NTL promoting copyright infringement [Archive]

duncant403

04-09-2003, 21:42

Originally posted by Mr Concerned
If it is stating fact, which it probably is, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Yes they are stating a fact in that people download movies and that Spiderman was (illegally) available to download before the cinema release, but in the context of an advert encouraging you to subscribe to NTL's broadband service NTL are suggesting that downloading movies illegally is a reason for subscribing to their service. In this respect they are encouraging copyright infringement.

While they are not literally saying "subscribe to our service to download movies" they are saying "people have broadband to shop on the internet and download movies. You should subscribe to our broadband service [and then you can do these things]".

They are using the ability to download movies in the reasonable time-frame that broadband gives you as a selling point for their service. And to quote a specific title - Spiderman - that was certainly never available to legally download prior to the cinema release (and I'm pretty sure isn't available to legally download now) is hardly appropriate. Suppose someone downloaded Spiderman and then got a letter from NTL stating that they were in breach of the T&C/AUP for doing so - I think the user would have a strong case to complain on the basis they were only using the account for the purpose for which it had been advertised.

A further quote from the feature is "We have only just scratched the surface of what you can experience and do in this magazine [with broadband]".

There is no mention of any "recommended daily download limits" mentioned anywhere in the advertisment feature although it does state "services available in ntl cabled streets and subject to capacity".

Duncan

dr wadd

04-09-2003, 22:03

Originally posted by kronas
i dont think they should be advertising piracy imagine if the MPAA got there hands on it yes i know in the uk they cant do a thing YET!!!

The MPAA can act in Britain, they just to do so by pulling the strings in the background. I read a few days ago against a court case being taken against a group distributing pirate DVDs in the UK. Officially the court case is being brought by Warner's UK arm, but the MPAA are doing the actual driving from the background.

andygrif

04-09-2003, 22:12

Originally posted by kronas
i dont think they should be advertising piracy imagine if the MPAA got there hands on it yes i know in the uk they cant do a thing YET!!!

You think? The MPAA would certainly have something to say, and guess who has a shareholding in a certain on-demand movies service?

I have some inderect dealings with all of the major Hollywood studios....but can I bring myself to snitch?

Bwhahahahaha

Stuart W

04-09-2003, 22:42

OK, I've been on to my mate Chris @ FACT and he is more than a little interestead in the article....

The first, second and fourth item (above the superman pic) are acceptable as they are commenting on the availability of DVD's for purchase.
However, Item 3... "400,000 - 600,000 movies are downloaded every day" is a perfect example of promoting copyright theft.

If a case is brought against ntl: I will know about it by 9:00 GMT tomorrow and will post in this thread to let you guys know.

Defiant

04-09-2003, 22:45

Microsoft is VERY anti piracy. Do they still have shares in NTL

Shaun

04-09-2003, 22:47

Makes me wonder how their marketing dept think they will get away with it! :erm:

duncant403

04-09-2003, 23:12

Originally posted by Stuart W
The first, second and fourth item (above the superman pic) are acceptable as they are commenting on the availability of DVD's for purchase.

Why do you say item 4 - "Spiderman was available on the net before it was even in the cinema" is acceptable? It certainly wasn't officially available on DVD before the cinema release(!) The only way it was available on the net before the cinema release was as an illegal download - and again NTL are promoting their broadband service for this purpose.

Duncan

Ben

04-09-2003, 23:20

nothing surprises me when it comes to NTL.

This is how they get the custom.

Defiant

04-09-2003, 23:22

Originally posted by Gandalf
nothing surprises me when it comes to NTL.

This is how they get the custom.

"customs" may be interested too lol

MovedGoalPosts

04-09-2003, 23:53

I seem to recall when the cap first came out, a BBC online article which implied that one of the reasons for a cap was pressure from the BPI (British Phongraphic Industry) to reduce illegal downloads.

OK so yes here we are talking of movie downloads, but it's much the same thing really. It's copyrighted material, and ntl seem to be promoting that it's OK to get hold of it without paying the authors.

I can see FACT, BPI, MPAA and anybody else watching this very closely.

th'engineer

04-09-2003, 23:58

if anyone can get any copies of this advert i am willing to pick them up as its just over the border in yorkshire.
I will the send them to the relevant organisations, including FACT and the ASA.
I think that Vidzone will also be interested in this recent campaign by NTL, SKY will also be interested and Disney

So if you have a few copies or can point me in the direction of stores that stock it please PM me

DonFluffy

05-09-2003, 00:06

I hope NTL go down in flames for this advert. What the hell were they thinking. Is there no thought process involved with that company any more.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 00:08

OK guys bit of a dumb move by NTL to say the least, but trying to get your TV and telephone supplier and your ISP taken too court is as equally silly.

What happens to the customers when NTL gets hit with a huge fine and a bigger legal bill? our bills will go up yes it will affect us all.

I dont want loss of service, increase in bills or monitoring on my inmternet connection and the little stunts you lot are trying to pull are jeopardising this not just for me but for everyone.
I hope to god non of you evcer have the gall to say the internet shouldnt have any kind of enforcement.

PLease stop and think about exactly what you are doing.

kronas

05-09-2003, 00:09

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
OK guys bit of a dumb move by NTL to say the least, but trying to get your TV and telephone supplier and your ISP taken too court is as equally silly.

What happens to the customers when NTL gets hit with a huge fine and a bigger legal bill? our bills will go up yes it will affect us all.

I dont want loss of service, increase in bills or monitoring on my inmternet connection and the little stunts you lot are trying to pull are jeopardising this not just for me but for everyone.
I hope to god non of you evcer have the gall to say the internet shouldnt have any kind of enforcement.

PLease stop and think about exactly what you are doing.

i totally agree with the above :rolleyes:

MovedGoalPosts

05-09-2003, 00:28

This is not about trying to get ntl taken to court. If that happens only the vultures (lawyers) win.

This is about getting ntl to advertise their services in a fair manner so that potential new (and existing) customers are not mislead. It's about getting ntl to be consistent in the messages they send to their customers.

To attempt to promote the ability and availability of a service that would be illegal to use is just unbelievable. To indicate on one hand that this volume of data transfer is available, when on the other hand the company is desperately trying to limit download use, is frankly appalling.

Departments and management at ntl clearly do not communicate. The regulators seem disinterested or powerless in getting ntl to play fair. At some stage or other ntl have to be made to behave properly. Regrettably, it may take the threat's of legal action to make ntl follow the rules of good business.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 00:32

Originally posted by MovedGoalPosts
This is not about trying to get ntl taken to court. If that happens only the vultures (lawyers) win.

This is about getting ntl to advertise their services in a fair manner so that potential new (and existing) customers are not mislead. It's about getting ntl to be consistent in the messages they send to their customers.

To attempt to promote the ability and availability of a service that would be illegal to use is just unbelievable. To indicate on one hand that this volume of data transfer is available, when on the other hand the company is desperately trying to limit download use, is frankly appalling.

Departments and management at ntl clearly do not communicate. The regulators seem disinterested or powerless in getting ntl to play fair. At some stage or other ntl have to be made to behave properly. Regrettably, it may take the threat's of legal action to make ntl follow the rules of good business.

Sorry but I distinctly read somewhere that FACT had been contacted. Therefor it is about getting NTL prosecuted.

I am not going to comment on the article as I have no legal experience and I do not know anything of copyright law.

What I do know is that some people have jumped in here and done some very strange things. It appears because of personal vendettas against NTL its ok to make others suffer.

Think about this:-
If NTL get shafted in court and it costs them Millions, how the hell are they gonna upgrade and improve the service?

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 00:41

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 00:46

I guess my point is that yes NTL are very very stupid to do such a thing, but why are you all reporting them for it?

Ok maybe that is how NTL learn, but does that make it ok to carry out an action that could affect others that want no part of it?

If NTL had caused you no problems at all, would you honestly be carrying out these actions?

What if (and yes I am kinda exagerating here) NTL went bust over this, I cannot receive BB from ANY other company where I live, why should I suffer in those circumstances?

All I am saying is that think carefully of what the consequences could be before you start reporting a company that provides YOU with a service. Albeit a sometimes ropey one.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 00:50

Many people have tried constructive communications with NTL and failed due to the arrogance of the company .

If they dont change they will lose customers and your bills will go up or they will go into chapter 11 again.

Trust me its for NTLs own good its like taking medicine to cure a sickness

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 00:53

seems more like assisted suicide to me lol.

I understand your comments, but I dont agree with the actions of reporting NTL to the relevant organisations.
I think it stems from personal gripes with the company and isnt intended for the good of others.

But hey thats my opinion, yours will differ.
I just felt that I wanted to say my piece in this thread and offer at least a bit of balance. :)

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 01:01

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Sorry but I distinctly read somewhere that FACT had been contacted. Therefor it is about getting NTL prosecuted.

I am not going to comment on the article as I have no legal experience and I do not know anything of copyright law.

What I do know is that some people have jumped in here and done some very strange things. It appears because of personal vendettas against NTL its ok to make others suffer.

Think about this:-
If NTL get shafted in court and it costs them Millions, how the hell are they gonna upgrade and improve the service?

I have contacted FACT as ntl appear to promote copyright theft.

I apreciate that any financial imposition levied against ntl will be paid by it's customers in the same way that I apreciate we paid for that damn advert.

What I DON'T apreciate is the thought that turning a blind eye to save yourself a few quid is acceptable!

If you don't want ntl to be finned because your services may become more expensive / upgrades will take longer, how far are you prepared to go?

Will it be OK for ntl to tell people they can go on the net and download movies, music, pornography, where to get the best "anonymizer" software, how to hack other ISPs etc. if it means you get cheaper service and quicker upgrades?

How on earth does breaking copyright law become acceptable just because the offending company is in financial difficulty???

Now, before you mug me off as just a muppet with a grudge.... I had a row with NTL about DPA and was in a position to get ntl a hefty financial penalty, but chose not to. The reason I didn't was simple. I was the only affected person as a result of ntl's DPA breach, no-one else. I asked for an appology and (eventualy) got one. That's all I wanted.

Now all I want (along with FACT) is a public appology in an official press release to clear up the copyright laws and what is / isn't permited as acceptable use.

homealone

05-09-2003, 01:02

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
seems more like assisted suicide to me lol.

I understand your comments, but I dont agree with the actions of reporting NTL to the relevant organisations.
I think it stems from personal gripes with the company and isnt intended for the good of others.

But hey thats my opinion, yours will differ.
I just felt that I wanted to say my piece in this thread and offer at least a bit of balance. :)

i agree timewarrior2001

bite the hand that feeds you?

It's not right, but why SHOUT? - shouldn't it be discussed first?

gaz

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 01:03

I 100% support NTL in becoming a larger player in the cable market it is only to assist NTL in being more customer focused.

This will then improve the companies standing and win more customers.

Therefore bills will be cheaper money available for upgrades etc.

Unfortunateley like many people have taken time out like most to suggest improvements.

Really support the company however they only learn by it hitting them in the pocket.

Example CAP therefore cant offer 2meg hit in the pocket

Unfair conditions compared to AOL on the same network about to be hit in the pocket.

misleading advertisements they get hit in the pocket , the cap has probably cost NTL more to contain it than it has saved them on upgrading infrastructure and continues to do so.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 01:10

Hey you have seen my comments on the CAP in the thread and on that issue I am with you guys.
Especially the AOL apparent favouritism.

I have never once said that infringement of copyright was acceptable. Neither have NTL.
What I think NTL have done is say it like it is, "yes the internet can be used for piracy and indeed some of our customers certainly use it for that means, but there is also other benefits to broadband"

How is telling the truth promoting piracy?
The talk about movies, other than the FACTUAL comment on Spiderman, makes no reference to being able to download copyrighted films does it?
And I am sure most BB adverts from all companies at one time or another have included the line "downlaod movies at the touch of a button".

No thats how you interprit it. Whether or not it was intened that way is of no concern to any of us.

Shaun

05-09-2003, 01:19

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Ok maybe that is how NTL learn, but does that make it ok to carry out an action that could affect others that want no part of it?

So they should get away with it?

I remember the ASA telling them to stop calling 150Kb BB 'high speed'. Did they? No.

Ntl never learn, I bought BB from them because they told me it was 'unlimited' in respect to downloads, and now we have a cap. I don't want any other unsuspecting customer to be taken in my their totally outrageous advertising.

Tell the authority's, this is the only way they will learn. Hit them where it hurts, and if they continue to do it them hit them again.

As far as I'm concerned, if they think that advertising like this in one breath and tell us not to d/l in another is acceptable then they don't deserve to be running a telecoms company.

If they continue to do this and the authority's put them out of business then GOOD. Someone will be waiting in the wings to take it over. I'm sure it cant get any worse than it is not.

Remember ITV Digital?:mad: :grind: :afire:

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 01:28

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Hey you have seen my comments on the CAP in the thread and on that issue I am with you guys.
Especially the AOL apparent favouritism.

I have never once said that infringement of copyright was acceptable. Neither have NTL.
Agreed. But, advertising standards prohibit this kind of thing.

The same as Ford arn't allowed to show clips of the Mondeo being hammered down the M4 by some rep flashing at the driver in front. It creates the wrong impression.

Would you be so cool about it if it said "paedophiles downloaded 32GB of child porn in the last week. ntl 1M broadband is here!"
Going by your statements, they are only telling the truth.
What I think NTL have done is say it like it is, "yes the internet can be used for piracy and indeed some of our customers certainly use it for that means, but there is also other benefits to broadband"
It still looks like they are saying it is acceptable, no mater how you phrase it.
How is telling the truth promoting piracy?
Dad, can I use Kazaa to download the latest Britney single?
Well son, millons of people do it all the time.

