Plex Said to Be Mulling Ad-Supported Movies and More Premium Content Subscriptions

[mylittlepwny]

I keep my mac plugged into my TV for plex now because the app for LG TV’s is so slow and has such a bad UI. It never used to be like this, I am about to try Emby again.

 

[Rique]

So this is the point where I come to the realization that there is nothing to be gained by arguing this further. I am just going to end by using other people's words:

Relevant Wikipedia article on DMCA in the United States

Specifically:

In the United States, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") has implemented the treaty provisions regarding the circumvention of some technological barriers to copying intellectual property.
Circumvention of Access Controls
Section 103 (17 U.S.C Sec. 1201(a)(1)) of the DMCA states:
No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
The Act defines what it means in Section 1201(a)(3):
(3) As used in this subsection—
(A) to "circumvent a technological measure" means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
(B) a technological measure "effectively controls access to a work" if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
Thus, if there is some "technological measure that effectively controls access to a work", it is illegal to circumvent that measure. However, Section 1201 creates several exceptions to this rule, and the Library of Congress is empowered to create additional exceptions.​

That's the relevant section of the DMCA. If it's not clear, here is a more readable summary written by lawyers at the Digital Media Law Project:

The DMCA prohibits circumventing access-control measures. 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1). For example, if you cannot watch a particular copyrighted DVD on your laptop because of an encryption system, the DMCA makes it unlawful for you to bypass this access-control measure. Access-control measures may also be found on eBooks, Internet streaming platforms, and password-protected sections of websites, among other things. Note that there is no ban on the act of circumventing copy-control measures, but it is illegal for anyone to provide you with the technological tools to do so. In any event, some copyright holders merge access-control and copy-control measures in the same DRM system, making it impossible to circumvent copy-controls (which is not prohibited) without circumventing access-controls (which is prohibited).
​

I feel like that is about as succinct and unambiguous as it could possibly be stated, and it specifically addresses the recording of "content you personally own." If you read all that and still feel that it's legal in the US to rip your own copyrighted content for personal use, there is nothing much I can say, except that that opinion would be going against essentially every legal interpretation of the DMCA to date.


You're right – if you stick to public domain content (which in the US is author's life + 70 years, so we're talking some seriously old video, for the most part), and things like your own family videos, there is definitely content out there that it is 100% legal to put on Plex. I'm sure this does make up some percentage of Plex content. I'm going to guess it is a very, very small percentage, but it is technically a thing.

Regarding those free YouTube movies: Not any more legal to put on Plex than ripped blu-rays, unfortunately. While most YouTube videos are not DRM-protected, these particular videos are. You can can check this with youtube-dl, which will happily download any YouTube video except the protected ones. Here is the output when I did a dry-run of youtube-dl on one of the movies in YouTube's "free to watch" section:

youtube-dl -F WzlGrjph9u4
[youtube] WzlGrjph9u4: Downloading webpage
[youtube] WzlGrjph9u4: Downloading video info webpage
ERROR: This video is DRM protected.

Sigh... you effectively conceded my point, which is that it was blatantly incorrect to state that Plex is "a product that currently deals exclusively with ripped or pirated content", but first you hid that behind a barrage of copied-and-pasted legal language. Well played, sir, well played.

As for the YouTube videos, pardon me for not researching those specific videos. I sent that link as an example URL to illustrate the point that YouTube provides videos which are not subject to copyright and available to download. Again, in providing the link you provided, you conceded that point as well.

Additionally, you chose not to speak at all to my point concerning the recording of streaming content to which one has subscribed and is a service that person or family is paying for. If your larger point is correct, then services such as PlayOn are illegal and should have been challenged. Yet, they continue on with impunity, unchallenged. I stick to my larger point, which is that recording of streaming content to which one has subscribed is, while probably inconsistent with the provider's TOU, technically not illegal and likely legal under Fair Use.

