Editing Streaming media (section)

== Use by the general public ==
[[File:羽村市動物公園 ニコ生 2017 (32782507624).jpg|thumb|A camera [[live streaming]] at a zoo by [[Niconico]]]]

Advances in [[computer network]]ing, combined with powerful home computers and operating systems, have made streaming media affordable and easy for the public. Stand-alone [[Internet radio device]]s emerged to offer listeners a non-technical option for listening to audio streams. These audio-streaming services became increasingly popular; music streaming reached 4 trillion streams globally in 2023—a significant increase from 2022—jumping 34% over the year.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sherman |first=Maria |date=2024-01-10 |title=Music streams hit 4 trillion in 2023. Country and global acts — and Taylor Swift — fueled the growth |url=https://apnews.com/article/music-streams-2023-luminate-54aa3735ed707c1d5e9649724cc78c1f |access-date=2024-11-21 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref>
[[File:Bluetooth Music Streaming - 2014 Scion tC (15664918268).jpg|thumb|A [[car audio]] receiver playing music being streamed via Bluetooth from a smartphone]]
In general, multimedia content is data-intensive, so media storage and transmission costs are still significant. Media is generally [[data compression|compressed]] for transport and storage. Increasing consumer demand for streaming [[High-definition television|high-definition]] (HD) content has led the industry to develop technologies such as [[WirelessHD]] and [[G.hn]], which are optimized for streaming HD content. Many developers have introduced HD streaming apps that work on smaller devices, such as tablets and smartphones, for everyday purposes.

{{quote box
| quote = "Streaming creates the illusion—greatly magnified by headphone use, which is another matter—that music is a utility you can turn on and off; the water metaphor is intrinsic to how it works. It dematerializes music, denies it a crucial measure of autonomy, reality, and power. It makes music seem disposable, impermanent. Hence it intensifies the ebb and flow of pop fashion, the way [[List of viral music videos|musical 'memes']] rise up for a week or a month and are then forgotten. And it renders our experience of individual artists/groups shallower."
| source = —[[Robert Christgau]], 2018<ref>{{cite web|last=Christgau|first=Robert|author-link=Robert Christgau|url=http://robertchristgau.com/xgausez.php|title=Xgau Sez|date=20 November 2018|website=robertchristgau.com|access-date=21 November 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180726005540/https://robertchristgau.com/xgausez.php|url-status=live|archive-date=26 July 2018}}</ref>|
| width = 20%
| align = right
| style = padding:8px;
}}

A media stream can be streamed either ''live'' or ''on demand''. Live streams are generally provided by a method called ''true streaming''. True streaming sends the information straight to the computer or device without saving it to a local file. On-demand streaming is provided by a method called ''[[progressive download]]''. Progressive download saves the received information to a local file and then plays it from that location. On-demand streams are often saved to files for extended period of time, while live streams are only available at one time only (e.g., during a football game).<ref>Grant and Meadows. (2009). Communication Technology Update and Fundamentals 11th Edition. pp.114</ref>

Streaming media is increasingly being coupled with the use of social media. For example, sites such as YouTube encourage social interaction in webcasts through features such as [[live chat]], [[online survey]]s, user posting of comments online, and more. Furthermore, streaming media is increasingly being used for [[social business]] and [[e-learning]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.inxpo.com/casting-calls/bid/113793/The-Future-of-Webcasting|title=The Future of Webcasting|last=Kellner|first=Scott|date=28 February 2013|publisher=INXPO|access-date=15 May 2013|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130703142337/http://web.inxpo.com/casting-calls/bid/113793/The-Future-of-Webcasting|archive-date=3 July 2013}}</ref>

The [[Horowitz Research]] State of Pay TV, OTT, and SVOD 2017 report said that 70 percent of those viewing content did so through a streaming service and that 40 percent of TV viewing was done this way, twice the number from five years earlier. [[Millennials]], the report said, streamed 60 percent of the content.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Horowitz: Streaming Is the New Normal|last=Umstead|first=R. Thomas|journal=[[Broadcasting & Cable]]|date=5 June 2017|page=4}}</ref>