The talk about movies, other than the FACTUAL comment on Spiderman, makes no reference to being able to download copyrighted films does it?
And I am sure most BB adverts from all companies at one time or another have included the line "downlaod movies at the touch of a button".

No thats how you interprit it. Whether or not it was intened that way is of no concern to any of us.

Quite the opposite, how it is interprited is of major concern to some of us!
Mostly the ones who are P'd at being told not to download more than 1GB per day, then no implimentation, followed by an advert which may apear to promote downloading films, makes a point of advertising the ability to download before the cinema and quote how many millions of films are downloaded.

If nothing else this add condones piracy.
Isn't that bad enough for you?

dr wadd

05-09-2003, 01:50

It is high time that NTL stopped acting as though they are above the law. I don`t give a damn if they get stung by an enormous fine by FACT, although what would really make me smile is if some of the upper management got jail time for it (highly unlikely, I know).

I currently have a DPA dispute going with NTL, and if they end up getting stung from that I have no sympathy for them. All this argument that they are still on shaky financial ground carries absolutely no weight for me. Being a bit hard-up doesn`t mean they can flout the law whenever they wish. NTL have been crapping all over their customers for years, I think it is about time that they got some of it back.

Lord Nikon

05-09-2003, 03:05

One question for those in here....

I apologise if it seems to be a long winded one, but it needs asking

A customer downloads a song by an artist... say Metallica - Enter Sandman to see if it is the song he wants...
He burns it to CD, at a media cost of 16-20p, he is happy
He is also infringing the law...

A Record company puts out a new CD Single.

Unit production cost for the single is less than a penny per, yet they sell it for ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£4.00

that's a 4,000% markup...

when you look at things in the way of markups everyone needs to make a profit..... but 4,000%?

the biggest case of robbery is done by the BPI, yet they do it within the law

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 09:36

UPDATE URGENT REQUEST
I have not got any pms with offers of this publication could anyone assist in providing hard copy for evidence.

This is required by trading standards

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 09:39

Original Publication not a copy

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 09:40

Originally posted by Lord Nikon
One question for those in here....

I apologise if it seems to be a long winded one, but it needs asking

A customer downloads a song by an artist... say Metallica - Enter Sandman to see if it is the song he wants...
He burns it to CD, at a media cost of 16-20p, he is happy
He is also infringing the law...

A Record company puts out a new CD Single.

Unit production cost for the single is less than a penny per, yet they sell it for ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£4.00

that's a 4,000% markup...

when you look at things in the way of markups everyone needs to make a profit..... but 4,000%?

the biggest case of robbery is done by the BPI, yet they do it within the law Key phrase there would be "within the law"

Besides, manufacturing costs are not the only fugures to look at for CD's.
You need to look at how much these manufacturing comanies invest in research and developement. Think about it.... If a company manufactures CD's to todays standards, but does not think of investing in research & developement, what will they be manufatruing when the format gets better, or more data can go onto a CD?
When CD's first came out, they held no more than 72mins of music or 650M of data.

Now, with that in mind, start to consider this.... Dont you think maybee they pay staff, rent, rates, utulity bills etc.?

Someone having a good mark-up on the legitimate sale of a product is whole heartedly different to someone stealing.

It costs no more than 7p to manfacture 20 Benson & Hedges, add on profits and tax and it's nearly ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5. Does that mean it is acceptable for me to go and rob my local newsagent?

Chris

05-09-2003, 09:41

Originally posted by th'engineer
Original Publication not a copy

Phone the Leeds Weekly News. They will post you a copy if you send them a cheque.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 09:46

I am willing to pick it up am only 25 mins from leeds this afternoon so if its available will pick it up and drop off with trading standards as suggested .

they just need original copy

Think this time we have got them :D

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 09:50

Will call them and ask for a copy but need to check its genuine,do not want to alert them as they may be part liable

Richard M

05-09-2003, 09:55

Anyone want to tip off El Reg or Amy @ The Mirror, Russ? :D

orangebird

05-09-2003, 09:56

I'm sorry, and after reading this thread I really couldn't give two hoots if I get banned for life but -

I HAVE NEVER SEEN SUCH A LOAD OF HYPOCRITICAL SANCTIMONIOUS BUNCH OF CODSWALLOP IN MY LIFE!!!!

Hands up all of you who have never downloaded a movie or a album etc? (roll in the tumble weeds.....)

:mad: :rolleyes: :shrug:

Obviously not as eloquently put as Timewarrior (and this must be the first time we have agreed on anything...), but come on - you're all acting like a bunch of Erin Brocovich's.....what on earth do any of you have to gain from doing this? Yeah, good one, get ntl a massive fine. Then see how much upgrading (which would go a long way to getting the 'cap' removed) and price reductions they can afford. You can also wave goodbye to any hope of 2mb.

What I find almost hilarious is Stuart W's actions - wasn't it you that fraudulently uncapped your modem??? :rolleyes:

I say it again - HYPOCRITES

duncant403

05-09-2003, 09:58

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
I have never once said that infringement of copyright was acceptable. Neither have NTL.
What I think NTL have done is say it like it is, "yes the internet can be used for piracy and indeed some of our customers certainly use it for that means, but there is also other benefits to broadband"

I think it goes further than that. They are using the ability to download movies illegally as a reason to subscribe to NTL's broadband service. They are implying that if you subscribe to NTL then you can quite freely download movies. They make no suggestion that doing so could be (in most cases) illegal - and certainly downloading Spiderman before the cinema release was. I would class this as promoting copyright infringement.

How is telling the truth promoting piracy?
The talk about movies, other than the FACTUAL comment on Spiderman, makes no reference to being able to download copyrighted films does it?
And I am sure most BB adverts from all companies at one time or another have included the line "downlaod movies at the touch of a button".

I find it impossible to believe that 400,000-600,000 movies are downloaded from legal sources every day. (Although if anyone knows of such a site where that number of movies could be downloaded legally then let me know...). There are some sites where movies can be legally downloaded (there was a feature in the news a couple of days ago about a UK film that is to be released on the internet as the same time as the cinema release - with DRM restrictions) and so the phrase "download movies at the touch of a button" isn't neccesarily promoting illegal activity. But to suggest you purchase NTL's broadband service to download 400,000-600,000 movies a day, and to download films such as Spiderman before the cinema release is promoting illegal activity.

Duncan

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:00

Come On Orangebird

Stop trying to defend NTL this time the advert and the aup conditions contridict each other.

Was only a matter of time before someboday tried to defend the undefendable.

Got em this time :p

duncant403

05-09-2003, 10:01

Originally posted by orangebird
I HAVE NEVER SEEN SUCH A LOAD OF HYPOCRITICAL SANCTIMONIOUS BUNCH OF CODSWALLOP IN MY LIFE!!!

Hands up all of you who have never downloaded a movie or a album etc? (roll in the tumble weeds.....)

That's not the point. I'm not a company promoting my services for illegal activities. NTL are trying to make money by promoting illegal activities. That is the difference.

Duncan

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:02

Originally posted by th'engineer
Stop trying to defend NTL this time the advert and the aup conditions contridict each other.

Was only a matter of time before someboday tried to defend the undefendable.

I am not 'defending' them at all - I haven't once said what they're doing is good. It's the hypocrisy I can't stand :afire:

Have you never downloaded a movie or some music?

Chris

05-09-2003, 10:02

Originally posted by Roger K
Anyone want to tip off El Reg or Amy @ The Mirror, Russ? :D

Sent to bbc news online this morning:

Hi Mark,

You don't know me ... a friend in the PR industry passed me your name as the main contact at BBC online for technology stories.

I thought you might be interested in an advert placed by NTL in this week's Leeds Weekly News (4 September issue). I have attached a scan of the item, which was originally posted here: http://www.nthellworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2395 nthellworld.co.uk is an independent discussion forum for disaffected ntl tv/phone/internet customers.

In the column on the left, NTL lists four apparent benefits of having broadband internet. Two of these appear to offer illegal movie downloads as a positive benefit - namely '400,000 - 600,000 movies are downloaded every day' and 'Spiderman was available on the net before it was even in the cinema'. There is a supporting picture of Spiderman under the text.

As an ntl customer I think it a little strange that the company should be using my monthly subscription to pay for adverts that appear to be promoting illegal downloading from the internet.

Kind regards

:D

duncant403

05-09-2003, 10:02

Originally posted by Andre
FAO duncant403

Would it be at all possible for you to send 'The Engineer' a copy of the newspaper that carried this advertisment?

I only have the one copy - it's a free paper so I can just go out and buy some more copies. I may be able to get hold of some more copies from neighbours.

Duncan

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:05

Originally posted by duncant403
That's not the point. I'm not a company promoting my services for illegal activities. NTL are trying to make money by promoting illegal activities. That is the difference.

Duncan

It is very much the point. It's about double standards. An awful lot of you seem to have bee's in your bonnets about the cap etc, and incredibly personal vendettas against ntl.

If you can honestly say you have never illegally downloaded from the internet, then I applaude you my friends, fill your boots and take them to court.

Otherwise, take your hypocritical morals and put them where the sun doesn't shine.

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 10:21

When I was a child I used to go scrumping... (stealing fruit / veg from farms) does that mean that I am now unable to report a thief to the police for stealing my car?

Another scenario....

I have been to a public all box and lied to the opperator telling her I had put 10p in the phone but it did not register, thereby making a call at the expence of BT. Does that mean that BT can now bill me ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£500 per month? after all, I 'stoll' 10p from them, so BT can 'steal' from me via my bill.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:21

Orangebird stop digging they have blown it this time:D

Chris

05-09-2003, 10:27

Originally posted by orangebird
It is very much the point. It's about double standards. An awful lot of you seem to have bee's in your bonnets about the cap etc, and incredibly personal vendettas against ntl.

If you can honestly say you have never illegally downloaded from the internet, then I applaude you my friends, fill your boots and take them to court.

Otherwise, take your hypocritical morals and put them where the sun doesn't shine.

Orangebird, your loyalty to your employer is commendable. There aren't many staff who stick around this forum and keep wading thru all the stuff that gets posted here. But I think you're beginning to take this 'defend ntl at all costs' thing a bit too far. You're right, everyone on this board has done something wrong at some point in their lives, that's human nature. But if that was a reason to stop us addressing other wrongs, we would pretty quickly end up living in anarchy.

Just to address the central point of this thread, do you accept that ntl appears to be suggesting illegal downloads is a good reason to subscribe to its broadband internet service?

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:30

British Code of Advertising, Sales
Promotion and Direct Marketing (the rulebook used by the ASA) states:

2.2 All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of
responsibility to consumers and to society.

4.1 Marketers have primary responsibility for ensuring that their
marketing communications are legal. Marketing communications should comply
with the law and should not incite anyone to break it.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:31

Originally posted by towny
Orangebird, your loyalty to your employer is commendable. There aren't many staff who stick around this forum and keep wading thru all the stuff that gets posted here. But I think you're beginning to take this 'defend ntl at all costs' thing a bit too far. You're right, everyone on this board has done something wrong at some point in their lives, that's human nature. But if that was a reason to stop us addressing other wrongs, we would pretty quickly end up living in anarchy.

Just to address the central point of this thread, do you accept that ntl appears to be suggesting illegal downloads is a good reason to subscribe to its broadband internet service?

Yes, I fully accept it. And please don't patronise me with regard to my 'loyalty to my employer'.
But I stated in an earlier post, it's not about defending my employer, in fact it has bugger all to do with it. It's the hypocrisy that makes me choke.

Chris

05-09-2003, 10:34

Originally posted by orangebird
Yes, I fully accept it. And please don't patronise me with regard to my 'loyalty to my employer'.
But I stated in an earlier post, it's not about defending my employer, in fact it has bugger all to do with it. It's the hypocrisy that makes me choke.

I'm not trying to patronize you, I'm bending over backwards trying not to start a slanging match. Please don't assume that everyone on this board is hell bent on causing mayhem and hurling insults.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:34

Originally posted by Andre
It is ntl that are being hypocritical here I believe.

They are (underhandedly) promoting their broadband service using the Spiderman movie as a good reason to have broadband in my opinion, yet when you get their broadband package, you find out the 'service' is capped and less than reliable as a whole (let's not mention email)

Nice try Andre, but that is not the point. ntl say you can download a movie (which you can, regardless of the 'cap') as long as you don't download more than 3 in 14 days... - what's underhand about that?

And no, let's not mention email, as it has nothing to do with this thread.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 10:35

I personally think any response form th elike so fth eBBC is going to be poor.

I doubt they will run and articles on the 6 o clock news because NTL have a poorly worded advert ina local free paper in Leeds.

Come on people live in the freakin real world here.

400,000 to 600,000 movie downloads, what about movie trailers? they are legal, what about the files that people have created, say the transforming car the ****es on a dog?

Some people on here want to find something better to do with their time. Its and advert, they are words on a page, what I refer to is effects on REAL things, I can tell you now, I am going to be more than ****ed at some of you IF I end up not being able to have ANY kind of BB connection. An exageration I have already admitted, but NTL are THE company here, I wont ever get ADSL I liove too far away from the nearest exchange.

Anmd if S.W had illegally uncapped his CM you are damned lucky NTL didnt prosecute you for Fraud, but hey thats OK isnt it, because you defrauded NTL.

Saying that NTL have made a big mistake with an advert is enough.
Being ****ed at the cap is one thing, but as orangebird says, the actions here are not going to help have the cap lifted, any network upgrading done and it will certainly prevent any kind of 2 Mb service.
Make your choices guys, I'd rather have a decent network , no cap and a 2mb service.

What should have been done is a protest to NTL, THEN maybe going to TS. but no thats not how you worked is it? No NTL didnt have a problem with misswording or clarity on services, no you want to take them down for promoting copyright theft.

