Indeed. If the Flo folks are really interested in protecting their investment, I would recommend they focus first on infrastructure/operations and delivery upgrades.
Last edited:
Cenzo VS IMAR, ESPN + IRONHEAD
- Thread starter PSU22
- Start date
Indeed. If the Flo folks are really interested in protecting their investment, I would recommend they focus first on infrastructure/operations and delivery upgrades.
1) As a paying customer you certainly have the right to criticism. As a said in my post, they've had some minor and major - national duals - hiccups. Deserving of criticism. But if you are a paying subscriber, I can't see how you have not noticed the improvement in their streaming services over the last year or two. As I posted above, I've rarely had issues with their streaming and I watch a lot of events. National Duals, obviously, and maybe their was one other event - can't remember which - where there was a 15 minute hiccup. Much, much better than in the past and certainly much better than any other streaming service I've used (TBF, I can only recall using Track). My point was not aimed at you, but more in general as perusing ALL boards you would think that FLO has streaming issues with every event they broadcast.
2) FLO has a monopoly on events you want to watch. Well, they do have a competitor in Track now. It's also a bit like saying the Golf Channel has a monopoly as my brother-in-law is FORCED to add that tier because they have a bunch of content he wants to watch.
3) I have no doubt that your argument about the technicalities of copyright infringement are correct. I wasn't arguing with you. My statement was more to the people posting "why are they doing this, kind of like the Grinch that stole Christmas." My point is that they DO have a financial incentive to have it taken down. Right now they are the only outlet with any content from this match available. And they paid for that right. Whether they made the request, or they should have one of their partners do it is important to you, but irrelevant to me and probably all the other posters here (not bagging on you, I get your point about this being a personal issue with your occupation)
4) As far as the "good of the sport" argument - you'll get no argument from me pointing out inconsistencies by parties on ALL sides, including the competitors. My point being only that I have no expectations of philanthropy from a for-profit business. My only expectation is that they should be interested in what's good for wrestling (why WOULDN'T they be - it provides content for one of their arms), but not at a sacrifice to their company. One could argue that there is a ying and yang to that - some sacrifice may be beneficial in the long run, but that's their business decisions to make.
In short, my post was not really taking issue with your posts - given the line you were arguing - but more aimed at the general FLO bashing that results around it on this thread, and on a bunch of other boards. Most of it is over the top and a lot baseless, without acknowledging the tremendous access we have to content today in which they have played a big part. And profited by. But we have profited as well, unless one is of the opinion that we should be getting this for free.
And as posted above, I won't argue with you if they are being disingenuous bashing their competitors for a capitalistic approach to the business. They are all in the business of profit.
IMO opinion they are, and their delivery of the product has improved greatly over the past year or two. The national duals fiasco was a big hiccup, but only a temporary downturn in a trend that has been pointing up consistently.
Why was the National Duals fiasco a big hiccup? Is it possible they aren't investing enough in infrastructure and/or skilled personnel to handle large events? Should that be acceptable for a subscription service? Oh well, beating a dead horse I know. Bottom line is I'd love to watch the matches this weekend. And maybe they have their shit together now. It's a trust issue at this point.
In the Cenzo-Joseph match, my money is on Cenzo!
I think Cenzo's overhook offense will finally overpower Joseph's great-hips defense.
Flo could improve customer relations by announcing the results of the root cause investigation, and a timeline of corrective action implementation.
Re: http://www.flowrestling.org/article...s-ceo-co-founder-martin-floreani#.WQDTkp8pDqA
I understand we're in different industries, but if I want to acquire future business (or at least not have my customer place calls to VPs), I had better disclose those RCCA results within 30-60 days.
It's been over 60 days. (Or, by Foley standards, a few hours.)
For perspective, Flo investigated the Rio refs and reported in under 5 weeks (8/21 vs. 9/26). That was to benefit the sport, and glad they did it, but not a direct customer benefit.
Re: http://www.flowrestling.org/article...s-ceo-co-founder-martin-floreani#.WQDTkp8pDqA
I understand we're in different industries, but if I want to acquire future business (or at least not have my customer place calls to VPs), I had better disclose those RCCA results within 30-60 days.
It's been over 60 days. (Or, by Foley standards, a few hours.)
For perspective, Flo investigated the Rio refs and reported in under 5 weeks (8/21 vs. 9/26). That was to benefit the sport, and glad they did it, but not a direct customer benefit.
I don't really understand the bitterness toward Flo in this particular instance. They paid good money for the exclusive right to show NCAA highlights. If my business did that and then someone else was illegally show what I paid good money to show (and more!), you are darn right I'd enforce my rights as that's business.