=== Transition from DVD ===
One of the movie streaming industry's largest impacts was on the DVD industry, which drastically dropped in popularity and profitability with the mass popularization of online content.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Durrani |first=Ana |date=27 March 2023 |title=Top Streaming Statistics In 2024 |url=https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/internet/streaming-stats/ |access-date=28 September 2024 |website=Forbes Home |language=en-US}}</ref> The rise of media streaming caused the downfall of many DVD rental companies, such as [[Blockbuster (retailer)|Blockbuster]]. In July 2015, ''[[The New York Times]]'' published an article about [[Netflix]]'s DVD services. It stated that Netflix was continuing their DVD services with 5.3&nbsp;million subscribers, which was a significant drop from the previous year. On the other hand, their streaming service had 65&nbsp;million members.<ref>{{cite news|author=Steel, Emily|title=Netflix Refines Its DVD Business, Even as Streaming Unit Booms|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/while-its-streaming-service-booms-netflix-streamlines-old-business.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170621135707/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/while-its-streaming-service-booms-netflix-streamlines-old-business.html |archive-date=21 June 2017 |date= 26 July 2015|work=The New York Times|access-date=4 November 2019}}</ref> The shift to streaming platforms also led to the decline of DVD rental services. In July 2024, [[NBC News]] reported that [[Redbox|RedBox]], a DVD rental service that had operated for 22 years, would shut down due to the rapid incline of streaming platforms. As the rental services has been rapidly declining since 2010, the business had to file for bankruptcy, with 99% of households now subscribing to streaming services. Further reflecting the shift away from physical media, BestBuy has ceased selling DVDs.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-07-11 |title=Redbox set to close as DVD market withers in streaming's shadow |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/redbox-set-close-dvd-market-withers-streamings-shadow-rcna161407 |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=NBC News |language=en}}</ref>

=== Napster ===
[[Music streaming]] is one of the most popular ways in which consumers interact with streaming media. In the age of digitization, the [[Private good|private consumption]] of music has transformed into a [[Public good (economics)|public good]], largely due to one player in the market: Napster.

[[Napster]], a [[peer-to-peer]] (P2P) file-sharing network where users could upload and download [[MP3]] files freely, broke all music industry conventions when it launched in early 1999 in Hull, Massachusetts. The platform was developed by Shawn and John Fanning as well as [[Sean Parker]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://fortune.com/2013/09/05/ashes-to-ashes-peer-to-peer-an-oral-history-of-napster/|title=Ashes to ashes, peer to peer: An oral history of Napster|website=Fortune|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=9 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190309220739/http://fortune.com/2013/09/05/ashes-to-ashes-peer-to-peer-an-oral-history-of-napster/|url-status=live}}</ref> In an interview from 2009, Shawn Fanning explained that Napster "was something that came to me as a result of seeing a sort of unmet need and the passion people had for being able to find all this music, particularly a lot of the obscure stuff, which wouldn't be something you go to a record store and purchase, so it felt like a problem worth solving."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2009/05/31/an-interview-with-napsters-shawn-fanning/|title=An interview with Napster's Shawn Fanning|last1=Evangelista|first1=Benny|date=31 May 2009|website=The Technology Chronicles|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=21 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210521093345/https://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2009/05/31/an-interview-with-napsters-shawn-fanning/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Not only did this development disrupt the music industry by making songs that previously required payment to be freely accessible to any Napster user, but it also demonstrated the power of P2P networks in turning any digital file into a public, shareable good. For the brief period of time that Napster existed, mp3 files fundamentally changed as a type of good. Songs were no longer financially excludable, barring access to a computer with internet access, and they were not rivals, meaning if one person downloaded a song, it did not diminish another user from doing the same. Napster, like most other providers of public goods, faced the [[free-rider problem]]. Every user benefits when an individual uploads an mp3 file, but there is no requirement or mechanism that forces all users to share their music. Generally, the platform encouraged sharing; users who downloaded files from others often had their own files available for upload as well. However, not everyone chose to share their files. There was no a built-in incentive specifically discouraging users from sharing their own files.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Ethics of Anonymous Computing: Napster |url=https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/anonymous-computing/technology/napster.php3 |access-date=21 September 2023 |website=cs.stanford.edu}}</ref>

This structure revolutionized the consumer's perception of ownership over [[digital goods]]; it made music freely replicable. Napster quickly garnered millions of users, growing faster than any other business in history. At the peak of its existence, Napster boasted about 80&nbsp;million users globally. The site gained so much traffic that many college campuses had to block access to Napster because it created network congestion from so many students sharing music files.<ref name="expertise1">{{cite web|url=https://www.lifewire.com/history-of-napster-2438592|title=The History of Napster: Yes, It's Still Around|last1=Harris|first1=Mark|website=Lifewire|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=15 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190315210151/https://www.lifewire.com/history-of-napster-2438592|url-status=live}}</ref>

