560
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 156 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Playing devil's advocate, I understand one point of pressure: Plex doesn’t want to be perceived as a “piracy app.”

See: Kodi. https://kodi.expert/kodi-news/mpaa-warns-increasing-kodi-abuse-poses-greater-video-piracy-risk/

To be blunt, that’s a huge chunk of their userbase. And they run the risk of being legally pounded to dust once that image takes hold.

So how do they avoid that? Add a bunch of other stuff, for plausible deniability. And it seems to have worked, as the anti-piracy gods haven’t singled them out like they have past software projects.


To be clear, I'm not excusing Plex. But I can sympathize.

[-] almost1337@lemmy.zip 54 points 1 week ago

I wish more people understood this perspective

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 36 points 1 week ago

It's really nice of them to fight the good fight while I use Jellyfin instead.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

You may (half) joke, but MPAA attention on Jellyfin would suck.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago

I'd like to call this "the Ubuntu buffer".

[-] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago

Maybe a dumb question: What exactly could go wrong? Has the MPAA done anything to stifle Kodi?

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

https://www.comparitech.com/kodi/kodi-piracy-decline/

https://www.digital-digest.com/news-64644-Netflix-Amazon-Join-Forces-with-the-MPAA-to-Sue-Kodi-Box-Maker.html

Based on our research, comparative search volume for “Kodi” has fallen around 85 percent from 2017 to 2022. Google Trends data reveals the dramatic decline started in Q2 of 2017 and has, for the most part, continued that trend up to this point. Consequently, the decline in people searching for Kodi directly relates to the appearance of the coordinated attack against piracy in the form of ACE.

And this is with Kodi furiously distancing itself from pirates at the time.

Attacks don’t have to be direct. Though they absolutely can be, too.

[-] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago

There is that but it’s primarily that they’ve taken over 40 million dollars of venture capital. They are almost certainly under immense pressure to turn profitable asap and converting lifetime pass users into revenue streams somehow, converting new users into SaaS, etc are going to be things they pursue more aggressively.

Don’t take the devils money if you don’t want the devils stipulations

[-] kieron115@startrek.website 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They've taken other measures as well. Nobody knows the details besides them, but they blocked an entire cloud provider called Hetzner because too many people were using it for pirate Plex servers. They absolutely have to maintain the image of being legitimate like you said.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

Sure, apart from charging for remote access.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That serves the purpose too. It’s harder to pin Plex as an “illegal distribution service” when you have to pay for access. Either the streamer or “distributor” can’t be very anonymous, which makes large scale sharing impractical.

On the other hand, the more money they squeeze out, the more they risk appearing as if they “make money from piracy,” which is exactly how you get the MPAA’s attention.

[-] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 7 points 1 week ago

Remote access via their servers.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

I admit I’m very out of the loop, but my understanding is that remote access via their servers is the only supported remote viewing solution? Anything else is a “hack” so to speak.

[-] xthexder@l.sw0.com 6 points 1 week ago

If you have a static IP, or dynamic DNS set up, you can set up your own remote access with a reverse proxy like nginx. The nice thing is I get to use my own SSL certificate and all the actual streaming goes directly to my server, not through their proxies.

The only "hacky" part about it is that the Admin dashboard shows "Not available outside your network", even though everything works perfectly.

[-] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

Everything else is "a hack" in the sense that it is literally just the way to get Jellyfin working outside your network too.

[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

It's really not. They handle authentication but then everything is sent to your server.

[-] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Dynamic DNS does cost money. But not $8 a month. Development also costs money which falls under the $8 a month, but really not my problem, which is why I use Jellyfin. I used to run Plex off of my Nvidia shield, which was a cool gateway drug to self hosting and I'm grateful to them for that, but I like handling the technical stuff myself.

this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
560 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

77666 readers
2534 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS