Streaming of commercials over Broadcastify feeds?

Status
Not open for further replies.

fxdscon

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
5,369
Since we've established that the feeds are FOR profit, I'm curious how they would be exempt from: 1058. Penalties

"The basic penalty provision for the intentional interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication is five years imprisonment and a fine under Title 18, United States Code. 18 U.S.C. § 2511(4)(a).

The first exception applies to unscrambled, unencrypted radio communications provided that the conduct is a first offense and is not for a tortious or illegal purpose, or purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain."
I'm surprised that you would think that Radio Reference is not aware of the legalities involved:


.
 

fxdscon

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
5,369
Feed providers are providing the source for the ads to be injected in. Without the feeds, there's no ads. Is it wrong to think that feed providers should have at least been made aware or included in the decision? Why not share the financials publically? What's to hide?
Nothing to hide:

RadioReference.com is a business. Make no mistake, I run the site as a for profit business with capitalistic underpinnings. This business takes a tremendous amount of time and effort to manage, including management, problem users, general users, development, coding, license fees, you name it. This business has significant costs every month to maintain every month. Just like Uniden, Radio Shack, Icom, etc… RadioReference.com attempts to, frankly, make as much money as we can. And, we cannot make money unless we provide a valuable service that the user community deems to be a good investment.
 

AJAT

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
270
Location
Snohomish, WA
I'm surprised that you would think that Radio Reference is not aware of the legalities involved:


.
That explains my statement on the legalities of divulging info you hear. Thanks for that link. I don’t see how that address the using for profit...”or purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain.”
 

belvdr

No longer active as of 2020-12-14
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
939
Feed providers are providing the source for the ads to be injected in. Without the feeds, there's no ads. Is it wrong to think that feed providers should have at least been made aware or included in the decision? Why not share the financials publically? What's to hide?
Sure I think it would have been kind to let feed providers know ahead of time. I think that’s fair.

However, I don’t think it’s accurate to think a private company has something to hide because they don’t share financials. That’s why it’s a private business. Since you’re a feed provider attached to a business, would you want to share all of your finances? Again, I’m not sure how finances correlate to your original complaint.
 

fxdscon

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
5,369
That explains my statement on the legalities of divulging info you hear. Thanks for that link. I don’t see how that address the using for profit...”or purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain.”
The owner of the Radio Reference site would be best qualified to address your question with their interpretation of the laws at this link :


Please let us know what the response is.

.
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
I'm surprised that you would think that Radio Reference is not aware of the legalities involved:


.
Sure I think it would have been kind to let feed providers know ahead of time. I think that’s fair.

However, I don’t think it’s accurate to think a private company has something to hide because they don’t share financials. That’s why it’s a private business. Since you’re a feed provider attached to a business, would you want to share all of your finances? Again, I’m not sure how finances correlate to your original complaint.
Please explain your assumption that I'm a feed provider attached to a business. My feeds have always been provided for free. I do not make any money whatsoever from my feed system. When I set-up here 10 years ago, the feeds were provided to the public for free. I even quoted previous words from Lindsay earlier in this thread, as saying there were no plans to incorporate ads in the feed.

Also, if it were my business, I would set it up as a non-profit, in which case, I would gladly show where income/expense was going. You know, how like radio clubs are.
 

belvdr

No longer active as of 2020-12-14
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
939
Please explain your assumption that I'm a feed provider attached to a business. My feeds have always been provided for free. I do not make any money whatsoever from my feed system. When I set-up here 10 years ago, the feeds were provided to the public for free. I even quoted previous words from Lindsay earlier in this thread, as saying there were no plans to incorporate ads in the feed.

Also, if it were my business, I would set it up as a non-profit, in which case, I would gladly show where income/expense was going. You know, how like radio clubs are.
No assumption made. Your feed is connected to Broadcastify, which is a business. It’s a simple fact. Still no connection to your original complaint.

It’s great to think you’d run it as a non-profit, but things and times change. We can “what if” it to death, until you start your non-profit.
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
The owner of the Radio Reference site would be best qualified to address your question with their interpretation of the laws at this link :


Please let us know what the response is.

.
The
RR is providing equipment also so why do you think they are guilty?
The adds pay the bills and pay for upkeep end of storey.
They are profiting from the rebroadcasting of radio transmissions. Perhaps you missed my reference to the law, above. There's a difference in the act of rebroadcasting, and the equipment of rebroadcasting. Apples, oranges.
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
9,010
Location
NW Tenn
Sorry you do not understand good luck in running your own site if you choose. You are responsible for reading and keeping up with the RR ULA good luck in your ventures.
 

