LOCAST

[emveepee]

I created a python plugin for NextPVR largely based on locast2plex and it was pretty simple. The issue has started moving to captcha for the web browser. Things have been pretty stable since November, but most related plugins broke recently for a couple of days to deal with the simple change they are using right now.

Pluto is moving to Bearer authorization too (for another of my projects)

If Channels DVR is authorized for these apps, it is probably a better choice (assuming they can stay in business, I don't see them survive) It might not be feasible for small projects to work with changing undocumented API's if more security is added.

Martin

[cncb]

Originally Posted by emveepee

If Channels DVR is authorized for these apps, it is probably a better choice (assuming they can stay in business, I don't see them survive)

Why do you think that they won't survive?

[emveepee]

Originally Posted by cncb

Why do you think that they won't survive?

Their model of providing DRM free content from TVEverywhere isn't consistent with the OTT industry. If it is in fact that license cost must be significant compared to other services and I don't know how it can survive for the small number of people willing to set it up. Many service with mass appeal have failed. If they have to provide the service with end-to-end DRM I am not sure it would be possible.

Martin

[nyplayer]

I find Channels DVR is a great product and has great support ... I was able to revive my Plex/Emby due to channels DVR M3U support. I have Channels DVR , Emby and Plex Sharing streams when watching or recording the same channels. In my House hold some prefer EMBY or Plex so everyone is happy thanks to ChannelsDVR.... Remote Viewing is outstanding and Android / Apple support is also oustanding.

Channels DVR provides Pluto /TVE OTA (locast) and Prime support to itself EMBY and Plex.

I will soon finally fully retire SageTV too much of a hassle and too limited to keep it running.

[emveepee]

We can't use it in Canada but no doubt it is great product especially for experience PVR users and their support is top notch.

If you read this https://getchannels.com/docs/getting...is-this-legal/ I think it works on the same assumption as Playon, if you subscribe to cable and get TVE then you have the license to record streams from it. It think that is a weak legal assumption and I was suggesting it may not be a good long term solution. Something link Silicon Dust foray into open cable.

Martin

[nyplayer]

My Synology DS1019+ 16 GB memory Setup ... This allows for Sharing Streams/tuners across all. Shows how flexible and great Channels DVR is...

Pluto Docker Container

ChannelsDVR1 Docker container (OTA Tuners) ... > M3U > XTEVE Container 1. > Plex
ChannelsDVR2 Docker Container (Prime Cable Tuners) ... M3U > XTEVE Container 2. > Plex

ChannelsDVR1 Docker container (OTA Tuners) ... > M3U > EMBY
ChannelsDVR2 Docker Container (Prime Cable Tuners) ... > M3U > EMBY

ChannelsDVR1 Docker container (OTA Tuners) ... M3U > Main ChannelsDVR on DMS7
ChannelsDVR2 Docker Container (Prime Cable Tuners)... M3U > Main ChannelsDVR on DMS7
TVE > ChannelsDVR on DMS7
Pluto Docker Container > ChannelsDVR on DMS7

[mitchcecg]

Originally Posted by NetworkGuy

I have been a fan of SageTV for over a decade, but it is starting to show its age.

In addition to the SageTV service, you need to have OpenDCT service and now the fHDHR services for LOCAST and Pluto. I have been using Channel DVR to record LOCAST for the past few months. It is built into the core product. (And they have a very simple way to add Pluto TV.) You can easily point SageTV to the Channels DVR recording directory and import the files.

And there is the issue of support. As much as I appreciate the dedication from this community, it is not a true support team. The Channels DVR developer answers questions within 24 hours and releases fixes to problems within days. (Reminds me of the early days of SageTV. )

I am still planning on going to an antenna since LOCAST audio is only stereo and I can get 5.1 from an antenna. At that time, I will probably make the switch to Channels DVR for my recording engine.

Something you should look into.

Thanks for your reply I will check it out

[mistergq]

Originally Posted by emveepee

We can't use it in Canada but no doubt it is great product especially for experience PVR users and their support is top notch.

If you read this https://getchannels.com/docs/getting...is-this-legal/ I think it works on the same assumption as Playon, if you subscribe to cable and get TVE then you have the license to record streams from it. It think that is a weak legal assumption and I was suggesting it may not be a good long term solution. Something link Silicon Dust foray into open cable.

Martin

Completely disagree. Ignoring the commercial skipping issue for a second, Channels DVR is just another form of time shifting for personal use, which is 100% legal under Sony Betamax case. This isn't a peer to peer network which violates the DMCA.

Now giving the ability to remove commercials has always been the issue that they can use to get you.

[NetworkGuy]

Originally Posted by mistergq

Now giving the ability to remove commercials has always been the issue that they can use to get you.

Channels DVR uses comskip same as SageTV to mark the commercials.

[emveepee]

Originally Posted by mistergq

Channels DVR is just another form of time shifting for personal use, which is 100% legal under Sony Betamax case. This isn't a peer to peer network which violates the DMCA. .

I think DMCA anti-circumvention rules make it quite different then old analog cable "convertors" and clear QAM especially especially since clients are paying for a service to circumvent it. My original point is over the long term this model may not be able to be sustained and services continued.

Locast is slightly different since it rebroadcasts services already in the clear but they are still being fought in court. This will be a more interesting case closer to Betamax.

Martin

[nyplayer]

https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/loca...s/?source=home


Comment on Court Ruling
We got some disappointing news from the court today.
Locast Nation

In the big media companies' lawsuit against Locast, the court just issued a disappointing ruling. We are evaluating our options and will keep you posted as the situation develops.