However if your so intent on taking NTL down, I hope that you will feel happy about it, when the customers turn around and firmly blame YOU for this situation.

Chris

05-09-2003, 10:38

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
I personally think any response form th elike so fth eBBC is going to be poor.

I doubt they will run and articles on the 6 o clock news because NTL have a poorly worded advert ina local free paper in Leeds.

Come on people live in the freakin real world here.

I agree. The bloke I wrote to is the technology correspondent for BBC News Online, he doesn't work in TV or Radio. Having worked in the media and PR, I do know a thing or two about correct targeting of potential stories. It's not going to make the TV news but it stands a realistic chance of getting on BBC news online.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:39

Originally posted by orangebird
Nice try Andre, but that is not the point. ntl say you can download a movie (which you can, regardless of the 'cap') - what's underhand about that?

And no, let's not mention email, as it has nothing to do with this thread.

Come on OB not like you to be down just got an e-mail from ASA quoting British Code of Advertising, Sales
Promotion and Direct Marketing (the rulebook used by the ASA) states:

2.2 All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of
responsibility to consumers and to society.

4.1 Marketers have primary responsibility for ensuring that their
marketing communications are legal. Marketing communications should comply
with the law and should not incite anyone to break it.

They have blown it complaint in, everyone please use online form at ASA

Chris

05-09-2003, 10:40

Originally posted by th'engineer
Come on OB not like you to be down just got an e-mail from ASA quoting British Code of Advertising, Sales
Promotion and Direct Marketing (the rulebook used by the ASA) states:

2.2 All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of
responsibility to consumers and to society.

4.1 Marketers have primary responsibility for ensuring that their
marketing communications are legal. Marketing communications should comply
with the law and should not incite anyone to break it.

They have blown it complaint in, everyone please use online form at ASA

Do you have a link?

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:40

Originally posted by towny
I agree. The bloke I wrote to is the technology correspondent for BBC News Online, he doesn't work in TV or Radio. Having worked in the media and PR, I do know a thing or two about correct targeting of potential stories. It's not going to make the TV news but it stands a realistic chance of getting on BBC news online.

Well, good for you. Grab yourself a medal.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:43

Originally posted by towny
Do you have a link?

as requested here (http://www.asa.org.uk/complain/form.asp)

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 10:47

Originally posted by orangebird
Well, good for you. Grab yourself a medal.

now surprised at you OB you should know not to be surprised with anything NTl do.

Wonder if anyone has contacted Vidzone about it they provide movies but ntl implying that people should download pirated:nono:

Bet they are not impressed waiting for e-mail from them, please feel free to e-maiol them any members of the site :D

orangebird

05-09-2003, 10:52

Originally posted by th'engineer
now surprised at you OB you should know not to be surprised with anything NTl do.

Wonder if anyone has contacted Vidzone about it they provide movies but ntl implying that people should download pirated:nono:

Bet they are not impressed waiting for e-mail from them, please feel free to e-maiol them any members of the site :D

FOR THE LAST TIME!!!!!

It's not ntl's advertising that I am unbelievable incensed by! It's everyone's double standards - unless you have never downloaded anything illegally, you have absolutely no right to take the moral high ground on this one.

Don't be surprised Th'eng, nothing at ntl surprises me - I've been here too long......

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 10:57

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
<snip> ...Anmd if S.W had illegally uncapped his CM you are damned lucky NTL didnt prosecute you for Fraud, but hey thats OK isnt it, because you defrauded NTL..... <snip>

OK, here are the FACTS I uncapped, got caught and offered to not only explain to ntl techs how it was done, but also offer a solution to stop anyone ever using that method again.
Instead of taking my offer they quoted irelevant sections of the AUP.... To cut a damn long story short, I had my service suspended (which I paid for) and had to sign a document, which I did.
ntl would not have prosecuted me for fraud because they could not prove any of the needed criteria. I uncapped, but they didn't (and don't to this day) know how.

Now, obviously I shouldn't have done it. I have tried to explain to people that I actualy downloaded LESS during my 'uncapped' time than I did under normal service, but as usual most people wouldn't listen and just gave me digs for uncapping.

ntl saw fit to suspend my services as a result of my uncapping.
In much the same way that I see it fit for ntl to re-imburse me for loss of service.

Now, advertising which condones piracy / copyright theft is a wrong thing to do. Wether it is more wrong or less wrong than uncapping a CM I'm realy not sure, but either way it is wrong.
Wrong, wrong... wrong.

I am sick of ntl's "ignore the customer at all costs" attitude and am pleased there are others with the same opinion as me.

I say feck 'em. ntl have messed up AGAIN.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 11:02

Originally posted by Stuart W
OK, here are the FACTS I uncapped, got caught and offered to not only explain to ntl techs how it was done, but also offer a solution to stop anyone ever using that method again.
Instead of taking my offer they quoted irelevant sections of the AUP.... To cut a damn long story short, I had my service suspended (which I paid for) and had to sign a document, which I did.
ntl would not have prosecuted me for fraud because they could not prove any of the needed criteria. I uncapped, but they didn't (and don't to this day) know how.

Now, obviously I shouldn't have done it. I have tried to explain to people that I actualy downloaded LESS during my 'uncapped' time than I did under normal service, but as usual most people wouldn't listen and just gave me digs for uncapping.

ntl saw fit to suspend my services as a result of my uncapping.
In much the same way that I see it fit for ntl to re-imburse me for loss of service.

Now, advertising which condones piracy / copyright theft is a wrong thing to do. Wether it is more wrong or less wrong than uncapping a CM I'm realy not sure, but either way it is wrong.
Wrong, wrong... wrong.

I am sick of ntl's "ignore the customer at all costs" attitude and am pleased there are others with the same opinion as me.

I say feck 'em. ntl have messed up AGAIN.

hey I said IF, you know I wasnt saying you were guilty of anything.

No matter what your argument is though I do not support your actions and I will never support them over this advertisement.
I think you have all rushed in and not thought about the implications of your actions.

I will however support the people in the CAP thread.

At this time I bear no grudges and no ill feelings to anyone.

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:03

Originally posted by orangebird
FOR THE LAST TIME!!!!!

It's not ntl's advertising that I am unbelievable incensed by! It's everyone's double standards - unless you have never downloaded anything illegally, you have absolutely no right to take the moral high ground on this one.

Don't be surprised Th'eng, nothing at ntl surprises me - I've been here too long......

Are you realy serious with this stance OB??

If one does wrong, one must tolerate all others wrong doing?

what a sad, sad world it would be if that were the case. We would no longer have a police force or an army :rolleyes:
Or do you believe that all police officers have never commited any offence?

Do you drive a car? have you ever gone over the speed limit?
If so, you can never complain at lunatics on the motorway at 130mph+. You can't complain about the moron behind you 3 inches from your bumper flashing his lights. :rolleyes:

OB, scroll up, re-read your posts and think about what you are saying.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 11:03

Hang on a minute, whether or not you have downloaded something you shouldn't from the web .... NTL were still promoting information piracy, copyright theft.

I can't see how I'm being hypocrital.

I do not promote copyright theft, and do not supply.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 11:09

Right I have just re-read the article.

NTL are not saying anything, what they are doing is quoting Facts about the internet.
They do not say use NTL to illegally download movies, they dont even say Download movies. It says 400,000 to 600,000 movies are downloaded a day. It doesnt even say 400,000 to 600,000 movoies are downloaded using NTL home internet a day.

Then it says that spiderman was available on the net before the cinemas, which is true, so was the Hulk.

can someone show me where it says illegally download movies, I cant see it, can someone show me where it says Use your NTL connection to steal copyright?

well can they?

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:10

OB...

If I walk down the road and see a ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£10 note, pick it up and decide to keep it, that is theft. Steeling by finding I believe.

If I later see an elderly person being robbed in the street, I think to my self "Hmm, I'd love to intervene and stop that thief, but, hey, he's a thief, I'm a thief, so there's nothing I can do".

Well your honor, I saw the men drag the victim into a van and drive off, but didn't say anything because I have, in the past, collected my children early from school and taken them home to be grounded as punishment, so we are both guilty of false imprisonment.... what could I do? I don;t want to be labeled a HYPOCRITE after all.....

orangebird

05-09-2003, 11:12

Originally posted by Stuart W
Are you realy serious with this stance OB??

If one does wrong, one must tolerate all others wrong doing?

You seem to think so - after uncapping your modem, you appear to have been slightly miffed at ntl not accepting your offer of how you did as an apology.....

what a sad, sad world it would be if that were the case. We would no longer have a police force or an army :rolleyes:
Or do you believe that all police officers have never commited any offence?

I have no idea. I'm sure there area dirty cops out there - and any of there actions incensed me as much as this has, I would indeed react as I am now.

Do you drive a car? have you ever gone over the speed limit?
If so, you can never complain at lunatics on the motorway at 130mph+. You can't complain about the moron behind you 3 inches from your bumper flashing his lights. :rolleyes:

Yes, I regularly break the speed limit - but I'm not about to grass up someone just because they have :rolleyes: Let the moron flash his lights instead. All I have to do is slowdown and put the brakes on and he/she will get themselves in trouble, rather than me getting them in trouble.

OB, scroll up, re-read your posts and think about what you are saying.

I am very clear on what I am saying, thank you, and am of the same opinion. You're all hypocrites. :)

Ignition

05-09-2003, 11:17

Originally posted by th'engineer
If they dont change they will lose customers and your bills will go up or they will go into chapter 11 again.

Trust me its for NTLs own good its like taking medicine to cure a sickness

*Checks ntl shareprice + customer numbers - wow it's not looking too good is it? Oh hang on, actually it is looking pretty good....

I think in your case sir the saddest part about this whole affair is how much you seem to be enjoying it. You describe yourself on another site as a self-appointed advisor to ntl meanwhile you seem to be on a bit of an ego-trip as far as this matter goes. I remember mentioning to you that you can now take ADSL in another thread, and why aren't you voting with your pocket as you through anticap advised so many others to do? As I remember no response? You even went as far as bemoaning the lower upstream on ntl's 600k service. BT can get you a phoneline in straight away if the point is already there, you can have adsl within 2 weeks. Or does that mean you can't bemoan ntl if you leave, and there goes a big recreational activity.

Just the vibe I think everyone is getting from the language you've used. One of oneupsmanship rather than anything else. Though you should be used to that, enough people joined then ran away from anticap thanks to your ranting, most of them like myself employees willing to have constructive conversation, but a couple of ranty posts from yourself soon ended that trend.

Maybe ntl will get fined lots then we'll see headline 'ntl to cut jobs in Wythenshawe following ASA / FAST / Trading Standards fine - then you'll see how what you do affects real people, especially if they are up in your neck of the woods, and maybe it'll wipe that smug smile off your face.

StuartW:

ntl saw fit to suspend my services as a result of my uncapping.
In much the same way that I see it fit for ntl to re-imburse me for loss of service.

OK so if you got convicted of theft you'd see fit to sue HMG for loss of pay? You got caught, suspended, and you want ntl to reimburse you for cutting you off. Frankly you are lucky you were put back on at all, let alone the fact what you did was illegal and carries a prison sentence if they'd wanted to take it that far.

For what it's worth I absolutely agree, the advert is completely out of order, and someone in that business unit does deserve a bit of a slapping for it. Just the way certain people are going about this is damn childish, bordering on pathetic.

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:18

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Right I have just re-read the article.

NTL are not saying anything, what they are doing is quoting Facts about the internet.
They do not say use NTL to illegally download movies, they dont even say Download movies. It says 400,000 to 600,000 movies are downloaded a day. It doesnt even say 400,000 to 600,000 movoies are downloaded using NTL home internet a day.

Then it says that spiderman was available on the net before the cinemas, which is true, so was the Hulk.

can someone show me where it says illegally download movies, I cant see it, can someone show me where it says Use your NTL connection to steal copyright?

well can they?

No need. You have already done it.

Superman available on net before cinema.

Picture this.... Your son comes home from school and calls you a f*cking c*nt and tells you to s*ck his d*ck. This fills you with rage and you demand to know why he is saying these things.... he says "Well, my teachers were telling me about a former pupil at the school who swore a lot, I thought it was a good idea, so I have incorperated it into my vocabulary, you c*nt"
Needless to say you ring the school, who confirm that bad language was the topic of todays lessons.

Of course, you would accept this and let your son carry on with the foul language wouldn't you.

More importantly, you wouldn't do anything about the school teaching kids this stuff without explaining that it is actually wrong because, after all, you have used foul language and wouldn't want to be a hypocrite eh?

orangebird

05-09-2003, 11:20

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:23

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
StuartW:

OK so if you got convicted of theft you'd see fit to sue HMG for loss of pay? You got caught, suspended, and you want ntl to reimburse you for cutting you off. Frankly you are lucky you were put back on at all, let alone the fact what you did was illegal and carries a prison sentence if they'd wanted to take it that far.

For what it's worth I absolutely agree, the advert is completely out of order, and someone in that business unit does deserve a bit of a slapping for it. Just the way certain people are going about this is damn childish, bordering on pathetic.

Sorry, should have explained clearly... I didn't seek to be compensated for the suspension period... I meant the times my CM has gone down for over a week and ntl don't seem interestead in sorting it out.

As for the prison thing, are you sure?? lol
How long is the min / max sentence for uncapping then?

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:24

Originally posted by orangebird
Sorry Stuart, no need to appologise ;) you really are scraping the bottom of the 'for instance' barrel now..... :rolleyes:

How so?

Same scenario isn't it?

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 11:24

Originally posted by Stuart W
No need. You have already done it.

Superman available on net before cinema.