The advent of Napster sparked the creation of numerous other P2P sites, including [[LimeWire]] (2000), [[BitTorrent]] (2001), and [[the Pirate Bay]] (2003). The reign of P2P networks was short-lived. The first to fall was Napster in 2001. Numerous lawsuits were filed against Napster by various record labels, all of which were subsidiaries of [[Universal Music Group]], [[Sony Music]] Entertainment, [[Warner Music Group]], or [[EMI]]. In addition to this, the [[Recording Industry Association of America]] (RIAA) also filed a lawsuit against Napster on the grounds of unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, which ultimately led Napster to shut down in 2001.<ref name="expertise1"/> In an interview with the ''New York Times'', Gary Stiffelman, who represents [[Eminem]], [[Aerosmith]], and [[TLC discography|TLC]], explained, "I'm not an opponent of artists' music being included in these services, I'm just an opponent of their revenue not being shared."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/18/arts/record-labels-answer-to-napster-still-has-artists-feeling-bypassed.html|title=Record Labels' Answer to Napster Still Has Artists Feeling Bypassed|last=Strauss|first=Neil|date=18 February 2002|work=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=11 March 2019|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=23 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190323004314/https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/18/arts/record-labels-answer-to-napster-still-has-artists-feeling-bypassed.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

==== The fight for intellectual property rights: ''A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.'' ====
The lawsuit ''[[A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.]]'' fundamentally changed the way consumers interact with music streaming. It was argued on 2 October 2000, and was decided on 12 February 2001. The [[Court of Appeals]] for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a P2P file-sharing service could be held liable for contributory and vicarious infringement of copyright, serving as a landmark decision for Intellectual property law.<ref name="wustl1">{{cite web|url=https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/case-study-am-records-inc-v-napster-inc/|title=Case Study: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. – Blog {{!}} @WashULaw|date=1 August 2013|website=onlinelaw.wustl.edu|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=31 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200531145508/https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/case-study-am-records-inc-v-napster-inc/|url-status=live}}</ref>

The first issue that the Court addressed was [[fair use]], which says that otherwise infringing activities are permissible so long as they are for purposes "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching [...] scholarship, or research."<ref name="cornell2001">{{cite web|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm|title=A&M RECORDS, INC. v. NAPSTER, INC., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)|website=law.cornell.edu|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=12 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412213747/https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> Judge Beezer, the judge for this case, noted that Napster claimed that its services fit "three specific alleged fair uses: [[sampling (music)|sampling]], where users make temporary copies of a work before purchasing; space-shifting, where users access a sound recording through the Napster system that they already own in audio CD format; and permissive distribution of recordings by both new and established artists."<ref name="cornell2001"/> Judge Beezer found that Napster did not fit these criteria, instead enabling their users to repeatedly copy music, which would affect the market value of the copyrighted good.

The second claim by the plaintiffs was that Napster was actively contributing to [[copyright infringement]] since it had knowledge of widespread file sharing on its platform. Since Napster took no action to reduce infringement and financially benefited from repeated use, the court ruled against the P2P site. The court found that "as much as eighty-seven percent of the files available on Napster may be copyrighted and more than seventy percent may be owned or administered by plaintiffs."<ref name="cornell2001"/>

The [[injunction]] ordered against Napster ended the brief period in which music streaming was a public good – non-rival and non-excludable in nature. Other P2P networks had some success at sharing MP3s, though they all met a similar fate in court. The ruling set the precedent that copyrighted digital content cannot be freely replicated and shared unless given consent by the owner, thereby strengthening the property rights of artists and record labels alike.<ref name="wustl1"/>

=== Music streaming platforms ===
{{Main|Music streaming service}}
[[File:Music streaming platform use vs music piracy rates in U.S.png|thumb|As music streaming platforms have become more prevalent in the US, music piracy rates have fallen. Piracy rates are calculated as a function of US total population.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://dima.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/DiMA-Streaming-Forward-Report.pdf|title=Digital Media Association Annual Report|date=March 2018|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=10 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181210195836/https://dima.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/DiMA-Streaming-Forward-Report.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>]]