Which brings me to my final point: In providing your mountain of legal copied-pasted doctrine, you chose to ignore entirely the concept of Fair Use, which is still available to you, to me or to anyone sued for copyright infringement. While it is true that DMCA incorporates a rather neat work-around in the language, bypassing the notion of Fair Use to instead prohibit the technological means to circumvent, its available as a defense. Not that anyone would necessarily want to get into that particular mud pit with the providers.

Closing the loop on my point concerning Fair Use, here is some text from the very wiki article that you posted:

Fair Use and Circumvention
Critics of the DMCA have often noted the absence of an explicit exception for circumvention to enable fair use.[2][3][4]

Section 103(c)(1) of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. Sec. 1201 (c)(1)) does state that [n]othing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title. However, a violation of the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA is not itself copyright infringement and therefore it is unclear whether fair use can be raised as a defense in circumvention cases.

Courts have come out both ways on the issue. Some have held that the anti-circumvention provisions can only be violated when the circumvention has a connection to copyright infringement. For example, in Storage Tech. Corp. v. Custom Hardware Eng'g & Consulting, Inc., 421 F.3d 1307, 1318-19 (Fed. Cir. 2005) the Federal Circuit held that a copyright holder must show a connection to copyright infringement in order to succeed in a claim under the DMCA.

Similarly, in Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Skylink Technologies, Inc. 381 F.3d 1178 (Fed. Cir. 2004) the court held that distribution of a circumvention device (in that case a garage door opener) did not violate the anti-circumvention provisions because its use did not lead to any copyright violation.

However, in a number of cases involving DVD decryption courts have held that there is no fair use defense in circumvention cases. In Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294, 322 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), the court stated that "f Congress had meant the fair use defense to apply to such actions, it would have said so."[5]

The point being that, it is disingenuous (IMNSHO) to make the blanket statement that it is illegal to copy your own content for personal purposes. If you want to get into the quagmire of a discussion concerning the manufacture and distribution of tools intended to circumvent, that's another thing altogether (and I'd concede that point).

In closing, my original point stands as unchallenged and true - it is not correct to state that Plex is "a product that currently deals exclusively with ripped or pirated content".

Thanks. Good debate.
[doublepost=1546990556][/doublepost]Separate from the back-and-forth about the DMCA and copyrighted content, etc., I'd love any comments anyone might have concerning Emby. I'd look at it again if it proves a good alternative to Plex. I do like Plex (still), but not the direction they're headed with the GUI changes.

Does anyone care to post a quick review of the pluses-and-minuses of Emby? Thanks.

 

[Rique]

Regarding the recording of streaming content and specifically the application of the Fair Use clause, here is what PlayOn says on the matter:

https://www.playon.tv/blog/playon-legal

 

[shpankey]

I looked at Emby about 6 months ago and stuck with Plex. I honestly can't remember why. Don't they charge for streaming locally to iOS devices? Maybe that was it. Also, I can't remember being thrilled with the UI, either.

Questions - do they support music playlists? How easy is it to make and edit playlists? One of the reasons I don't use Kodi is because management of audio playlists is ridiculous. I realize Emby <=> Kodi, but audio playlists are super important to me. Also, if its true that you need to subscribe to stream locally to any device, how much is the subscription?

I guess I differ with the majority of posters on this thread... I still really like Plex, but I do have to admit that some of their recent GUI changes are questionable. For the most part, I don't turn that junk on.

I'm not aware of any other additional charges, though I do subscribe to their 'Premiere' service (much like I paid for plex as a monthly fee, though it's minimal). As far as the free service, I'm not sure what the deal is. But as a Premiere user there are no other fees. I believe it's $4.99, but one small note is that it buys it for you and all your users, not just for you. So all advanced features like Emby Connect, etc are available for everyone (up to a limit I believe, but I think it's like 15 users and then they have a higher tier).

Playlists for anything, including music, are extremely easy and on Par w/ Plex. Simply click the ... on the file you wish to start with and select "Create Playlist" and the next item you add you will select "Add to Playlist" and chose the playlist you just created and then add. Repeat for as many items as you wish. Once you're done... select "Playlists" at the top (always visible) and click on your new playlist. From there, you can edit it (play, play all, download, delete media, add, remove from playlist, favorite, etc).

