Another year of Root Sports, no streaming, same' ol same ol'?

I apologize, let me be clear. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong. I'm saying the letter of the law and the definition of the words you are using are inaccurate.

 

Pretty sad KGW no longer broadcasts any.

 

My responses are 100% correct though. Your claims of illegality and theft are 100% inaccurate. Which makes your claim of immorality questionable at best.

 

On this I think we all agree. Local station broadcasting was the best IMO.

 

My claim is that if you are using a pirated stream you are contributing to the theft of a product. IMO that is theft.
Now I hope that clears up your position.
Carry on doing what you feel is best for you. I will be doing the same.

 

Thereby using quality adblockers removes the possibility of making a morality argument? In fact, you could say that watching streams with ad blockers even hurts those who would be trying to profit on such streams, thereby reducing the incentive for such immoral and illegal behavior.

 

Using a pirated stream (defined as a stream in which the streamer is making profit) with a quality ad blocker is not contributing to the theft of a product. First of all, no theft is happening. And you aren't contributing to any copyright violation if you are not being served ads. You are in fact making it less profitable for such a stream by using up bandwidth they have to pay for, without generating revenue to cover that cost.

 

Sure. If that works to make you feel better about pirating then have at it.
I will continue to pay what I feel is a reasonable price for a good product.
Funny part is all the typing you have done to make yourself feel better you could have earned the money to pay the 100 bucks to buy the product and more.
Enjoy your pirated stream.

 

Doctors seem to all the time no?

 

This is why it's not a responsibility of the viewer. It's not realistic to expect people to parse the contracts of every streamer. That's why as long as the content is legal (legal sports), it is legal to view it.

This not the case. The reason drugs are a problem is that we have criminalized them and the people who use them. Hence creating artificial scarcity (raising the price, creating an unregulated black market), and we refuse to treat victims (addicts). Instead imprisoning them and restricting their legal prospects, which pushes them back into the black market, and the cycle continues and grows.

This was proven by Portugal who decriminalized drugs and made sure there was adequate treatment available to all. Within 5 years all drug related crime had dropped significantly, and it continued to be drop until they started restricting access to care.

But that's a different topic, which I'd be glad to engage in on a different thread. It does however, show how easily mischaracterizing problems can result in great and unintentional societal harms.

That's great! I'm happy it works for you! A great many others are left unable to access this content because people support these practices (not me, but many others).

It's your opinion that it's shady, but you're basing that opinion on incorrect definitions and incorrect interpretations of law.

Responsible browsing practices eliminate the increased concern for popups and hacking.

Excellent! I won't judge your moral standing for supporting a corporation that engages in immoral activity. It's not my place to do so. After all, you aren't breaking any laws either.

 

The law is written that way for a reason. If it is not being done for financial gain then there is no problem. It's not a moral problem, any more than recording the game on the VCR and watching it later was in the 1980s.
It was a moral problem to sell the recording for profit, though.

 

Lol. I'm not refusing to pay for it because I can't afford it. I just refuse to support artificial scarcity when I can. There are people who would love to be able to sign up and watch these games, but cannot.

That's insane in this day and age.

*EDIT* In fact, it was insane a decade ago.

**EDIT** And to answer your concern, I feel far better about not paying for cable service I didn't use than I did when I was supporting the immoral and anticompetitive behavior by paying for cable service.

 

Wow? You had to dig deep for that one. I'm thoroughly impressed.
Never heard of someone offended by not being able to watch TV?

 

Not at all. Artificial scarcity and planned obsolescence are huge issues for me (these are tools corporations use in the name of profit which actively damage our society as well as our environment), and I make many decisions in my life with those considerations in mind.

It's why I refuse to get locked into the Apple ecosystem, and will not buy an iphone or mac unless absolutely necessary. It hasn't been necessary yet. For nearly all of my tech I support the company that offers the most open ecosystem with the most repairable and reusable hardware reasonably possible. Same with cars, whenever possible, and most anything else I own.

There are many examples of this in my life. These are real moral considerations, IMO.