Picture this.... Your son comes home from school and calls you a f*cking c*nt and tells you to s*ck his d*ck. This fills you with rage and you demand to know why he is saying these things.... he says "Well, my teachers were telling me about a former pupil at the school who swore a lot, I thought it was a good idea, so I have incorperated it into my vocabulary, you c*nt"
Needless to say you ring the school, who confirm that bad language was the topic of todays lessons.

Of course, you would accept this and let your son carry on with the foul language wouldn't you.

More importantly, you wouldn't do anything about the school teaching kids this stuff without explaining that it is actually wrong because, after all, you have used foul language and wouldn't want to be a hypocrite eh?

Eh?:shrug:

I am unsure how I Have "already done it".
There must be some kind of invisable wording in that advert that I cannot see.
Show me, i.e Highlight where it says "Join NTL and you can use your connection for copyright theft".

And for your information I am very liberal minded, If my son came home form school swearing, whcih indeed he will one day.
I would simply point out that its ok for him to know these words but he shouldnt really say them too often because its not very nice.
I certainly wouldnt chastise him for doing somehting ALL kids do.

Chris

05-09-2003, 11:24

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Right I have just re-read the article.

NTL are not saying anything, what they are doing is quoting Facts about the internet.
They do not say use NTL to illegally download movies, they dont even say Download movies. It says 400,000 to 600,000 movies are downloaded a day. It doesnt even say 400,000 to 600,000 movoies are downloaded using NTL home internet a day.

Then it says that spiderman was available on the net before the cinemas, which is true, so was the Hulk.

can someone show me where it says illegally download movies, I cant see it, can someone show me where it says Use your NTL connection to steal copyright?

well can they?

If the article was merely a discussion of what goes on on the internet, there would be no wrongdoing on ntl's part. But it is not merely a discussion. It is in the context of an advertisement, and the reasonable assumption is that anything said in an advert is intended to support the proposition that you buy/subscribe to the product being described. So when NTL advertises its broadband internet, and tells people they should sign up, and then issues statistics about illegal activities as part of that advert (without saying these are illegal and warning you not to do it), we can reasonably conclude that they are inciting people to commit an illegal act. IMHO. But I think the ASA might agree.

Ignition

05-09-2003, 11:26

Originally posted by Stuart W
Sorry, should have explained clearly... I didn't seek to be compensated for the suspension period... I meant the times my CM has gone down for over a week and ntl don't seem interestead in sorting it out.

As for the prison thing, are you sure?? lol
How long is the min / max sentence for uncapping then?

Ahh, ask CS for compensation grasshopper and it shall be yours, though only at rate of whatever you pay per day. Higher levels of compensation are reserved for those who pay for SLAs.

Well yes, it's theft, and also violation of Computer Misuse Act, no idea of the penalties involved.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 11:31

Originally posted by Stuart W
no need to appologise ;)

How so?

Same scenario isn't it?

No, it's not. For starters, if my son came home from school with that kind of language, apart from dishing out a clip round the ear, I would also take the responsibility for myself. Any child of mine would know the right and wrong words to use, regardless of what some teacher has told them.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 11:37

Originally posted by towny
If the article was merely a discussion of what goes on on the internet, there would be no wrongdoing on ntl's part. But it is not merely a discussion. It is in the context of an advertisement, and the reasonable assumption is that anything said in an advert is intended to support the proposition that you buy/subscribe to the product being described. So when NTL advertises its broadband internet, and tells people they should sign up, and then issues statistics about illegal activities as part of that advert (without saying these are illegal and warning you not to do it), we can reasonably conclude that they are inciting people to commit an illegal act. IMHO. But I think the ASA might agree.

Towny you raised some interesting points there, and I would normally accept them as being good enough, however, I think its wrong. The Advert isnt the best written advert I've seen, no Far from it.

What I contest is that some of the users on here have rushed headlong into this argument and are trying their best to even their personal gripes with NTL. Not only this, but they are also on the other hand demanding NTL spend money to upgrade the network and enable the 2Mb connection speed also to remove the download CAP.

Now the way I see the advert is this:-

Its predominantly an NTL advertisment for BB internet. They then have a side panel seperated from the main advertisement by a border, and within this border it repeats some facts about internet usage as a whole.

The advertisment in my oppinoin is poor, as it doesnt state where those facts came from. But anyone with a ha'peth of intelligence would know that they are not talking solely about NTL home BB connections there.
I am not saying NTL dont deserve a ticking off because the advertisement is poor and doesnt carry T&C small print.

I also dont think reporting NTL to FACT for this matter is appropriate either.

Chris

05-09-2003, 11:38

Originally posted by orangebird
No, it's not. For starters, if my son came home from school with that kind of language, apart from dishing out a clip round the ear, I would also take the responsibility for myself. Any child of mine would know the right and wrong words to use, regardless of what some teacher has told them.

But, assuming you've sworn at some time in your life, doesn't the fact that you tell your son off for the same thing make you a hypocrite too?

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:39

I have been working with FACT and FAST for a number of years now and can assure you that this is EXACTLY what FACT need to know about.

Adverts like this WILL promote the downloading of copyrighted material.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 11:39

in reply to JustAnotherN00b

I am quite happy to stop moaning about NTL when NTL have some respect for there customers.

Remove the CAP

:D

I will will stop posting on this site and others is that a deal when NTL actually listen and remove the CAP

orangebird

05-09-2003, 11:44

Originally posted by th'engineer
I am quite happy to stop moaning about NTL when NTL have some respect for there customers.

Remove the CAP

:D

I will will stop posting on this site and others is that a deal when NTL actually listen and remove the CAP

Oh right - so what it looks to me like you're sayng is -

'I have the hump about the cap, and I couldn't give a **** about the promotion of illegally downloading material - it just suits my agenda to p1ss ntl off anyway I can until I get my own way'.

Excellent. :rolleyes:

Chris

05-09-2003, 11:46

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Its predominantly an NTL advertisment for BB internet. They then have a side panel seperated from the main advertisement by a border, and within this border it repeats some facts about internet usage as a whole.

The advertisment in my oppinoin is poor, as it doesnt state where those facts came from. But anyone with a ha'peth of intelligence would know that they are not talking solely about NTL home BB connections there.
I am not saying NTL dont deserve a ticking off because the advertisement is poor and doesnt carry T&C small print.

I also dont think reporting NTL to FACT for this matter is appropriate either.

You're right, where borders between items on news pages has been the key deciding factors in many a court case, more usually where libel is concerned. But the panel in this case doesn't separate the information from the advert, it's simply a 'sidebar' - a list of related facts that don't easily fit into the main narrative of the text. As such it is still clearly part of the advert. The overall headline also extends over the top of the sidebar, reinforcing this.

On the issue of it not saying these downloads were achieved using NTL connections, again you're right it doesn't. However I've never suggested that this is what NTL are saying (can't speak fow what others have posted) and I don't think they need to be saying this to be inciting illegal activity. They are advertising boradband, then pointing out what some other people use the internet for. The context of this suggestion clearly implies that they see these statistics as a good thing.

These may seem like pedantic details, but as both FACT and the ASA are now clearly involved, they are exactly the issues that are going to get mulled over by the agencies, and, I think, sweated over by NTL's lawyers, who I am certain can't have okayed this before it went to print.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 11:46

Originally posted by Stuart W
I have been working with FACT and FAST for a number of years now and can assure you that this is EXACTLY what FACT need to know about.

Adverts like this WILL promote the downloading of copyrighted material.

That kind of behaviour doesnt need promting its rife anyway, but I guess its ok as long as someone doesnt acknowledge it happens?

As for you uncapping you CM, just because you didnt use the extra bandwidth doesnt make it permissable or acceptable.
Your actions then, as now, could have a detrimental affect on others service.

That is the ONLY reason I am against your actions. I agree the advert is a bad advert but it also doesnt state your wording, it possibly infers it, but only if you want to see that.

Stuart W

05-09-2003, 11:47

Originally posted by orangebird
No, it's not. For starters, if my son came home from school with that kind of language, apart from dishing out a clip round the ear, I would also take the responsibility for myself. Any child of mine would know the right and wrong words to use, regardless of what some teacher has told them.
So you'd be OK with the school teaching him language like that and NOT pointing out it is wrong??

I know I wouldn't! I'd be straight on to the education authority!

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 11:48

Originally posted by orangebird
Oh right - so what it looks to me like you're sayng is -

'I have the hump about the cap, and I couldn't give a **** about the promotion of illegally downloading material - it just suits my agenda to p1ss ntl off anyway I can until I get my own way'.

Excellent. :rolleyes:

Well sussed out OB and quite happy to carry on doing it till my service is restored to what i signed up for UN CAPPED

duncant403

05-09-2003, 11:51

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Now the way I see the advert is this:-

Its predominantly an NTL advertisment for BB internet. They then have a side panel seperated from the main advertisement by a border, and within this border it repeats some facts about internet usage as a whole.

Not entirely true - but then that's not your fault as I only scanned a same portion of the "advertisment feature". The entire thing was a 4 page wrap around the paper so the advert appeared as the front, second, penultimate and back page of the paper.

The first page was a general advert for the digital TV services, with boxes listing the packages advertised on the following pages. The second page was the broadband advert, of which the scan I posted was the top two-thirds of. The remainder of the page was a breakdown of the costs of the 3 broadband packages and so advice on how to decide which one bests suits you (150Kb for occasional usage, 600K for medium usage - including downloading music - and 1Mb for heavy usage - including online gaming and downloading files).

The third page detailed net filtering - apparently NTL offer deals on buying Net Nanny - and broadband content. The fourth page detailed the dial-up network package.

Duncan

Chris

05-09-2003, 11:52

Originally posted by th'engineer
Well sussed out OB and quite happy to carry on doing it till my service is restored to what i signed up for UN CAPPED

Guys, I think the issue of whether or not ntl is inciting illegal activity is an important topic in itself. I know I'm not a mod or anything, but ...

:notopic:

orangebird

05-09-2003, 11:52

Originally posted by th'engineer
Well sussed out OB

Then you have just discredited yourself, and any argument you have put across....

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 11:53

In reply to justanother noob if you wish to discuss anything quite happy to talk to people on any subject at NTL.

In fact quite a few people at HOOk have my e-mail or phone number so if you wish to discuss further just ask around always willing to talk.

Even AIZAD has my e-mail and phone number :D

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 11:54

Originally posted by orangebird
Then you have just discredited yourself, and any argument you have put across....
No incorrect

Chris

05-09-2003, 11:54

Originally posted by duncant403
Not entirely true - but then that's not your fault as I only scanned a same portion of the "advertisment feature". The entire thing was a 4 page wrap around the paper so the advert appeared as the front, second, penultimate and back page of the paper.

Thanks for the extra info Duncan. The prominence this advert had means, in my view, it is even more serious.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 12:15

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
*Checks ntl shareprice + customer numbers - wow it's not looking too good is it? Oh hang on, actually it is looking pretty good....

I think in your case sir the saddest part about this whole affair is how much you seem to be enjoying it. You describe yourself on another site as a self-appointed advisor to ntl meanwhile you seem to be on a bit of an ego-trip as far as this matter goes. I remember mentioning to you that you can now take ADSL in another thread, and why aren't you voting with your pocket as you through anticap advised so many others to do? As I remember no response? You even went as far as bemoaning the lower upstream on ntl's 600k service. BT can get you a phoneline in straight away if the point is already there, you can have adsl within 2 weeks. Or does that mean you can't bemoan ntl if you leave, and there goes a big recreational activity.

Just the vibe I think everyone is getting from the language you've used. One of oneupsmanship rather than anything else. Though you should be used to that, enough people joined then ran away from anticap thanks to your ranting, most of them like myself employees willing to have constructive conversation, but a couple of ranty posts from yourself soon ended that trend.

Maybe ntl will get fined lots then we'll see headline 'ntl to cut jobs in Wythenshawe following ASA / FAST / Trading Standards fine - then you'll see how what you do affects real people, especially if they are up in your neck of the woods, and maybe it'll wipe that smug smile off your face.

StuartW:

OK so if you got convicted of theft you'd see fit to sue HMG for loss of pay? You got caught, suspended, and you want ntl to reimburse you for cutting you off. Frankly you are lucky you were put back on at all, let alone the fact what you did was illegal and carries a prison sentence if they'd wanted to take it that far.

For what it's worth I absolutely agree, the advert is completely out of order, and someone in that business unit does deserve a bit of a slapping for it. Just the way certain people are going about this is damn childish, bordering on pathetic.

Hope everyone can see the way you get treated by NTL employees when they can not come out with a sensible argument they go to personal attacks must be the call centre training.

For everyones info, when trying to cancel the service, was offered the service at a rate that made ADSL look expensive.

This point has been made by myself many times you can not cancel because you end up in an auction with the retention team :rolleyes:

So who is just anothernoob trying to kid

Ignition

05-09-2003, 12:17

Originally posted by th'engineer
In reply to justanother noob if you wish to discuss anything quite happy to talk to people on any subject at NTL.

In fact quite a few people at HOOk have my e-mail or phone number so if you wish to discuss further just ask around always willing to talk.

Even AIZAD has my e-mail and phone number :D

OK, fine, PM me your MSN details (I am aware you use it) and we'll proceed from there :devsmoke:

BTW no need to put HOOK in caps, I know where it is, though I don't work there, used to live pretty close tho for my sins.

EDIT: On the other hand going by above attitude, despite the mass of evidence suggesting it maybe not a good plan.

Who said I work in a callcentre anyway?

Russ

05-09-2003, 12:22

It would be nice if we could get an official responce from NTL on this, however I don't think we'll get it.