Hope that helps. Definitely check it out. The UI is not as polished as Plex yet, but pretty darn close with continual improvements coming in almost daily (on the beta). A new final version is days away from release btw.

Hardware transcoding is far, far ahead of Plex... if that matters to you.

 

[Dameatball]

Maybe they should get their ass together and fix their clients on multiple platforms before adding more crap their paying users aren't asking for. Their server software is amazing, but their clients are helt together with ducttape

There was a time when I would agree with you, re: the server software but this isn't even true anymore. Emby has filled in the gaps where Plex has changed course. On Emby they leave make the server as the central hub for all content and the admin with complete control. IE- default transcoding settings aren't up to the user to find and change. Emby allows you to set the default for all the players tied to your account. Specifically setting it to "auto" automatically means emby plays media at the ideal setting for that particular client. The end result is your users find that 'it just works' because they dont have to go in and fiddle with their settings (if they dont want to, they of course can). Begrudgingly I've been testing it for the past few months and everything I've been reading is true.

The fundamental difference in the approach is Plex insists on your users being theirs. So everything we see moving forward is client based "features" revolving around serving ads (web shows, podcasts, etc). Unfortunately this doesn't actually translate to the clients being improved upon (plex ios actors still arent listed correctly, android tv doesnt list actors at all, Roku is a total **** show). The focus is on independent/non server content from useless sources and serving ads within those.

I say this as a long time Plex fan boy (I even have a plex t-shirt). Breaks my heart but the writing is on the wall and I'm starting to accept it.
[doublepost=1549951483][/doublepost]

Sigh... you effectively conceded my point, which is that it was blatantly incorrect to state that Plex is "a product that currently deals exclusively with ripped or pirated content", but first you hid that behind a barrage of copied-and-pasted legal language. Well played, sir, well played.

As for the YouTube videos, pardon me for not researching those specific videos. I sent that link as an example URL to illustrate the point that YouTube provides videos which are not subject to copyright and available to download. Again, in providing the link you provided, you conceded that point as well.

Additionally, you chose not to speak at all to my point concerning the recording of streaming content to which one has subscribed and is a service that person or family is paying for. If your larger point is correct, then services such as PlayOn are illegal and should have been challenged. Yet, they continue on with impunity, unchallenged. I stick to my larger point, which is that recording of streaming content to which one has subscribed is, while probably inconsistent with the provider's TOU, technically not illegal and likely legal under Fair Use.

Which brings me to my final point: In providing your mountain of legal copied-pasted doctrine, you chose to ignore entirely the concept of Fair Use, which is still available to you, to me or to anyone sued for copyright infringement. While it is true that DMCA incorporates a rather neat work-around in the language, bypassing the notion of Fair Use to instead prohibit the technological means to circumvent, its available as a defense. Not that anyone would necessarily want to get into that particular mud pit with the providers.

Closing the loop on my point concerning Fair Use, here is some text from the very wiki article that you posted:

Fair Use and Circumvention
Critics of the DMCA have often noted the absence of an explicit exception for circumvention to enable fair use.[2][3][4]

Section 103(c)(1) of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. Sec. 1201 (c)(1)) does state that [n]othing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title. However, a violation of the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA is not itself copyright infringement and therefore it is unclear whether fair use can be raised as a defense in circumvention cases.

Courts have come out both ways on the issue. Some have held that the anti-circumvention provisions can only be violated when the circumvention has a connection to copyright infringement. For example, in Storage Tech. Corp. v. Custom Hardware Eng'g & Consulting, Inc., 421 F.3d 1307, 1318-19 (Fed. Cir. 2005) the Federal Circuit held that a copyright holder must show a connection to copyright infringement in order to succeed in a claim under the DMCA.

Similarly, in Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Skylink Technologies, Inc. 381 F.3d 1178 (Fed. Cir. 2004) the court held that distribution of a circumvention device (in that case a garage door opener) did not violate the anti-circumvention provisions because its use did not lead to any copyright violation.

