That’s true. But to be fair, I have added one song and synced a few. I didn’t do it because I wanted pay, I did it because I wanted the song’s lyrics to be on Spotify and on the app.
They built a service and people seem to like it, so I don’t mind.
So someone can ignore the ads, ignore not being able to chose a song, and ignore no download. But having to open musixmatch in a separate app is the straw that broke the camels back
It seems they were right going by how upset people are in here. Many of these people that are carrying on like spoiled children will no doubt subscribe to premium now.
The goal is that now that they’ve been caught pirating lyrics, they have to pay MusixMatch for their lyrics, perhaps on a per request basis, so they lose money by making it available.
Even then you might not see them. I’ve noticed recently that a ton of songs that used to have the lyrics attached no longer show the lyrics or have the button to show them. And I do have premium.
It clearly states what he did and on what he was prosecuted. How is it one sided? It doesn’t quote people from either side but rather states facts presumably from court filings.
If you want arguments on how this is bad or why such things shouldn’t be prosecuted, look for an opinion piece. Thats not the job for every news reporting.
This is what I found from a Reddit comment: Debrid services literally are just like if you downloaded from the share website directly, as if you had signed up for an account with them. And/or the debrid service downloads the torrent on their server, and you stream from it.
This is already protecting you from any potential legal issue.
Some people may get warnings/potential legal trouble for torrenting directly, but this is only because when using torrent you also become a hoster of the content yourself. This doesn’t happen with these.
Think you’ve missed the point a bit of OP’s comment. They’re asking not how the end-user is protected from copyright claims, but how the debrid service itself is.
I guess it would, aside speed, this is another big reason for some users to get it, as a third world country person I couldn’t care less about torrenting, nor data caps now that I remember 🤣
Yeah, it was the same for me. I loved playing the demo on the PS3 back in the days. You can actually get it from key resellers which is what I did. However, I think they sell for about 80€ or so which is insane. I thought it was expensive when I bought it for 30€.
Opportunity cost, possibly. They might be remastering it and wish to sell it at a higher cost, or think they can get more money through a different retailer.
That game seems pretty loved, I wouldn't be that surprised about a remaster. Though it would have to be a pretty barebones if it can't compete with a ten year old release.
That would only make sense if you a) had a competing product on the market or b) at the very least actually announced one. The remaster/remake is a mere rumour, we don't even know if there's substance behind it.
Nah… I would guess a remaster or something at some point. The skull&bones game has been dead for a long time…they will release it as they legally have to…but they will not give a crap after.
I saw my wife playing this years ago, and always fancied having a go, but never got around to it.
So a few months back we got it going so it could stream to our Apple TV and off I went. Spent a few weeks playing it in the evenings and having a nice time.
Then Ubisoft put out an ‘update’ to it, that broke it completely. A massive update for a ten year old game. Cunts.
So I guess I’ll never finish it, because fuck Ubisoft.
I wouldn’t stress it; you didn’t miss much. Like every modern Ubisoft title, the game was very repetitive. You had enough playtime to see everything the game had to offer.
Not sure where you got the idea that it’s not advisable to mount the box via NFS. You can totally do this. I would make some adjustments though.
I would use mergerfs to union multiple mounts into one. You would then download to the local mount which is the drive connected directly to your seed box. Then I would have a remote mount to the nfs mount. You merge these into one so that when you link up jellyfin, it won’t know the difference and you can just stream like normal.
You need to copy files from the local drive to the remote, so you can try and roll your own solution by using rclone or use something like cloudplow which solves this issue as well. Cloudplow uses rclone as well, but monitors for changes automatically.
As far as copying files, why are you using sync anyway? It’s pretty dangerous. Just use move or copy instead. This way you don’t need to keep copies on your computer and the server.
As far as streaming from the nfs mount. You may need to make some changes to the cache settings and ensure they are set correctly.
With a setup like that, you should have no problems though.
piracy
Najstarsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.