This certainly does need to be brought out in the open.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 12:22

Originally posted by th'engineer
Hope everyone can see the way you get treated by NTL employees when they can not come out with a sensible argument they go to personal attacks must be the call centre training.

For everyones info, when trying to cancel the service, was offered the service at a rate that made ADSL look expensive.

This point has been made by myself many times you can not cancel because you end up in an auction with the retention team :rolleyes:

So who is just anothernoob trying to kid

Can you please, just for once, stop using the 'employee versus customer' line - it is just not relevant (not for my argument anyway), Believe it or not, I only work to live and do not have a mission to stick up for ntl regardless. The company who has advertised this is not in question. It's the moral high ground which I don't think anybody on this thread has the right to take that's appalling, not the fact that it's ntl you have a vendetta against.

Ignition

05-09-2003, 12:33

Originally posted by th'engineer
For everyones info, when trying to cancel the service, was offered the service at a rate that made ADSL look expensive.

So who is just anothernoob trying to kid

Quite amusing then that for your strong moral stance saving a few quid a month was enough to keep you. Maybe you should take a look at yourself before pontificating about others? If you actually felt that strongly about the AUP etc would have thought a few quid a month would be a small price to pay?

Chris

05-09-2003, 12:33

Originally posted by orangebird
Can you please, just for once, stop using the 'employee versus customer' line - it is just not relevant (not for my argument anyway), Believe it or not, I only work to live and do not have a mission to stick up for ntl regardless. The company who has advertised this is not in question. It's the moral high ground which I don't think anybody on this thread has the right to take that's appalling, not the fact that it's ntl you have a vendetta against.

I think you are obscuring the central point by repeatedly focusing on a very narrow side issue. Not a single person has replied to you to object that they have never done anything wrong, or never downloaded copyright material from the net. Your point is well made. But as others have posted, civil society would collapse if one person's wrongdoing prevented them from acting on someone else's.

What I'm interested in establishing (and I think one or two others are trying to thrash this out too) is whether ntl have done anything wrong, and if they have, what action should be taken.

Everything else - e.g. whether or not you are on a 'mission' to stick up for ntl, whether or not someone else is carrying on an anti-cap grudge match, and so on - is irrelevant to me. I'm interested in the facts behind this issues and how they are interpreted.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 12:40

Originally posted by orangebird

If you can honestly say you have never illegally downloaded from the internet, then I applaude you my friends, fill your boots and take them to court.

Otherwise, take your hypocritical morals and put them where the sun doesn't shine.

The hypocrisy is not whther someone might have downloaded a movie (which incedentally I have not - I prefer to own the DVD myself) but the following:

1. This is a good thing to do

2. You have the bandwidth to do it (which under the terms of the AUP you clear do not).

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 12:44

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
Quite amusing then that for your strong moral stance saving a few quid a month was enough to keep you. Maybe you should take a look at yourself before pontificating about others? If you actually felt that strongly about the AUP etc would have thought a few quid a month would be a small price to pay?

If i moved to another supplier that would be easy, unfortunately myself like others stand up for there rights .

It just shows how desperate they are to stop churn, to be honest in respect of your reply to the offer of further conversation.

I have tried to get some reply back from NTL in respect of concerns but it has not been forthcoming.

Therefore the only way to really make NTL open there eyes is by hitting them in the pocket, bad press, and contacting partners of NTL.

i am quite happy to stop this if the answers are forthcoming

If you think there is a way forward then wil accept your offer

orangebird

05-09-2003, 12:44

Originally posted by towny
I think you are obscuring the central point by repeatedly focusing on a very narrow side issue. Not a single person has replied to you to object that they have never done anything wrong, or never downloaded copyright material from the net. Your point is well made. But as others have posted, civil society would collapse if one person's wrongdoing prevented them from acting on someone else's.

<snip>

And you don't see anthing wrong with this? So, you know it's illegal to download said films, but you do it anyway. Maybe ntl know they shouldn't be advertising the fact you can do these downloads via their BB service, but they are anyway....:rolleyes:

q) What's the difference?
a) absolutely none.

But carry on, the lot of you. My sincerest wishes that you all get a life after your crusade is over (as long as you all don't choke on your hypocritical words first ) :)

orangebird

05-09-2003, 12:46

Originally posted by andygrif
The hypocrisy is not whther someone might have downloaded a movie (which incedentally I have not - I prefer to own the DVD myself) but the following:

1. This is a good thing to do

2. You have the bandwidth to do it (which under the terms of the AUP you clear do not).

number 2 is WRONG. Yes you do have the bandwith, as long as you don't download for example 3 films in 14 days - as AUP clearly states.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 12:48

Originally posted by orangebird
number 2 is WRONG. Yes you do have the bandwith, as long as you don't download 3 films in 14 days - as AUP clearly states.

never seen 3 films in 14 days in the AUP have they changed it again

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 12:49

Originally posted by th'engineer
never seen 3 films in 14 days in the AUP have they changed it again

You know damn well what OB meant.

unless you exceed 1Gb a day for 3 consecutive days in 14 you are not breaking AUP.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 12:50

Originally posted by th'engineer
never seen 3 films in 14 days in the AUP have they changed it again

Well done Th'eng. Can't bring a decent argument to the discussion, so you take posts out of the context although you're probably well aware of what it is, and become facaetious (sp?). Another classic. My post will now be edited, so no more misunderstandings can happen.... :rolleyes:

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 12:53

OK slightly off topic, I now have to go do some welding etc on my car. I'll be back though. Dont know if I can stay in the real world too long.

Chris

05-09-2003, 12:57

Originally posted by orangebird
And you don't see anthing wrong with this?

I do see something wrong with it. It's illegal. I have never disagreed with you on this point. What I have said, is that focusing on this point obscures the central issue which is, 'is ntl inciting people to commit illegal acts?'

So, you know it's illegal to download said films, but you do it anyway.

I have never downloaded any film illegally from the internet, and I would be interesed if you could link to anything I have said that has given you cause to think that I have.

I'll give you a starter for 10 - I tried out Napster a couple of years ago but never moved on to use any other p2p application because I felt distinctly uncomfortable about it. It is illegal after all.

Maybe ntl know they shouldn't be advertising the fact you can do these downloads via their BB service, but they are anyway....:rolleyes:

q) What's the difference?
a) absolutely none.

For someone who is so concerned about everyone's morals, you are remarkably tolerant of the way NTL appears to be acting in this instance. This country has laws precisely so that breaking them does make a difference.

But carry on, the lot of you. My sincerest wishes that you all get a life after your crusade is over (as long as you all don't choke on your hypocritical words first ) :)

You protested in an earlier post that you are not on some mission to defend ntl at any cost on any issue, or words to that effect. I hope you can understand why some folks find that hard to believe. This to me is simply a case of, have ntl broken the law (and spent our subscription money doing it) or have they not? If they have, what should happen to them? There was no need to make it a slanging match over people's morality.

Shaun

05-09-2003, 13:02

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
What should have been done is a protest to NTL

Yer right, have you seen .com recently, Ntl management have been contacted time and time again in protest to several issues and all people get is stony silence.

Please don't over dramatise on this issue, if NTL go under some other company will take over the network, AOL?

This isn't the first time this has happened, if you care to look at the ASA website, they are regularly being rapped over the knuckles for misleading advertising but nothing changes.

This IS the only way they will learn.:( :(

XFS03

05-09-2003, 13:05

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
You know damn well what OB meant.

unless you exceed 1Gb a day for 3 consecutive days in 14 you are not breaking AUP.
Wrong :rolleyes:

It always makes me smile when someone tries to correct another person, only to get it wrong themselves. :D

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:10

Originally posted by towny
I do see something wrong with it. It's illegal. I have never disagreed with you on this point. What I have said, is that focusing on this point obscures the central issue which is, 'is ntl inciting people to commit illegal acts?'

I have never downloaded any film illegally from the internet, and I would be interesed if you could link to anything I have said that has given you cause to think that I have.

I'll give you a starter for 10 - I tried out Napster a couple of years ago but never moved on to use any other p2p application because I felt distinctly uncomfortable about it. It is illegal after all.

For someone who is so concerned about everyone's morals, you are remarkably tolerant of the way NTL appears to be acting in this instance. This country has laws precisely so that breaking them does make a difference.

You protested in an earlier post that you are not on some mission to defend ntl at any cost on any issue, or words to that effect. I hope you can understand why some folks find that hard to believe. This to me is simply a case of, have ntl broken the law (and spent our subscription money doing it) or have they not? If they have, what should happen to them? There was no need to make it a slanging match over people's morality.

It's not the fact whether what ntl or you (and when I say 'you' I don't mean you personally towny, so apologies for the confusion there :) ) are behaving illegally.

Yes, I am tolerant of it, because I don't see it as a big deal, just as I don't see illegally downloading films as a big deal - I have more than a couple of downloaded albums myself.

I am so sick of repeating myself, and am not going to do it again, and I really want to give all you good people the benefit of the doubt that you are intelligent enough to understand what I'm getting at - illegal or not, ntl or not, it's the HYPOCRISY OF THE SITUATION that I find appalling.
If you were all intent on outing yourselves to the relevant authorities on all the illegal downloading you've done, you may be able to gain some respect and have a decent argument. But until then, IMO you're just bored, with sad, pointless agendas. I;m not trying to start a slanging match, just saying as I see it. :)

andygrif

05-09-2003, 13:12

Originally posted by orangebird
number 2 is WRONG. Yes you do have the bandwith, as long as you don't download for example 3 films in 14 days - as AUP clearly states.

But where in the advert did it say that there was a limit to the amount you could download. Quite the opposite in fact - it suggests that there are 400,000 movies downloaded every day (although where this figure came from I have no idea).

So point two stands.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 13:13

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
You know damn well what OB meant.

unless you exceed 1Gb a day for 3 consecutive days in 14 you are not breaking AUP.

Sorry to be pedantic, but it is 1Gb per day, for three days, in a consecutive 14 day period:)

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:17

Originally posted by XFS03
Wrong :rolleyes:

It always makes me smile when someone tries to correct another person, only to get it wrong themselves. :D

Quote from AUP -

We will be very flexible. Our objective is only to limit very frequent or persistent heavy network use that can impact other customers. Therefore we will ONLY contact customers who exceed the daily data limit for three or more days in any consecutive 14-day period.

Link for AUP attached - please tell me where I was wrong?
http://www.ntlworld.com/service_update.html

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:20

Originally posted by andygrif
But where in the advert did it say that there was a limit to the amount you could download. Quite the opposite in fact - it suggests that there are 400,000 movies downloaded every day (although where this figure came from I have no idea).

So point two stands.

No it doesn't - if you download more than one gig a day for three days in a row out of fourteen, then you will be breakig the AUP.

The advert suggests there are 40000 movies on the net that could be downloaded. So what??? :rolleyes:

Richard M

05-09-2003, 13:20

OK - can we chill on the cap/aup thing now please. :Peaceman:

XFS03

05-09-2003, 13:23

Originally posted by orangebird
Quote from AUP -

...we will ONLY contact customers who exceed the daily data limit for three or more days in any consecutive 14-day period.

Link for AUP attached - please tell me where I was wrong?
http://www.ntlworld.com/service_update.html
I was quoting timewarrior2001 who said "unless you exceed 1Gb a day for 3 consecutive days in 14 you are not breaking AUP."

As you have just quoted from the AUP yourself, it is actually 3 days in a consecutive 14 day period, which is much more restrictive!

andygrif

05-09-2003, 13:28

Originally posted by orangebird
No it doesn't - if you download more than one gig a day for three days in a row out of fourteen, then you will be breakig the AUP.

The advert suggests there are 40000 movies on the net that could be downloaded. So what??? :rolleyes:

You're wrong about the three days in a row. In the quote from the AUP it says that it is 3 days in a consecutive 14 day period.

So what? Well it is illegal to promote illegal activity. Simple.

EDIT: Oops, XFS beat me to it on the consecutive thing!

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:28

Originally posted by XFS03
I was quoting timewarrior2001 who said "unless you exceed 1Gb a day for 3 consecutive days in 14 you are not breaking AUP."

As you have just quoted from the AUP yourself, it is actually 3 days in a consecutive 14 day period, which is much more restrictive!

Still, either way, it blows andygrifs' point 2 out of the water. There is the bandwith to download a movie. End of.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:30

Originally posted by andygrif
You're wrong about the three days in a row. In the quote from the AUP it says that it is 3 days in a consecutive 14 day period.

So what? Well it is illegal to promote illegal activity. Simple.

See my last paragraph in post #135 - it doesn't bother me either way what is or isn't illegal... :rolleyes:

Jonboy

05-09-2003, 13:33

I AM WITH timewarrior2001 on this one wot yer gonna do when the plug is pulled on you to many do gooders about
i think its a cool advert move ntl they aint tellin any lies for once :D

andygrif

05-09-2003, 13:33

Originally posted by orangebird
Still, either way, it blows andygrifs' point 2 out of the water. There is the bandwith to download a movie. End of.

No it doesn't - not in the eyes of the ASA. You may know a lot about ntl OB - but I know a lot about the rules of advertising. If the adverister gives the impression of being able to have access to something (unless stating restrictions) it is in contravention of the rules of advertising in the UK.

So..point two stands.

And back to point one:

The advert clearly promotes an illegal activity. Not only is this a criminal offence, but also again against ASA regulations.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 13:34

Hmmm, methinks this is going to carry on and on and on.

Surely people are allowed to have their own opinions, I can see this turning nasty

Foo Fighter

05-09-2003, 13:35

This is stupid i don't see why you have gone and grassed them up... its not gonna do anything good for ntl or us...

its stating a true fact anyway its not ntls fault that the internet is full warez, most people wouldn't have broadband if it wasn't for warez....

