georestricted streams from public broadcasters like SBS.

Why would they defend you? They told you not to do it in the T&Cs, they get brownie points with the complaining broadcaster, and they get to keep the rest of your payment without having to provide any service! Win, win, win, win.

But you'll probably get away with it if you don't take the pee. Just don't kid others about what is at risk, albeit a small risk.

What is the difference between me subscribing to BBC and watching it in Oz, or me subscribing to SBS and watching it here?
And yes, some VPNs specifically mention watching geo restricted material as a benefit. I don’t expect them to defend me but they aren’t going to go out of their way to block me either.

 

[Venod]

SBS states their service does not work with VPN's, but it does.
What I can't figure out is why one of my laptops will not play the video it says I have an adblocker enabled (I don't) both laptops are running Windows 11 and I am using Chrome as the browser, I have checked all the settings and they same to be identical.
It's not a big problem as it works on one laptop and also works on phone and tablet, I just don't like being defeated.
The hardware is different on the laptops, it's the older one that is the problem.
I have tried three different browsers with no joy, might try Safari next if I find time.

 

[PurplePenguin]

They usually say stuff like it's for accessing streaming services you subscribe to, while you're away from home, not for unauthorised access to georestricted streams from public broadcasters like SBS.

Why would they defend you? They told you not to do it in the T&Cs, they get brownie points with the complaining broadcaster, and they get to keep the rest of your payment without having to provide any service! Win, win, win, win.

But you'll probably get away with it if you don't take the pee. Just don't kid others about what is at risk, albeit a small risk.

Most VPNs have no records. The only action SBS can realistically take is to block the VPN'S IP address in Australia. That's pretty simple and fairly common - BBC does it regularly for UK IP addresses. The risk for cycling watcher is that they have paid for a VPN which is blocked, but they can still use it to access other things.

 

[mjr]

What is the difference between me subscribing to BBC and watching it in Oz, or me subscribing to SBS and watching it here?

As far as I can tell, you cannot subscribe to SBS at present (you could before 2015 for some years, to some of their channels). If you subscribe to the BBC, you're actually subscribing to something like BBC UKTV which is a commercial service with different channels.

And yes, some VPNs specifically mention watching geo restricted material as a benefit.

Which ones? I don't think anybody has yet posted any example of a service that says it's fine to do this unless you're a subscriber and the material is georestricted to your residence. I suspect you're seeing what you want to see and ignoring their warnings (which they often put lower down the page and/or in smaller size, because it's not in their interests to dispel someone's prejudice on this before they've got their money).

I quoted the warning from Proton earlier. Surfshark say to use their VPN to avoid your ISP throttling your connection when they notice you're streaming, and to access local content while abroad, and has a big "disclaimer" warning you that "using Surfshark services for any illegal activities is strictly forbidden and violates our Terms". Nord VPN say they're for "safer and smoother access to your social media, games, and legal streaming platforms that you pay for" and nothing about getting access to streams that aren't normally available to you. ExpressVPN is probably the biggest provider that gets closest to saying they're happy to take payments from users who are ripping off TV from other countries, but even they still include "you are responsible for complying with our Terms of Service, your content provider’s terms, and any applicable laws" on their streaming page and on another page they say "If they detect VPN use, they may block access or restrict content availability. While a VPN helps secure your connection and protect your privacy, it does not guarantee access to region-specific streaming libraries."

Some of their paid advertisers say VPNs can be used to break georestriction, but that's not the same thing as the VPN provider saying it, just like safety kit makers aren't punished when their retailers go too far with unsubstantiated claims about how protective the kit is.

I don’t expect them to defend me but they aren’t going to go out of their way to block me either.

Handling abuse reports by disconnecting troublesome users isn't "going out of their way". It's a core business function of an internet service, else they're in big trouble when a vandal buys an account and starts using it to deface websites, as they get blocked by loads of other businesses and eventually cease to have a service that they can sell. Tracing and then noting, warning or booting a user who's broken the terms is usually a pretty slick operation once they put in the exit IP address and time from the complaint. (I used to work for ISPs, and knew some who worked in a big ISP abuse / fraud department.)