AJAT

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
270
Location
Snohomish, WA
The


They are profiting from the rebroadcasting of radio transmissions. Perhaps you missed my reference to the law, above. There's a difference in the act of rebroadcasting, and the equipment of rebroadcasting. Apples, oranges.
I would recommend you remove your feed immediately since you think you are assisting some one in engaging in illegal activity. Plus the fact you are so upset about it. I would assume that it is legal what this site does since it has been up for so long. I could be wrong and don’t really care one way or the other, but you seem to be very upset about it.
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
No assumption made. Your feed is connected to Broadcastify, which is a business. It’s a simple fact. Still no connection to your original complaint.

It’s great to think you’d run it as a non-profit, but things and times change. We can “what if” it to death, until you start your non-profit.
My original complaint was about ads on my feed. If you don't see the connection, then I believe it is you that does not understand. :)

I understand very well, actually. I find it very strange that everyone is so defensive, rather than answering simple questions. That's an answer all in itself. The issue of money was brought up by others, which started another discussion.

Also, I have been running my site for 12 years now, after taking it over from someone that ran it for about 8 years before moving away. Thanks! :)
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
I would recommend you remove your feed immediately since you think you are assisting some one in engaging in illegal activity. Plus the fact you are so upset about it. I would assume that it is legal what this site does since it has been up for so long. I could be wrong and don’t really care one way or the other, but you seem to be very upset about it.
But I thought it was perfectly legal according to statements above? I'm in the clear! Phew.

Who said I was upset? Again, I'm just trying to have a conversation with some very defensive folks!
 

belvdr

No longer active as of 2020-12-14
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
939
My original complaint was about ads on my feed. If you don't see the connection, then I believe it is you that does not understand. :)

I understand very well, actually. I find it very strange that everyone is so defensive, rather than answering simple questions. That's an answer all in itself. The issue of money was brought up by others, which started another discussion.

Also, I have been running my site for 12 years now, after taking it over from someone that ran it for about 8 years before moving away. Thanks! :)
There is no connection between sharing company financials and ads on your feed. You’re right. I don’t understand the correlation and I think I’ve stated that multiple times.

I’m not defensive in this at all. I apologize if it came across that way. Forums lack the emotion of speech unfortunately.
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,857
Location
San Antonio, TX
We are a for profit private business, so no P&L will be forthcoming, and I'm under no obligation to provide one either.

You quoted a policy that I posted 8 years ago with regards to ads in streams - things can change in a business over 8 years.

I have an enormous amount of time and money invested in this business, and it is a full time job for me. Our expenses alone to run this business run in the hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. We provide free premium subscriptions to feed providers, and we pay collective bonuses to our volunteer database administrators of over 40K a year. The owners and operators of this site have tremendous risk, but we are also handsomely rewarded for our efforts and work.

ScanWorcester: if you don't like how we are providing services here, then terminate your feed. No hard feelings, our platform isn't for everyone, and sometimes even the most ardent supporters of capitalism get envious, or whatever. That's up to you my friend.

Now before anyone storms in here and starts telling "you can't talk to a feed provider like that!" remember that I'm well known for speaking my mind and fiercely defending what we have in place here. We know what we're doing, we're on the right track, and things are better than ever here. You can lecture me on what I should/could/would be doing, but so far we've kinda proven we know what the hell we're doing around here. The listeners, the feeds, the platform, everything stands on its own and speaks for itself.

Given all this - none of this is up for debate further. Thank you.
 

fxdscon

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
5,369
I understand very well, actually. I find it very strange that everyone is so defensive, rather than answering simple questions.
Your questions have been answered many times over, you just don't want to hear them.

As others have mentioned, and as stated in the rules of registering for this site... If you don't like how the site is run, you are free to go elsewhere.

.
 

fredva

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
1,758
Location
Virginia/West Virginia
How did this thread get on the topic of the legalities of streaming? Was somebody unable to win the argument against ads, so they then suggested the whole operation was possibly illegal? After a dozen or more years of continuous streaming?
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
How did this thread get on the topic of the legalities of streaming? Was somebody unable to win the argument against ads, so they then suggested the whole operation was possibly illegal? After a dozen or more years of continuous streaming?
Who said anything about the legalities of streaming?
 

ScanWorcester

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
146
Your questions have been answered many times over, you just don't want to hear them.

As others have mentioned, and as stated in the rules of registering for this site... If you don't like how the site is run, you are free to go elsewhere.

.
Who said I didn't like the way it was being run? Again... Just asking questions that have sparked off a great conversation!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top