/me wonders off to download sommet

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:39

Originally posted by andygrif
No it doesn't - not in the eyes of the ASA. You may know a lot about ntl OB - but I know a lot about the rules of advertising. If the adverister gives the impression of being able to have access to something (unless stating restrictions) it is in contravention of the rules of advertising in the UK.

So..point two stands.

And back to point one:

The advert clearly promotes an illegal activity. Not only is this a criminal offence, but also again against ASA regulations.

In your point 2, you stated that there is not the bandwith to download a movie. This is completes rubbish. You can - but to be on the safe side, only download two in a consecutive fourteen day period.....
Why can't you just admit it?

And with point 1 - great. I expect you be off grassing up all the other p2p/warez applications that you know promote illegal downloading etc after your triumph with ntl?

Shaun

05-09-2003, 13:46

Originally posted by orangebird
number 2 is WRONG. Yes you do have the bandwith, as long as you don't download for example 3 films in 14 days - as AUP clearly states.

Firstly The Matrix was available on the net as 3 VCDs', thats well over 1 days limit.

Secondly, would you like my Nan to complain to the ASA, she has never d/l a film or music off the net, she oly uses it for her shopping and banking, but she like me also thinks that it is a disgusting adverts.;)

Now, I like the rest of you like a good argument but this thread seems to be degenerating into a slanging match. I'm not that bothered where 'th' engineer' gets his b/b or if 'orangebird' is on a crusade to save Ntl. What I am interested in is that Ntl learn something from this situation, so therefore can we try and keep this thread on-topic by discussing the advert, not each other. :)

If we can't we may loose the chance to get this the recognition it deserves.

:spin:

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:50

Originally posted by dellwear
<snip>or if 'orangebird' is on a crusade to save Ntl. What I am interested in is that Ntl learn something from this situation, so therefore can we try and keep this thread on-topic by discussing the advert, not each other. :)<snip>

I am on no crusade for ntl - just cannot abide double standards of the mammoth proportions I am seeing on here.... :rolleyes:

As for your nan - good on her. If she's never downloaded illegally and has a problem with the advert, then she has every right to act as she see's fit :) ;)

aliferste

05-09-2003, 13:52

#reads thread#

ROFLMAO#

It IS biting the hand that feeds you.

The only good copies of films out there are ones that are out on DVD......the newest films are pathertic quality and are in no way enjoyable to watch. Shaky cams with poeple getting more popcorn.

I wonder if you people who are adamant about reporting ntl would be reporting your m8ts for copying a cd or downlaoding a film.........nah didnt think so ..!!

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 13:55

I thought this was about NTL actually publishing the advert and by doing so promoting the illegal downloads of films etc.

I can't see my mates putting a 4 page wrap around on their local paper to advertise the fact that they do it !!

Shaun

05-09-2003, 13:57

Another take on the issue at hand (trying desperately to steer the conversation away from the slanging match) is Google were recently made to remove some Kazza links from their search results pages because they infringe the 'Digital Millennium Copyright Act'. Google were not advertising Kazza, just providing a search service, the authorities still took a very dim view of the situation. :eek:

In this instance Ntl are implying that you can take their service and d/l movies and that will be o.k. I wonder what the RIAA would make of this?:spin:

orangebird

05-09-2003, 13:59

Originally posted by dellwear
Another take on the issue at hand (trying desperately to steer the conversation away from the slanging match) is Google were recently made to remove some Kazza links from their search results pages because they infringe the 'Digital Millennium Copyright Act'. Google were not advertising Kazza, just providing a search service, the authorities still took a very dim view of the situation. :eek:

In this instance Ntl are implying that you can take their service and d/l movies and that will be o.k. I wonder what the RIAA would make of this?:spin:

the advert states - "400,000-600,000 movies are downloaded every day" and "Spiderman was available on the net before it was even in the cinema". Two facts, as far as I see. Not a suggestion to go and do it.....

Shaun

05-09-2003, 14:00

Originally posted by orangebird
I am on no crusade for ntl - just cannot abide double standards of the mammoth proportions I am seeing on here.... :rolleyes:

As for your nan - good on her. If she's never downloaded illegally and has a problem with the advert, then she has every right to act as she see's fit :) ;)

In regards to the first part of your post, I'm really not bothered, but by contently bring it up you seem to be proving 'them' right :(

Just because I may have d/l the odd song from the Internet (which I couldn't buy elsewhere), doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to report Ntl, that just doesn't make any sense, I'm not inciting thousands of readers to do it.:rolleyes:

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:05

Originally posted by dellwear
In regards to the first part of your post, I'm really not bothered, but by contently bring it up you seem to be proving 'them' right :(

Did you mean consistently, rather than contently?? :confused:

If you did - I don't keeo bringing up, only reply about when someone else insinuates it..... :rolleyes:

Just because I may have d/l the odd song from the Internet (which I couldn't buy elsewhere), doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to report Ntl, that just doesn't make any sense, I'm not inciting thousands of readers to do it.:rolleyes:

So, you're happy to actually download something illegally (commit an illegal act), but not happy that ntl infer that it is possible? This gets even better.....

That's like me owning, say, a gun shop. I tell people that a gun could kill a person. Then all those who own guns illegally try and get me arrested for implying that they go and shoot someone!!!!

dr wadd

05-09-2003, 14:09

Originally posted by dellwear
Another take on the issue at hand (trying desperately to steer the conversation away from the slanging match) is Google were recently made to remove some Kazza links from their search results pages because they infringe the 'Digital Millennium Copyright Act'. Google were not advertising Kazza, just providing a search service, the authorities still took a very dim view of the situation. :eek:

In this instance Ntl are implying that you can take their service and d/l movies and that will be o.k. I wonder what the RIAA would make of this?:spin:

Google were actually ordered to remove links to Kazzaa Lite as it contains code that was dubiously appropriated from the main Kazzaa source code. In this case it was actually Kazzaa itself invoking the DMCA against a third-party client, not the RIAA or MPAA going against Kazzaa.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 14:09

Originally posted by orangebird
So, you're happy to actually download something illegally (commit an illegal act), but not happy that ntl infer that it is possible? This gets even better.....

Which is worse ..... Doing an illegal act, or trying to entice new users onto a service by indicating that you can do it via them ???

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:12

Originally posted by Nemesis
Which is worse ..... Doing an illegal act, or trying to entice new users onto a service by indicating that you can do it via them ???

Doing it of course :dunce: :rolleyes:

And if you read the advert, all it does is state facts/figures. It doesn't tell you to go and do it.

aliferste

05-09-2003, 14:13

Originally posted by Nemesis
I thought this was about NTL actually publishing the advert and by doing so promoting the illegal downloads of films etc.

I can't see my mates putting a 4 page wrap around on their local paper to advertise the fact that they do it !!

But if people are going to get on their high horse about it.........and report ntl ......for promoting something that they use there connection for anyway......its absurd!:)

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 14:15

Originally posted by aliferste
But if people are going to get on their high horse about it.........and report ntl ......for promoting something that they use there connection for anyway......its absurd!:)

But NTL are surely wrong for using THAT advert to get more custom - especially with what is currently going on in the states with Kazaa.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:27

Originally posted by Nemesis
But NTL are surely wrong for using THAT advert to get more custom - especially with what is currently going on in the states with Kazaa.

Why? All they did was state figures/facts. It's not in ntls control as to how people translate this.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 14:30

Originally posted by orangebird
Why? All they did was state figures/facts. It's not in ntls control as to how people translate this.

Maybe not, but it can be argued that it can be taken that way.

It may be a fact that Spiderman was available on the net before it hit the cinema's but I bet you the Movie Studio don;t want that advertised. It's all a bit unethical don't you think

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:35

Originally posted by Nemesis
Maybe not, but it can be argued that it can be taken that way.

It may be a fact that Spiderman was available on the net before it hit the cinema's but I bet you the Movie Studio don;t want that advertised. It's all a bit unethical don't you think

Yes, but so is downloading it.

I've had enough now anyway. IMO, it's on a hiding to nothing.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 14:36

Your probably right, but nice arguing with you :wavey:

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:39

Originally posted by Nemesis
Your probably right, but nice arguing with you :wavey:

You too! :wavey:

XFS03

05-09-2003, 14:44

Originally posted by orangebird
...And if you read the advert, all it does is state facts/figures. It doesn't tell you to go and do it.
Oh come on!
Why do you think that ntl put the bit in about Spiderman (even enhancing it with a photo), if it wasn't to entice people to download illegal movies. O.K...it doesn't actually tell you to do it, but what is the relevance of the Spiderman bit otherwise?

downquark1

05-09-2003, 14:53

If they is nothing more interesting the media will make a deal out of this, someone will see it.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 14:54

Originally posted by XFS03
Oh come on!
Why do you think that ntl put the bit in about Spiderman (even enhancing it with a photo), if it wasn't to entice people to download illegal movies. O.K...it doesn't actually tell you to do it, but what is the relevance of the Spiderman bit otherwise?

It's not about how relevant it is or isn't. It's about the wording of the advert and the legalities of the words. And going by the words of the advert in black and white (not mine or anyone elses intrepretations of it), all it does is state a fact. As I said, I think it's a hiding to nothing.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 14:55

Originally posted by orangebird
It's not about how relevant it is or isn't. It's about the wording of the advert and the legalities of the words. And going by the words of the advert in black and white (not mine or anyone elses intrepretations of it), all it does is state a fact. As I said, I think it's a hiding to nothing.

Hmm, I thought you'd given up ... :D

At best can we agree that the advert was unethical ??

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 14:57

Originally posted by Nemesis
Hmm, I thought you'd given up ... :D

At best can we agree that the advert was unethical ??

I agree with that and it appears so do the ASA:D

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:00

Originally posted by Nemesis
Hmm, I thought you'd given up ... :D

At best can we agree that the advert was unethical ??

At the end of the day, I agree that is unethical - I've never said it was a good advert.....

But to go to the ASA or FACT or whoever your mate works for is ridiculous. Pot and kettle etc..... ;)

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 15:00

Originally posted by th'engineer
I agree with that and it appears so do the ASA:D

What have you heard then ?

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:01

Originally posted by th'engineer
I agree with that and it appears so do the ASA:D

Can you provide a link to show that the ASA agree Th'eng? :angel:

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:03

Originally posted by orangebird
In your point 2, you stated that there is not the bandwith to download a movie. This is completes rubbish. You can - but to be on the safe side, only download two in a consecutive fourteen day period.....
Why can't you just admit it?

And with point 1 - great. I expect you be off grassing up all the other p2p/warez applications that you know promote illegal downloading etc after your triumph with ntl?

Why the hostility?

I haven't 'grassed' anyone up. I also haven't said I am going to.

As an aside, the company I work for requires under our agreement with the MPAA to report known issues that may affect them...that said I still haven't said if I am going to do it.

At the end of the day, we all know it goes on, MPAA included. But for ntl to be promoting it as a selling point is way beyond the mark.

Shaun

05-09-2003, 15:04

Originally posted by orangebird
Did you mean consistently, rather than contently?? :confused:

Thats ieSpell for you. Oops:rolleyes:

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:05

Originally posted by andygrif
Why the hostility?

I haven't 'grassed' anyone up. I also haven't said I am going to.

As an aside, the company I work for requires under our agreement with the MPAA to report known issues that may affect them...that said I still haven't said if I am going to do it.

At the end of the day, we all know it goes on, MPAA included. But for ntl to be promoting it as a selling point is way beyond the mark.

Someones gonna report it sooner or later:shrug:

Serves NTL right for being so stupid.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 15:07

link as requested here (http://www.nthellworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48417#post48417)

Shaun

05-09-2003, 15:07

Originally posted by orangebird
It's not about how relevant it is or isn't. It's about the wording of the advert and the legalities of the words. And going by the words of the advert in black and white (not mine or anyone elses intrepretations of it), all it does is state a fact. As I said, I think it's a hiding to nothing.

Ntl ARE responsible for how the advert can be interpreted.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:08

Originally posted by aliferste
#reads thread#

ROFLMAO#

It IS biting the hand that feeds you.

The only good copies of films out there are ones that are out on DVD......the newest films are pathertic quality and are in no way enjoyable to watch. Shaky cams with poeple getting more popcorn.

This is not always the case actually. There are litterally hundreds of preview VHS copies of movies before they are screened in cinemas.

We get them here, and you wouldn't believe the security we have to have to get them

Sadly there are some idiots in the industry who abuse the system, which is why you can get some movies ahead of release. I don't advocate it, just like I don't advocate people downloading music (just for the record I have downloaded about 12 tracks from the internet over the years - ones not available elsewhere on CD)

Being in the media and entertainment business, I care passionately about copyright. If everyone downloaded everything, there would be nothing to download.....think about it.

To promote such behaviour is not only illegal, but immoral.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:09

Originally posted by th'engineer
link as requested here (http://www.nthellworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48417#post48417)

I'll take that as a 'no' then.....:rolleyes:

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:09

Oh we are still here goody :)

Hey theres been a right load of noise about this advert, yeah honestly, it was about as loud as a mouses fart.

lets keep it all in perspective.
We all think the advert is pretty dumb, but then theres those of us that think some people have over reacted and reported this nonsense to other organisations. And its worth noting that these people also think the people doing so have done it because of their personal gripes at NTL. Not for the good of existing and future customers.

Thats the bottom line.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:10

Originally posted by orangebird
Yes, but so is downloading it.

I've had enough now anyway. IMO, it's on a hiding to nothing.

You make good points and make them well my friend!

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:10

Originally posted by dellwear
Ntl ARE responsible for how the advert can be interpreted.