I'm not happy about not being able to see these matches any longer but I get the economics. As mentioned, DVR it when ESPN shows it again if you really feel strong about this. It's a temporary hurdle at best.
I'm not happy about not being able to see these matches any longer but I get the economics. As mentioned, DVR it when ESPN shows it again if you really feel strong about this. It's a temporary hurdle at best.
This.
Classic example of people believing what they want to believe.
I suspect IMar will come back with a vengeance.
Let's do this. Let's get some pot-bellied old geezers and have them re-enact the match shot-for-shot, move-for-move, and then let's take the re-enactment video and sync it to Byer's call and put it on YouTube. Then, let's see if Willie takes it down.
#bekindrewind
Let's do this. Let's get some pot-bellied old geezers and have them re-enact the match shot-for-shot, move-for-move, and then let's take the re-enactment video and sync it to Byer's call and put it on YouTube. Then, let's see if Willie takes it down.
#bekindrewind
No singlets please!
Bonus: no need for slow motion editing.Let's do this. Let's get some pot-bellied old geezers and have them re-enact the match shot-for-shot, move-for-move, and then let's take the re-enactment video and sync it to Byer's call and put it on YouTube. Then, let's see if Willie takes it down.
#bekindrewind
I spotted a great looking girl in the audience. I'll play the part of the seat she was sitting on. I'm old now... not sure my heart can take it but for the good of the board, I'll give it my best shot...Let's do this. Let's get some pot-bellied old geezers and have them re-enact the match shot-for-shot, move-for-move, and then let's take the re-enactment video and sync it to Byer's call and put it on YouTube. Then, let's see if Willie takes it down.
#bekindrewind
No one asked me to come post pro-flo replys. I just truly enjoy the amount of wrestling I now get to see for a fairly small fee. I live in Oregon so don't get to see a lot of high quality wrestling (except for Travis Wittlake) but with Flo I get to watch Iron man, beast of the east, us open, and on and on. People complaining about it seem crazy to me. Is Flo perfect...absolutely not. I was super pissed about the PSU-OSU duel but I still did get to watch all of those matches. Something I wouldn't have been able to do not long ago. And it's a huge resource for kids. I wish I had the technique content available when I was coming up. I'm sure I'll be called a flo homer or worse but for an ex wrestler living far away from a wrestling Mecca, flo has been a godsend for me.
I love FLO for their documentaries alone. Only one complaint.... more PSU and less Iowa. Last fall when I binge watched their originals, I thought I was about to puke black and gold.
not Flos fault.
have to keep Willie at arms distance from program. Plausible deniability of sorts [sarcasm font]
They paid for something (rights), and are reselling it. Do you also get ticked off at the stores you shop in, which also don't really do any of the work making the product? Their work is getting it to you, as is Flo's.
The point here is that Flo did not have the right to get the videos taken down. They are not the responsible party.
I respectfully disagree. To me, that's not the point. That's like saying I committed a crime, but the wrong police department caught me. To a lawyer, that may be an alleged point, but for actual right vs wrong, the particular police department is a minor and separate detail.
It's more like reporting that you were robbed because you live on the same street as someone that was. I get that it's not a meaningful distinction for everyone here but if you're running a company, which Flo allegedly is, distinctions like that are important because sooner or later you're going to step on a legal liability landmine.
Assuming you mean the YT poster, at the point they produced a $20,000 retainer. Online infringement cases (from either plaintiff or defendant's view) are usually cost-prohibitive, even if you're sure to prevail, because the attorneys costs in bringing one (a certain cost) usually eclipses what you might get back (an uncertain award).
More importantly, the cost risk on the defendant side is often (usually depending on whether the work was registered) fixed (x $ for each infringement, etc.) and so the math could work out in a way that risks bankrupting your family.
Unsurprisingly there are fewer disincentives for plaintiffs; being wrong could result in an award including attorneys fees, but only in instances egregious overreaching, such as when Diebold (the voting machine company) used the DMCA to takedown a website which exposed its technical flaws and security holes.
With respect to the YT clip in question I mentioned way upthread that there was a potential fair use argument because the user had created something that actually hadn't existed before and transformed the original work into something new--Byers radio narration of ESPN's footage. But fair use is a defense to infringement and the courts are somewhat unpredictable in analyzing it. Same post upthread I also doubted its success here, meaning that I'd be a bad choice for YT poster's attorney, being that the other side would use my statements against my client.
another reason why this a great forum!! (most of the time) thanks tikk10 for the insight
Flo aren't the copyright police. You don't see them going around YouTube and requesting DMCA takedowns for music do you?
Similar threads