Although music streaming is no longer a freely replicable public good, streaming platforms such as [[Spotify]], [[Deezer]], [[Apple Music]], [[SoundCloud]], [[YouTube Music]], and [[Amazon Music]] have shifted music streaming to a [[Club good|club-type good]]. While some platforms, most notably Spotify, give customers access to a [[freemium]] service that enables the use of limited features for exposure to advertisements, most companies operate under a premium subscription model.<ref>{{cite news |title=Battle of the Streaming Services: Which Is the Best Premium Video Service? |url=https://www.gadgets360.com/internet/features/best-streaming-service-app-tv-movies-india-price-netflix-amazon-prime-disney-plus-hotstar-google-apple-2223556 |access-date=11 May 2020 |work=NDTV Gadgets 360 |language=en |archive-date=17 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220617065514/https://gadgets360.com/internet/features/best-streaming-service-app-tv-movies-india-price-netflix-amazon-prime-disney-plus-hotstar-google-apple-2223556 |url-status=live }}</ref> Under such circumstances, music streaming is financially excludable, requiring that customers pay a monthly fee for access to a music library, but non-rival, since one customer's use does not impair another's.

An article written by the [[New York Times]] in 2021 states that "streaming saved music." This is because it provided monthly revenue. Especially Spotify offers its free platform, but you can pay for their premium to get music ad-free.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2021-03-22 |title=Streaming Saved Music. Artists Hate It. (Published 2021) |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/technology/streaming-music-economics.html |access-date=2024-12-09 |language=en |last1=Ovide |first1=Shira }}</ref> This allows access for people to stream music anywhere from their devices not having to rely on CDs anymore.

There is competition between services similar but lesser to the streaming wars for video media. {{as of|2019}}, Spotify has over 207&nbsp;million users in 78 countries,<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 February 2024 |title=Decoding Artist Compensation: Streaming 2024 |url=https://mariahpedia.com/decoding-artist-compensation-streaming-2024/}}</ref> {{as of|2018}}, Apple Music has about 60&nbsp;million, and SoundCloud has 175&nbsp;million.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2018/05/25/the-top-10-streaming-music-services-by-number-of-users/|title=The Top 10 Streaming Music Services By Number Of Users|last=McIntyre|first=Hugh|website=Forbes|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=8 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191108105345/https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2018/05/25/the-top-10-streaming-music-services-by-number-of-users/|url-status=live}}</ref> All platforms provide varying degrees of accessibility. Apple Music and Prime Music only offer their services for paid subscribers, whereas Spotify and SoundCloud offer freemium and premium services. Napster, owned by Rhapsody since 2011, has resurfaced as a music streaming platform offering subscription-based services to over 4.5&nbsp;million users {{as of|January 2017|lc=on}}.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/08/21/realnetworks-napster-profitable/|title=Napster Proves That Streaming Music Can Be Profitable|date=22 August 2018|website=Digital Music News|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=1 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200301050307/https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/08/21/realnetworks-napster-profitable/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In the evolving music streaming landscape, competition among platforms is shaped by various factors, including royalty rates, exclusive content, and market expansion strategies. A notable development occurred in January 2025, when Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify announced a new multi-year agreement. This partnership aims to enhance opportunities for artists and consumers through innovative subscription tiers and an enriched audio-visual catalog.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Oganesyan |first=Natalie |date=2025-01-26 |title=Spotify, Universal Music Group Strike Multi-Year Deal |url=https://deadline.com/2025/01/spotify-universal-music-group-deal-1236268625/ |access-date=2025-01-27 |website=Deadline |language=en-US}}</ref>

The music industry's response to music streaming was initially negative. Along with music piracy, streaming services disrupted the market and contributed to the fall in US revenue from $14.6&nbsp;billion in 1999 to $6.3&nbsp;billion in 2009. CDs and single-track downloads were not selling because content was freely available on the Internet. By 2018, however, music streaming revenue exceeded that of traditional revenue streams (e.g. record sales, album sales, downloads).<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|url=https://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2018.pdf|title=Global Music Report 2018: Annual State of the Industry|year=2017|work=GMR|access-date=12 March 2019|archive-date=9 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200709091121/https://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2018.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Streaming revenue is now one of the largest driving forces behind the growth in the music industry.