And you really think that some legal/governing body is going to expect ntl to control the interpretations of the thousands of people who are going to see the ad? Get real. The only person responsible for my actions is me.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 15:13

Originally posted by orangebird
I'll take that as a 'no' then.....:rolleyes:

Come on ob read the thread its taken from return e-mail to me from ASA.

Whats all the bitterness for

:wavey:

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:14

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:16

Originally posted by orangebird
And you really think that some legal/governing body is going to expect ntl to control the interpretations of the thousands of people who are going to see the ad? Get real. The only person responsible for my actions is me.

Rules are rules. Thank God our government doesn't think I can be trusted to be responsible for my own actions. Why else do you think that a cup of coffee from Starbucks says 'Caution: Hot' on it!!!

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:16

Originally posted by th'engineer
Come on ob read the thread its taken from return e-mail to me from ASA.

Whats all the bitterness for

:wavey:

It quotes clauses th'eng, not an official response from the ASA about the advert in question. And until (if) the ASA do comment, you can't really say they agree.....

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:16

It far easier to develop your oppinion based on what you hear from others.

Had that advert been shwon to 100 people, I wonder how many would instantly assume NTl were in the wrong?
The how many would develop the oppinion that NTL copndoned Copyright theft.
And how many would think "**** it i cant be arsed"

Shaun

05-09-2003, 15:16

Originally posted by orangebird
I'll take that as a 'no' then.....:rolleyes:

2.2 All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.

Look Ntl have done wrong, you have admitted that orangebird.

The issue here is how do we get Ntl to stop advertising illegally. This isn't the first time, have a look through the ASA's website.

I'm more concerned with how Ntl can be taught a lesson regarding their advertising, they don't listen to customers, they don't listen to ASA, maybe they will listen to FACT.

I'm sure you will agree, it has to stop, I was sold an unlimited service it isn't now. I don't want to stop other unsuspecting customers being lured to a service that isn't what they expect from the advert.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:18

Originally posted by andygrif
Rules are rules. Thank God our government doesn't think I can be trusted to be responsible for my own actions. Why else do you think that a cup of coffee from Starbucks says 'Caution: Hot' on it!!!

Because we're turning into the bloody USA - compensation! writs! supenas! :rolleyes: :zzz:

And if you too stupid to realise by yourself that a cup of coffee made with boilng water is hot, then frankly, you shouldn't be allowed out by yourself. :)

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:18

Originally posted by dellwear
2.2 All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.

Look Ntl have done wrong, you have admitted that orangebird.

The issue here is how do we get Ntl to stop advertising illegally. This isn't the first time, have a look through the ASA's website.

I'm more concerned with how Ntl can be taught a lesson regarding their advertising, they don't listen to customers, they don't listen to ASA, maybe they will listen to FACT.

I'm sure you will agree, it has to stop, I was sold an unlimited service it isn't now. I don't want to stop other unsuspecting customers being lured to a service that isn't what they expect from the advert.

But dellwear, My originasl argument against this method of action, was that as a result we ar eunlikely to get any restrictions lifted, when NTL gets fined millions or whatever thats Millions that could and SHOULD have been spent on the network not paying a fine because someone has a gripe with NTL and reported them for it.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:19

Originally posted by orangebird
It quotes clauses th'eng, not an official response from the ASA about the advert in question. And until (if) the ASA do comment, you can't really say they agree.....

That's becuase first someone has to report it. Then the ASA has to enter a period of consultation with the person reporting and the advertiser themselves.

The board of the ASA will then meet at the next rulings hearing, and will discuss any new complaints/breaches since the last meeting.

They will then offer their ruling on the case. It can take a while, sometimes months.

Usually, especially in both high-profile and cut and dry cases they will make some comment and immidiate ruling for the ad to be withdrawn prior to any ruling / judgement being issued.

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:19

I'm sure you will agree, it has to stop, I was sold an unlimited service it isn't now. I don't want to stop other unsuspecting customers being lured to a service that isn't what they expect from the advert.

Exactly. people are either going to that that:
It's ok, legal, fine to download movies.

or

NTL support illegal downloading

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:20

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
It far easier to develop your oppinion based on what you hear from others.

Had that advert been shwon to 100 people, I wonder how many would instantly assume NTl were in the wrong?
The how many would develop the oppinion that NTL copndoned Copyright theft.
And how many would think "**** it i cant be arsed"

Most people don't understand copyright. They are the people who think it is LEGAL to copy a CD on to a cassette to listen to in the car.

Ignition

05-09-2003, 15:20

Originally posted by th'engineer
If i moved to another supplier that would be easy, unfortunately myself like others stand up for there rights .

It just shows how desperate they are to stop churn, to be honest in respect of your reply to the offer of further conversation.

I have tried to get some reply back from NTL in respect of concerns but it has not been forthcoming.

Therefore the only way to really make NTL open there eyes is by hitting them in the pocket, bad press, and contacting partners of NTL.

i am quite happy to stop this if the answers are forthcoming

If you think there is a way forward then wil accept your offer

I'm sorry, didn't realise that absolutely unlimited Internet access is a right.

Obviously your idea of hitting them in the pocket means 'hitting them in the pocket so long as it doesn't harm me in any way or increase my costs'.

Quite funny that you are happy to go from Middleton to Leeds to stir things, but aren't willing to pay that bit extra to hurt ntl in the pocket. Or would it not be as glamorous or self-satisfying to have just quietly, and without fanfare have cancelled your service like others did? You made quite a speech of doing it if I remember.

The offer of dialogue was yours, however I don't really think there is a way forward, I've tried talking to you about these things on another forums, including anticap, just degenerated into you ranting at me if I remember right. If you can actually listen to what I have to say without nitpicking + degenerating things into an anticap rant, as you did with the last ntl person who posted about this on anticap, nor with your completely unqualified opinions on senior ntl management (last time I checked you have NO IDEA what these people do behind the scenes) then I'd be happy to talk to you. While I'm not a senior member of staff by any means maybe I can provide a new perspective for you.

You'd be surprised that I actually agree on the odd thing with you....

Ignition

05-09-2003, 15:22

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
It far easier to develop your oppinion based on what you hear from others.

Had that advert been shwon to 100 people, I wonder how many would instantly assume NTl were in the wrong?
The how many would develop the oppinion that NTL copndoned Copyright theft.
And how many would think "**** it i cant be arsed"

I suppose another good survey would be to show this thread to 100 people and see how many of them think 'what utter utter drivel' and stop at page 2 or earlier...

Fair to say most people really wouldn't care less.

Shaun

05-09-2003, 15:23

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
when NTL gets fined millions or whatever thats Millions that could and SHOULD have been spent on the network not paying a fine because someone has a gripe with NTL and reported them for it.

SO they should be alowed to do what ever they like to make money, and noone should complain.

Lets get them pimping women on street corners, that'll make a few bob to help with their money problems.:rolleyes:

What would you rather we did about it then, just bend over and take, maybe we should ask for more when they are done.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:24

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
I suppose another good survey would be to show this thread to 100 people and see how many of them think 'what utter utter drivel' and stop at page 2 or earlier...

Fair to say most people really wouldn't care less.

14 bloody pages and you , you clever git, sum up what I s'pose is a majority feeling in one bloody sentence.

*throws arms up in despair*

lol:D

andygrif

05-09-2003, 15:25

Originally posted by orangebird
Because we're turning into the bloody USA - compensation! writs! supenas! :rolleyes: :zzz:

But that's the point. The reason people get sued is becuase they have suffered losses.

Every time you watch a movie that you have downloaded illegally, the Studios suffer a loss. Every time you download a music track, the composers and artists suffer a loss.

As a conduit for inflicting loss on others, ntl should prepare themselves to be sued. The entertainment business is a highly litigious industry, and immensely protective one.

If someone stole ntl's copyright you would expect them to sue, so why should it not work the other way around? Becuase they don't have much money? Well they should be more careful when they make illegal claims then.

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:26

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b

Fair to say most people really wouldn't care less.

I couldn't care less in someone in Birmingham (being safe and sound in Manchester) was robbed - it doesn't mean it's not wrong and shouldn't be punished.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 15:26

Well justanothernoob the balls in your court you should have the PM. The decision is yours

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:28

Originally posted by andygrif
But that's the point. The reason people get sued is becuase they have suffered losses.

Every time you watch a movie that you have downloaded illegally, the Studios suffer a loss. Every time you download a music track, the composers and artists suffer a loss.

As a conduit for inflicting loss on others, ntl should prepare themselves to be sued. The entertainment business is a highly litigious industry, and immensely protective.

If someone stole ntl's copyright you would expect them to sue, so why should it not work the other way around? Becuase they don't have much money? Well they should be more careful when they make illegal claims then.

NTL are NOT inflicting a loss on anyone.
What people choose to do with their conection that just happens to be provided by NTL is their business and/or the business of the people trying to get it stopped.
NTL are not to blame for what people do with their connections.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 15:31

Originally posted by andygrif
Most people don't understand copyright. They are the people who think it is LEGAL to copy a CD on to a cassette to listen to in the car.

You are allowed to copy it, if you own the original.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 15:32

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:37

Originally posted by andygrif
But that's the point. The reason people get sued is becuase they have suffered losses.

Every time you watch a movie that you have downloaded illegally, the Studios suffer a loss. Every time you download a music track, the composers and artists suffer a loss.

As a conduit for inflicting loss on others, ntl should prepare themselves to be sued. The entertainment business is a highly litigious industry, and immensely protective one.

If someone stole ntl's copyright you would expect them to sue, so why should it not work the other way around? Becuase they don't have much money? Well they should be more careful when they make illegal claims then.

What illegal claims have they made?

There are 4000000000000 movies downloaded from the internet (or whatever) - fact - what's illegal about that?

Spiderman was in the internet before it was in the cinema - fact. Anything illegal about that?

Stop making mountains out of molehills. You want to stop something terrible and illegal, give your spare time to the NSPCC, or your local animal rescue centre or something - run a marathon to raise funds for a battered wives shelter.

Or just get a grip and a sense of perspective.....

Shaun

05-09-2003, 15:38

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 15:38

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:41

Originally posted by dellwear
So as someone else already said, it would be in 'in your book' if they adverted that you can download child porn then. Come on. :rolleyes:

You guys still haven't answered my other comments about what you think should be done

You can't compare the two, that really is grasping at straws.

CHild porn is disgusting/**** of the earth/sick/ etc etc etc which can destroy peoples lives forever.
Copying a film illegally mean the company doesn't receive the royalties. Whoop-de bloody doo.

Not comparable at all. What was I saying about perspective?...... :rolleyes:

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:52

Originally posted by orangebird
What illegal claims have they made?

There are 4000000000000 movies downloaded from the internet (or whatever) - fact - what's illegal about that?

Spiderman was in the internet before it was in the cinema - fact. Anything illegal about that?

Stop making mountains out of molehills. You want to stop something terrible and illegal, give your spare time to the NSPCC, or your local animal rescue centre or something - run a marathon to raise funds for a battered wives shelter.

Or just get a grip and a sense of perspective.....

It is not the facts themselves that are illegal. NTL are advertising an internet service and are using these facts as incentives. As the things the facts are describing are illegal, then you could say that NTL are supporting illegal practices or at least using them to gain customers.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 15:52

Originally posted by orangebird
YCopying a film illegally mean the company doesn't receive the royalties. Whoop-de bloody doo.

This is true, but when Fox, Disney, universal, etc start shedding jobs because of it ...

XFS03

05-09-2003, 15:54

Originally posted by orangebird
You want to stop something terrible and illegal, give your spare time to the NSPCC, or your local animal rescue centre or something - run a marathon to raise funds for a battered wives shelter...
Talking of "grasping at straws", don't you think by introducing the above that you are more guilty than anyone?

The kind of quote above is always trotted out when someone cannot think of anything else to substantiate their arguement.

btw...how do you know what any of the members do in the rest of their spare time?

orangebird

05-09-2003, 15:56

Originally posted by Nemesis
This is true, but when Fox, Disney, universal, etc start shedding jobs because of it ...

OH, OK. And if ntl get a bloody great fine, where do you think they're going to cut costs?

It's a shame I've never seen you so supportive of ntl employees when other members here and .com quite openly say how much they would like the company to go under....

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 15:56

Originally posted by orangebird
There are 4000000000000 movies downloaded from the internet (or whatever) - fact - what's illegal about that?

Spiderman was in the internet before it was in the cinema - fact. Anything illegal about that?

Facts are facts, unchangeable reality.

Using these facts to sell a service, when the facts are an undesirable ? Right or Wrong ?

You want to stop something terrible and illegal, give your spare time to the NSPCC, or your local animal rescue centre or something [/B]

Do that already.:D

downquark1

05-09-2003, 15:58

Originally posted by orangebird
OH, OK. And if ntl get a bloody great fine, where do you think they're going to cut costs?

It's a shame I've never seen you so supportive of ntl employees when other members here and .com quite openly say how much they would like the company to go under....

I'll be the first to cry if NTL go under - but - they have done something wrong. They need to be held accountable. Personally, I'd just fire whoever made that advert.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 16:01

Originally posted by XFS03
Talking of "grasping at straws", don't you think by introducing the above that you are more guilty than anyone?The kind of quote above is always trotted out when someone cannot think of anything else to substantiate their arguement.

Well, with the hypocrisy of the entire thread in the first place, I wasn't really given much to go on... :rolleyes: It has been 15 pages now, and all the decent stuff got used ages ago - needs must etc....

[/b]btw...how do you know what any of the members do in the rest of their spare time? [/B]

Forgive my assumption, but I don't think that someone who would tend to the wounds of a pitbull terrier after a bout of illegal fighting would give a crap about the wording of an advert for an internet service. :)

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:07

Originally posted by orangebird
OH, OK. And if ntl get a bloody great fine, where do you think they're going to cut costs?