Here is what our legal team had to say:

Electronic Frontier Foundation:

"We are disappointed that the court ruled against Locast on its copyright defense. The court interpreted the law in an artificially narrow way. Congress wrote copyright’s nonprofit retransmission exception to make sure that every American has access to their local broadcast stations, and expanding access is exactly what Locast does. This ruling that nonprofit retransmitters can’t use viewer contributions to expand access will do the opposite of what Congress intended. Over 3 million people use Locast to access local TV, including many who can’t afford cable and can’t pick up their local stations with an antenna. This ruling threatens their access to local news and vital information during a global pandemic and a season of unprecedented natural disasters. And it treats copyright law not as an engine of progress but a moat protecting the privileged position of the four giant broadcasting networks."

R. David Hosp, Partner Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe:

"We are disappointed in the ruling today and disagree with its conclusions and reasoning. Our client is in the process of evaluating the decision and formulating next steps. Locast provides a valuable service to its over 3 million users who are otherwise unable to access the over-the-air broadcasts to which they are entitled by virtue of their location or economic circumstances. Our client remains committed to its mission of delivering free, local broadcast TV service to all Americans, and particularly for those consumers who can’t afford pay-TV services like cable, satellite, or streaming, or who can’t get their local broadcast channels using an over-the-air antenna."

[wayner]

Hopefully it isn't another Aereo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo

[AlphaCrew]

AFAIK, battles with US media organizations have never resulted in a meaningful victory for the public.

Big business' rarely loose. One only has to look at the laws extending Copyright and Patent life as example. Our government (US) has effectively killed the Public Domain.

[davidb]

It doesn't seem wise to spend any efforts on Locast as it looks like its their days are numbered. Their exemption from copyright law was just turned down by a federal court judge.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/bu...tv-1235006305/

[KeithAbbott]

Looking at this from a glass-half-full perspective, is it possible that this could actually be good news? Since the concern seems to be around using a portion of their revenue to expand into new areas, maybe the monthly charge drops from $5 to $3 per month? They would then have to figure out a new way to fund expanding into new territories.

[nyplayer]

Some one on Channels called Locast Freemium ... and I agree not a non-profit.


Understanding Freemium
Under a freemium model, a business gives away services at no cost to the consumer as a way to establish the foundation for future transactions. By offering basic-level services for free, companies build relationships with customers, eventually offering them advanced services, add-ons, enhanced storage or usage limits, or an ad-free user experience for an extra cost.


They remove the constant interruptions for a subscription fee.... ooops I meant donation ...

[KeithAbbott]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

Some one on Channels called Locast Freemium ... and I agree not a non-profit.


Understanding Freemium
Under a freemium model, a business gives away services at no cost to the consumer as a way to establish the foundation for future transactions. By offering basic-level services for free, companies build relationships with customers, eventually offering them advanced services, add-ons, enhanced storage or usage limits, or an ad-free user experience for an extra cost.


They remove the constant interruptions for a subscription fee.... ooops I meant donation ...

30+ years ago, I worked for a non-profit health (dental) insurance company. It didn't really feel any different to me than working for a for-profit company; the employees were all compensated well, and the CEO got a pretty healthy paycheck. I just checked, they are still operating as a non-profit today. I was always surprised that their competition (for-profit companies) didn't pitch a bitch, because it seems like it would be unfair to have to compete price-wise with a non-profit.

Bottom line is, just because a company charges for it's services, doesn't mean that they cannot be considered a non-profit.

[nyplayer]

The judge found that the donations that Locast requests to avoid uninterrupted service are NOT actually donations, and that Locast is not operating as a non-profit. This cuts the legs under Locast's legal argument for why what they're doing is allowed.

[KeithAbbott]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

The judge found that the donations that Locast requests to avoid uninterrupted service are NOT actually donations, and that Locast is not operating as a non-profit. This cuts the legs under Locast's legal argument for why what they're doing is allowed.

“Since portions of its user payments fund Locast’s expansion, its charges exceed those “necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service”

My interpretation of what the judge said is that Locast is allowed to recover it's costs involved in maintaining and operating it's service. The judge is saying that they are not allowed to use that money to expand service into new territories. I'm thinking that Locast is going to need to find a different funding model to expand to different areas. Maybe gofundme...

[nyplayer]

Originally Posted by KeithAbbott

“Since portions of its user payments fund Locast’s expansion, its charges exceed those “necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service”

My interpretation of what the judge said is that Locast is allowed to recover it's costs involved in maintaining and operating it's service. The judge is saying that they are not allowed to use that money to expand service into new territories. I'm thinking that Locast is going to need to find a different funding model to expand to different areas. Maybe gofundme...

Locast Nation

As you probably know, the federal district court in the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in the case brought against Locast by the big media companies. The court concluded that by interrupting programming to ask users for donations, and by suspending those interruptions based on whether a user makes contributions, Locast actually was charging a fee, not merely seeking a voluntary contribution. The court then concluded that revenues Locast collects in this manner exceed the cost of operating the service because funds are used to add new markets, rendering Locast ineligible to use the copyright exemption for non-profits (17 U.S.C. 111(a)(5)).



Although we disagree with this interpretation and are exploring our legal options to contest it, out of respect for the court's order,



Locast is suspending immediately all programming interruptions to request donations.



This means that anyone located in a market we serve who signs up for Locast will get the service without interruption, regardless of whether or not they donate.



Of course, it is up to you whether or not to contribute to Locast. But if you currently contribute, we humbly request that you continue to do so. And if you don't contribute, we hope that you will do so if you can afford it.