=== COVID-19 pandemic ===
By August 2020, the [[COVID-19 pandemic]] had streaming services busier than ever. The pandemic contributed to a surge in subscriptions, in the UK alone, 12 million people joined a new streaming service that they had not previously had.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Rajan|first=Amol|date=5 August 2020|title=TV watching and online streaming surge during lockdown|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-53637305|access-date=24 November 2021|archive-date=24 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124103617/https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-53637305|url-status=live}}</ref> Global subscriptions skyrocketed passing 1 billion.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Faughnder |first=Ryan |date=2021-03-18 |title=Streaming milestone: Global subscriptions passed 1 billion last year |url=https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-03-18/streaming-milestone-global-subscriptions-passed-1-billion-last-year-mpa-theme-report |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=Los Angeles Times |language=en-US}}</ref> Within the first 3 months, back in 2020, nearly 15.7 million people signed up for Netflix.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lee |first=Edmund |date=April 21, 2020 |title=Everyone You Know Just Signed Up for Netflix |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/business/media/netflix-q1-2020-earnings-nflx.html?login=email. |website=New York Times}}</ref> With people stuck at home and facing lock-downs Netflix and other streaming services provided a much needed distraction.

An impact analysis of 2020 data by the [[International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers]] (CISAC) indicated that remuneration from digital streaming of music increased with a strong rise in digital royalty collection (up 16.6% to EUR 2.4&nbsp;billion), but it would not compensate the overall loss of income of authors from concerts, public performance and broadcast.<ref>{{Cite web|last=CISAC|title=CISAC Global Collections Report 2021 (for 2020 Data)|url=https://www.cisac.org/Newsroom/news-releases/cisac-global-collections-report-shows-creators-royalties-down-eu-1-billion|url-status=live|access-date=30 December 2021|website=CISAC|date=27 October 2021|archive-date=30 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230051614/https://www.cisac.org/Newsroom/news-releases/cisac-global-collections-report-shows-creators-royalties-down-eu-1-billion}}</ref>  The [[International Federation of the Phonographic Industry]] (IFPI) recompiled the music industry initiatives around the world related to the COVID-19. In its State of the Industry report, it recorded that the global recorded music market grew by 7.4% in 2022, the 6th consecutive year of growth. This growth was driven by streaming, mostly from paid subscription streaming revenues which increased by 18.5%, fueled by 443 million users of subscription accounts by the end of 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|title=IFPI issues Global Music Report 2021: Global recorded music revenues grow 7.4%|url=https://www.ifpi.org/ifpi-issues-annual-global-music-report-2021/|url-status=live|access-date=30 December 2021|website=IFPI.org|date=23 March 2021|archive-date=25 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210325201021/https://www.ifpi.org/ifpi-issues-annual-global-music-report-2021/}}</ref>

The COVID-19 pandemic has also driven an increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly on streaming platforms like YouTube and [[podcast]]s.<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Hsu|first1=Tiffany|last2=Tracy|first2=Marc|date=12 November 2021|title=On Podcasts and Radio, Misleading Covid-19 Talk Goes Unchecked|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/12/business/media/coronavirus-misinformation-radio-podcasts.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211228/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/12/business/media/coronavirus-misinformation-radio-podcasts.html |archive-date=28 December 2021 |url-access=limited|access-date=24 November 2021|issn=0362-4331}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

=== Local/home streaming ===
[[File:Synology-audio-station-chromecast-apple-tv-dlna2.jpg|thumb|A TV set streaming an audio file from a local [[home server]]]]
Streaming also refers to the offline streaming of multimedia at home. This is made possible by technologies such as [[DLNA]], which allow devices on the same local network to connect to each other and share media.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Enabling and configuring DLNA media server |url=https://docs.qnap.com/operating-system/quts-hero/5.1.x/en-us/enabling-and-configuring-dlna-media-server-86443D8B.html |access-date=27 October 2023 |website=docs.qnap.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Connected Digital Home |url=https://www.manifest-tech.com/ce_products/digital_home.htm |access-date=27 October 2023 |website=manifest-tech.com}}</ref> Such capabilities are heightened using [[network-attached storage]] (NAS) devices at home, or using specialized software like [[Plex Inc.|Plex Media Server]], [[Jellyfin]] or [[TwonkyMedia server|TwonkyMedia]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brookes |first=Tim |date=30 March 2023 |title=No Plex App, No Problem: Using Plex as a DLNA/UPnP Server |url=https://www.howtogeek.com/880945/no-plex-app-no-problem-using-plex-as-a-dlna-upnp-server/ |access-date=5 May 2024 |website=How-To Geek |language=en}}</ref>