However, in a number of cases involving DVD decryption courts have held that there is no fair use defense in circumvention cases. In Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294, 322 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), the court stated that "f Congress had meant the fair use defense to apply to such actions, it would have said so."[5]

The point being that, it is disingenuous (IMNSHO) to make the blanket statement that it is illegal to copy your own content for personal purposes. If you want to get into the quagmire of a discussion concerning the manufacture and distribution of tools intended to circumvent, that's another thing altogether (and I'd concede that point).

In closing, my original point stands as unchallenged and true - it is not correct to state that Plex is "a product that currently deals exclusively with ripped or pirated content".

Thanks. Good debate.
[doublepost=1546990556][/doublepost]Separate from the back-and-forth about the DMCA and copyrighted content, etc., I'd love any comments anyone might have concerning Emby. I'd look at it again if it proves a good alternative to Plex. I do like Plex (still), but not the direction they're headed with the GUI changes.

Wow this is dull, who cares

[doublepost=1549951689][/doublepost]

This is probably sounds conspiratorial, but there is a intdustry-wide push for you to RENT absolutely everything, without having any easy way to own and manage something outright. Soon the "no easy" way will be replaced with "no way", so to speak boiling the frog slowly.
This is perfect for the rentier class - they will now own ABSOLUTELY everything.

Nothing tinfoil hat about this. Media companies dont want us to own anything digital. They want to be able to control the how, where and where it's utilized. Even if it's readily available through whatever service, they want total control over the assets.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

There was a time when I would agree with you, re: the server software but this isn't even true anymore. Emby has filled in the gaps where Plex has changed course. On Emby they leave make the server as the central hub for all content and the admin with complete control. IE- default transcoding settings aren't up to the user to find and change. Emby allows you to set the default for all the players tied to your account. Specifically setting it to "auto" automatically means emby plays media at the ideal setting for that particular client. The end result is your users find that 'it just works' because they dont have to go in and fiddle with their settings (if they dont want to, they of course can). Begrudgingly I've been testing it for the past few months and everything I've been reading is true.

I don't run with any external users - We simply use it as the family media center, and it works very nicely (With Infuse, mind you).

Is Emby worth switching to in the long run, even if Plex Server is working fine for us at the moment?

I say this as a long time Plex fan boy (I even have a plex t-shirt). Breaks my heart but the writing is on the wall and I'm starting to accept it.

I was close to buying a Plex Pass back in the days, when it cost a fraction of what it does now - I am so happy that I didn't. Their attitude has removed any respect I had for them.

 

[shpankey]

Imo, yes.... Emby is worth the switch. It is better than Plex on most fronts now.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I am not a Plex user, although I have looked at their software.

Vudu does the kind of thing although one doesn't have to click on any of the ad-support movies or shows.

If I were paying for Plex, I wouldn't like this idea at all.

 

[Dameatball]

I don't run with any external users - We simply use it as the family media center, and it works very nicely (With Infuse, mind you).

Is Emby worth switching to in the long run, even if Plex Server is working fine for us at the moment?

I was close to buying a Plex Pass back in the days, when it cost a fraction of what it does now - I am so happy that I didn't. Their attitude has removed any respect I had for them.

That’s a good question. Emby isn’t perfect (no software is) but it’s filled in a lot of the gaps that plex has missed for my needs. Most of my gripe with plex has to do with the control the admin has (or lack of) in regard to the users we share content with and the web shows etc I don’t want.

If it’s just you/your family that eliminates a lot of my complaints. That said, Emby allows far greater controls you would have over which members of your family see which libraries, what times of the day. For example if you have children, you can control what time they can access content, ratings and specific libraries. I’m not sure if this is relevant or not for you but it speaks to my overall point. All that said, I would look at what you gain/lose as an ‘Emby Premiere’ user vs a regular user
as it’s structured differently than plex. To your point, plex pass ‘features’ are pretty few and far between and you can get the pretty full experience without paying for a pass. It never hurts to try it out and see how it lines up with your needs.