read it again perhaps?
I know people get instantly defensive when it comes to an issue like this and love to argue their side and lecture other adults about morels, right/wrong but if you look at his last sentence he isn't blaming the nhl. he simply states he would love to continue to provide this service but the party's been ruined. I'm just saying he is already being forced to close his site; chastising the dude like he is ignorant of the law comes off as a little insulting.
I wasn't chastising him, or attempting to lecture anyone on morals (pppst, that ain't my photo in my avatar!), or attempting to argue a legal point as there's nothing really to "argue" about the legality of unauthorized streaming. Perhaps it's matter of perspective as I create copyrighted material that I've seen misappropriated on-line without my permission from time to time and I know that people often get defensive when you ask them to stop the infringement and you're made to be the "bad guy". If Getty were to send me a note to ask that I find another image to use instead of Homer's butt in Mason's face, I'd do so and not be upset about it because I know I wouldn't have much if any ground to stand on.
But if the OP isn't blaming the NHL's flexing of their legal muscle as reason the party's been "ruined", then I don't know where you think that he thinks the fault lies instead. He could have said "Sorry guys, but I had to take it down over objections by the NHL" and left it at that.
If my post came off as insulting, I can assure you that that wasn't my intent. I'll add my thanks to the OP for making the effort while knowing that you were risking taking one for the team.
Edited by Gizmo, 20 February 2012 - 01:58 PM.