And just to repeat again: unless you take the pee, the worst that's likely is to be blocked off the streaming service you snuck into. But if too many start doing this, it's pretty easy for the VPN accounts to be toasted too, especially if TNT, FLCS, ASO, RCS or whoever starts applying pressure to broadcasters to get tougher. We saw that happen with football when it went behind the paywall, we saw that happen with F1, we even saw that happen with golf. We may thing it's wrong and stupid, but it's hardly unforseeable. In theory, your internet connection is at risk too, but that's much less easy for them to get behind a VPN, as far as we've seen so far. You place your bets and takes your chances. Just please don't mislead people about how much they would be betting if they follow your example.

 

[PurplePenguin]

As far as I can tell, you cannot subscribe to SBS at present (you could before 2015 for some years, to some of their channels). If you subscribe to the BBC, you're actually subscribing to something like BBC UKTV which is a commercial service with different channels.


Which ones? I don't think anybody has yet posted any example of a service that says it's fine to do this unless you're a subscriber and the material is georestricted to your residence. I suspect you're seeing what you want to see and ignoring their warnings (which they often put lower down the page and/or in smaller size, because it's not in their interests to dispel someone's prejudice on this before they've got their money).

I quoted the warning from Proton earlier. Surfshark say to use their VPN to avoid your ISP throttling your connection when they notice you're streaming, and to access local content while abroad, and has a big "disclaimer" warning you that "using Surfshark services for any illegal activities is strictly forbidden and violates our Terms". Nord VPN say they're for "safer and smoother access to your social media, games, and legal streaming platforms that you pay for" and nothing about getting access to streams that aren't normally available to you. ExpressVPN is probably the biggest provider that gets closest to saying they're happy to take payments from users who are ripping off TV from other countries, but even they still include "you are responsible for complying with our Terms of Service, your content provider’s terms, and any applicable laws" on their streaming page and on another page they say "If they detect VPN use, they may block access or restrict content availability. While a VPN helps secure your connection and protect your privacy, it does not guarantee access to region-specific streaming libraries."

Some of their paid advertisers say VPNs can be used to break georestriction, but that's not the same thing as the VPN provider saying it, just like safety kit makers aren't punished when their retailers go too far with unsubstantiated claims about how protective the kit is.


Handling abuse reports by disconnecting troublesome users isn't "going out of their way". It's a core business function of an internet service, else they're in big trouble when a vandal buys an account and starts using it to deface websites, as they get blocked by loads of other businesses and eventually cease to have a service that they can sell. Tracing and then noting, warning or booting a user who's broken the terms is usually a pretty slick operation once they put in the exit IP address and time from the complaint. (I used to work for ISPs, and knew some who worked in a big ISP abuse / fraud department.)

And just to repeat again: unless you take the pee, the worst that's likely is to be blocked off the streaming service you snuck into. But if too many start doing this, it's pretty easy for the VPN accounts to be toasted too, especially if TNT, FLCS, ASO, RCS or whoever starts applying pressure to broadcasters to get tougher. In theory, your internet connection is at risk too, but that's much less easy for them to get. You place your bets and takes your chances.

Are you suggesting that VPN providers maintain records when they explicitly promise not to?

 

[Regular.Cyclist]

Private internet access say

”Access all of your favorite content free from ISP throttling and annoying network restrictions. Enjoy unlimited bandwidth to stay connected to the world's best shows, apps, and games.”

 

[mjr]

Are you suggesting that VPN providers maintain records when they explicitly promise not to?

Not quite. Some of them say they don't log your online activity, or that they don't monitor or record what you're doing online, but most of them seem like narrow promises to me and I can usually think of useful information that they've not mentioned. After all, most providers will have some records of who was connected to what bits of their VPN when because they need that for billing, or even only for diagnostic and maintenance purposes, besides anything else. Otherwise, if you complain and say you're getting no service, how would they know whether you're due any refund for non-performance?

There are a few VPN providers that claim not to keep any records at all, but I've never been sure whether they really don't (and how they support users if not) or if it's just a ploy to justify operating out of countries famous for dodgy financial dealings and for being very difficult for people in most European countries to get justice from if they start overcharging.

So, in short, most VPNs will say they don't log things like what sites you visit or what data you transferred, but some are quiet on whether they log where you connected from and which addresses you exited to. A Virtual Private Network isn't necessarily Private from everyone. Check what you buy.

And even shorter, let's remember that Facebook's VPN "Onavo Protect" did actually track what people visited and more than 10 million people still downloaded it.

 

[mjr]

Private internet access say

”Access all of your favorite content free from ISP throttling and annoying network restrictions. Enjoy unlimited bandwidth to stay connected to the world's best shows, apps, and games.”

And yet, https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/terms-of-service still includes "You must also agree that you and any other user that you have provided access to will not engage in any of the following activities: [...] Uploading, possessing, receiving, transporting, or distributing any copyrighted, trademark, or patented content which you do not own or lack written consent or a license from the content owner" so are you sure that's not just talking about things like accessing your home Paramount+ shows while travelling abroad?

Like I wrote earlier, it's not in their financial interest to dispel user misconceptions too quickly.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Not quite. Some of them say they don't log your online activity, or that they don't monitor or record what you're doing online, but most of them seem like narrow promises to me and I can usually think of useful information that they've not mentioned. After all, most providers will have some records of who was connected to what bits of their VPN when because they need that for billing, or even only for diagnostic and maintenance purposes, besides anything else. Otherwise, if you complain and say you're getting no service, how would they know whether you're due any refund for non-performance?

There are a few VPN providers that claim not to keep any records at all, but I've never been sure whether they really don't (and how they support users if not) or if it's just a ploy to justify operating out of countries famous for dodgy financial dealings and for being very difficult for people in most European countries to get justice from if they start overcharging.

So, in short, most VPNs will say they don't log things like what sites you visit or what data you transferred, but some are quiet on whether they log where you connected from and which addresses you exited to. A Virtual Private Network isn't necessarily Private from everyone. Check what you buy.

And even shorter, let's remember that Facebook's VPN "Onavo Protect" did actually track what people visited and more than 10 million people still downloaded it.

A Facebook VPN sounds like an oxymoron to me. Otherwise, it sounds like a conspiracy theory. Privacy is the entire business model of VPNs and worrying about a user streaming some cycling seems pretty unlikely as it would destroy their entire business.

 

[Pblakeney]

As far as I can tell, you cannot subscribe to SBS at present (you could before 2015 for some years, to some of their channels). If you subscribe to the BBC, you're actually subscribing to something like BBC UKTV which is a commercial service with different channels.

I always enjoy people telling me that something I've done is impossible. 😂 I'm signed up to both SBS and BBC News.
I regularly get emails from SBS telling me all about their new shows and what's on. Just watched a bit of Gent-Wevelgem.
Sign into BBC News from abroad and you get a different feed without a VPN placing you in the UK. BBC UKTV is a service available outside of the UK.
"BBC iPlayer is a video on demand service from the BBC. The service is available over-the-top on a wide range of devices, including mobile phones and tablets, personal computers and smart televisions. iPlayer services delivered to UK-based viewers are free from commercial advertising. To use the service, a valid TV Licence is required by law. The terms BBC iPlayer, iPlayer, and BBC Media Player refer to various methods of viewing or listening to the same content. BBC iPlayer launched in 2007. Previously, a separate BBC iPlayer Radio brand was used for radio services but this was replaced with BBC Sounds in 2018."
I think we are in the territory of how things should be, how you'd like things to be, and how they actually are.

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Regarding Surfshark. That’s the VPN I use and have done for quite some time. Their policy allows for “unlimited devices” from one subscription.
Monitoring and recording the activity of potentially dozens of devices on one account would appear a Herculean task.
I can’t see them going to such lengths.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Like I wrote earlier, it's not in their financial interest to dispel user misconceptions too quickly.

Because of this discussion I checked out SurfShark and NordVPN's sites, and sure enough they don't push the "avoiding content location restrictions" as a feature.

But they both advertise heavily on Youtube, and I'm sure I've see sponsored Youtubers push this feature. I'm pretty sure I've seen one that specifically pushed the ability to access US Netflix, which shows stuff unavailable elsewhere (is that the same as cycling coverage from Aus?). Maybe these sponsored segments give the VPNs some kind of plausible deniability that their websites and Ts&Cs don't have.

Doesn't matter to me - I'm far too stupid to use a VPN.