It's unlikely there would be a big fine, just a retraction.

It's a shame I've never seen you so supportive of ntl employees when other members here and .com quite openly say how much they would like the company to go under....

I will defend ANY employee of ANY company if I beleive they are doing their job to the best of their abilities. On NTHell I have defended the CS staff to the hilt, on co.uk I have asked and received assistance from NTL staff and been very grateful for that help, on .com, I can't say much as I don't go there that often.

NTL suffer sometimes unsubstantiated complaints, and I beleive that they still have work to to. I am not in the business of slgging NTL or it's employees off as they provide a good service to me. But sometimes they shoot themselves in the foot.

... and by the way, I like the way you argue, and have the utmost respect for you. You're doing a tough job and exposing yourself to these sites won't make you feel better.

Respect

orangebird

05-09-2003, 16:10

Originally posted by Nemesis
<snip>... and by the way, I like the way you argue, and have the utmost respect for you. You're doing a tough job and exposing yourself to these sites won't make you feel better.

Respect

Not sure if that was a compliment or not.. :confused:
but thanks! :D :wavey:

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:12

Originally posted by orangebird
Not sure if that was a compliment or not.. :confused:
but thanks! :D :wavey:

It was :blush: but don't let it go to your head, NTL were still wrong printing that advert

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 16:14

You two still arguing its wrong, its agreed.

Now what should we do about it:wavey:

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:18

Originally posted by th'engineer
You two still arguing its wrong agreed now what should we do about it

Now that's a question, but I'm quite sure that someone will report it to the ASA. Maybe instead of NTL bashing, we should start <wait for it> supporting <there I said it> NTL.

Why do any of us need to report it, if it DOES get reported then NTL will learn their lesson. But what good does it do us ?

Yes they were wrong, but do WE need to do anything about it ?

orangebird

05-09-2003, 16:18

Originally posted by Nemesis
It was :blush: but don't let it go to your head, NTL were still wrong printing that advert

I never said they weren't ;) But all this fuss :confused: especially when as far as BB goes, we've most of us done illegal downloads ourselves.. :rolleyes:

Do unto those (or something) etc etc - or pot and kettle....

orangebird

05-09-2003, 16:20

Originally posted by Nemesis
Now that's a question, but I'm quite sure that someone will report it to the ASA. Maybe instead of NTL bashing, we should start <wait for it> supporting <there I said it> NTL.

Why do any of us need to report it, if it DOES get reported then NTL will learn their lesson. But what good does it do us ?

Yes they were wrong, but do WE need to do anything about it ?

AT LAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D :D :D

Indeed, ask yourselves - of benefit would reporting ntl be to you?
Are you really doing it for the good of all bb mankind? Or are you just p1ssed at ntl for other reasons?

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:21

Originally posted by orangebird
I never said they weren't ;) But all this fuss :confused: especially when as far as BB goes, we've most of us done illegal downloads ourselves.. :rolleyes:

Do unto those (or something) etc etc - or pot and kettle....

See my post above, things need to calm down here. Attacking others does not sit well with me. I'm here because I'm interested and want to help as well as voice my opinion, but it is just that MY opinion.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 16:44

Originally posted by orangebird
AT LAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D :D :D

Indeed, ask yourselves - of benefit would reporting ntl be to you?
Are you really doing it for the good of all bb mankind? Or are you just p1ssed at ntl for other reasons?

It would keep the forum numbers down, customers would not moan about not being told the truth by NTL again.

So if they withdraw the advert its better for existing and new customers because the implied meaning is untrue.

orangebird

05-09-2003, 16:49

Originally posted by th'engineer
It would keep the forum numbers down, customers would not moan about not being told the truth by NTL again.

So if they withdraw the advert its better for existing and new customers because the implied meaning is untrue.

Th'eng - you quite openly admitted that you don't care about this advert - you're just gunning for ntl and jumping on the bandwagon cos of the cap... :rolleyes:

So I'm not quite sure as to why you bothered replying to my post. You position was already perfectly clear.

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:50

Originally posted by th'engineer
It would keep the forum numbers down, customers would not moan about not being told the truth by NTL again.

So if they withdraw the advert its better for existing and new customers because the implied meaning is untrue.

But is it OUR responsibility to fix NTL's errors. The flipside is that the forum members increase ans become a larger voice that the Media and NTL will listen to.

Back to my other point of using the forums to be somewhat constructive in any way that we can.

I admit that there will always be NTHell stories, as there will be with Telewest, BT and many others, but come on, be realistic.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 16:52

I am worried about the advert because it gives the impression you can download loads of movies and can not because of the cap.

Therefore the advert is incorrect the bonus part is it also suggests downloading pirated films which really takes the biscuit even for NTL

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 16:54

Originally posted by th'engineer
Therefore the advert is incorrect the bonus part is it also suggests downloading pirated films which really takes the biscuit even for NTL

This is agreed, but the cap would be explained on sign up, the advert is there to entice.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 16:57

never heard the cap explained to anyone its hidden in the AUP

Nemesis

05-09-2003, 17:00

Originally posted by th'engineer
never heard the cap explained to anyone its hidden in the AUP

Even so, it's unlikely to be in an advert for the service, just as it's not in adverts for other capped services.

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 17:15

Originally posted by Nemesis
Even so, it's unlikely to be in an advert for the service, just as it's not in adverts for other capped services.

Agree but are they not better telling customers about it,you saw an ad for downloading movies but can not download them because of our AUP.

Its all a big con to get you to subcribe

:)

kronas

05-09-2003, 17:21

damn i just read through 10 pages :spin:

Originally posted by downquark1
I'll be the first to cry if NTL go under - but - they have done something wrong. They need to be held accountable. Personally, I'd just fire whoever made that advert.

same here i cannot believe people want NTL to be accounted for this advert your affectivly killing the company if a huge fine or major action is taken against them :nono:

Originally posted by Nemesis
This is true, but when Fox, Disney, universal, etc start shedding jobs because of it ...

really well this would quash your theory then

Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl has taken more than $100m (ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£64.1m ) outside the US.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3185391.stm

Hollywood film studios are celebrating a record year at the box office.
Movie-ticket sales for 2001 totalled $8.35 billion (ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5.7 billion) by the end of New Year's Eve, up from last year's record of $7.7 billion (ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5.2 billion), according to a Los Angeles box office tracker.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/1737277.stm

they arent suffering as bad as they make out.......

i dont condone piracy but NTL are clearly stating what is possible with the broadband service they are NOT pointing out how and where to get them just providing a faster net service that is capable of downloading larger files compaired to dial up

personally i think all you guys who want NTL to suffer should leave them because they do NOT need customers like you who have vendetta's gripes with them who are affectivly trying to turn every single screw to get them fined etc

andygrif

05-09-2003, 17:35

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
NTL are NOT inflicting a loss on anyone.
What people choose to do with their conection that just happens to be provided by NTL is their business and/or the business of the people trying to get it stopped.
NTL are not to blame for what people do with their connections.

Read what I wrote again!

Every time you watch a movie that you have downloaded illegally, the Studios suffer a loss. Every time you download a music track, the composers and artists suffer a loss.

As a conduit for inflicting loss on others, ntl should prepare themselves to be sued. The entertainment business is a highly litigious industry, and immensely protective.

It is like the driver of the car in the bank robbery - he didn't do the crime of robbing the bank, but he aided and abbetted those who did, and as such is almost as culpable.

kronas

05-09-2003, 17:38

Originally posted by andygrif

It is like the driver of the car in the bank robbery - he didn't do the crime of robbing the bank, but he aided and abbetted those who did, and as such is almost as culpable.

one thing your forgetting is if a person was not going to buy something yet they found it for free and took how would a company be losing profits ?

Shaun

05-09-2003, 17:41

Originally posted by orangebird
You can't compare the two, that really is grasping at straws.

CHild porn is disgusting/**** of the earth/sick/ etc etc etc which can destroy peoples lives forever.

You don't need to tell me about it, I know all about it.

The thing is, both happen on the Internet, and both are wrong. However Ntl need to get a grip of their advertising agency, because they are going to e in real trouble if they don't. Have you looked at the ASA's website???

andygrif

05-09-2003, 17:42

Originally posted by Nemesis
You are allowed to copy it, if you own the original.

You do not own the original. You own a pressing of the master disc.

You are NOT allowed (technically) to copy the CD or any other format you might own, to any other format, unless you are in possesion of either written permission from the copyright holder or a dubbing licence from both PPL and MCPS.

Contrary to popular belief, and although it is accepted that it goes on and generally allowed - you have no rights whatsoever to copy anything, irrespective of the reason and irrespective of the ownership of the CD.

In the US it is different, that is how the law stands in the UK. As someone who's job involves regular consulation with both of the bodies, as well as advising my customers on licensing issues, you can take it from me that this is the truth.

That said, it is accepted that this practice goes on - and to be honest no body such as PPL/IFPI would go after someone for making a cassette for the car of a CD you own, and even if they did no court in the land would entertain the case.

But technically, it is ILLEGAL (and they are watching you! one day I might tell you how!!)

Shaun

05-09-2003, 17:43

Originally posted by orangebird
OH, OK. And if ntl get a bloody great fine, where do you think they're going to cut costs?

Good, lets start with the advertising agency. :dozey:

kronas

05-09-2003, 17:44

andygrif it is dodgey ground if you make a backup yes technically your not allowed to but it is accepted and i doubt anyone would care because you do own the original in the retail sense

andygrif

05-09-2003, 17:45

Originally posted by orangebird
What illegal claims have they made?

There are 4000000000000 movies downloaded from the internet (or whatever) - fact - what's illegal about that?

Spiderman was in the internet before it was in the cinema - fact. Anything illegal about that?

Stop making mountains out of molehills. You want to stop something terrible and illegal, give your spare time to the NSPCC, or your local animal rescue centre or something - run a marathon to raise funds for a battered wives shelter.

Or just get a grip and a sense of perspective.....

Can you read?

And you talk about me getting a grip!!!!

This has nothing to do with me being Deputy Hollywood - a one man mission to rid the world of you evil downloaders.

I'm just quoting facts. I couldn't care less what you download. But if I find you I might just report you...bwahahaha:devsmoke:

andygrif

05-09-2003, 17:47

Originally posted by orangebird
OH, OK. And if ntl get a bloody great fine, where do you think they're going to cut costs?

You know what they say?

You do the crime.......

th'engineer

05-09-2003, 17:51

Logistics

:rolleyes:

Shaun

05-09-2003, 17:51

Originally posted by Nemesis
Even so, it's unlikely to be in an advert for the service, just as it's not in adverts for other capped services.

I believe BT make you aware on their TV adverts that you will need to redial after 60 min to avoid charges. Companies do let people know, NTL don't.:(

Macca

05-09-2003, 17:58

I've trudged through all the posts and my opinion has still not changed since my one and only post on page 1, but I would like to know what the major issue is:

The apparent advertising of an unlimited service.

or

The apparent advertising of illegal d/loads.

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 17:58

Originally posted by andygrif
Read what I wrote again!

It is like the driver of the car in the bank robbery - he didn't do the crime of robbing the bank, but he aided and abbetted those who did, and as such is almost as culpable.

Well with that thinking lets abolish the internet because thats how a lot of paedophiles get their stuff.
Ban all ISP's destroy the whole internet and downt even allow online games.

after all the internet is aiding and abbetting the sick paedos isnt it?

Come on man, think real, thats all I ask.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 17:59

Originally posted by kronas
one thing your forgetting is if a person was not going to buy something yet they found it for free and took how would a company be losing profits ?

There is no such thing as a victimless crime.

I know someone who never rents or buys videos or DVDs, never goes to the cinema. Yet he downloads his movies from the net.

You're not seriously telling me that he wouldn't buy DVDs or go to the cinema if that option wasn't available to him are you?

Play it the other way. Imagaine everyone has fibre direct internet connections right to their house. You can download moves in 20 minutes. It's still illegal, but begause everyone has such fast connections the new breed of Kazza and Morpheus have evolved.

Now people are downloading 20/30 movies a day, all ripped from single DVDs or pre-release review copies.

There is a 70% reduction in DVD sales and a 50% reduction in cinema attendance.

Do you think there will be as many new movies coming out now, with the huge advances in CGI, immense scenery and sets, major stars?

How will they pay for that, as most of the studios will have gone bust - and that was just becuase no-one was buying classic back-catalogue movies anymore, becuase they were all on the net for free.

We're at the start of something potentially catastrophic for the movie industry as a whole. You can't see it yet, becuase all you see is something for nothin, and hey, everyone likes something for nothing (especially as they've been milking us for years right?)

Well that's great, so a bunch of overpaid yanks end up on the street. We'll be OK right?

Wrong! Cinemas will shut. CD & DVD pressing plants and distribution centres will shut. The lorry drivers will lose their jobs, haulage firms will close. HMV's profits will reduce to virtually nothing, shop assistants will lose their jobs.

Even supermarkets are basing huge contributions to their bottom line on entertainment media. Do you know someone who works in a shop?

All this becuase you don't see the bigger picture.

Originally posted by kronas
andygrif it is dodgey ground if you make a backup yes technically your not allowed to but it is accepted and i doubt anyone would care because you do own the original in the retail sense

As I said, it is accepted, but still technically you are in breach of the copyrights of the composer, publisher, artist and record label.

But I take your point.

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Well with that thinking lets abolish the internet because thats how a lot of paedophiles get their stuff.
Ban all ISP's destroy the whole internet and downt even allow online games.

after all the internet is aiding and abbetting the sick paedos isnt it?

Come on man, think real, thats all I ask.

Well lets take this argument to the next level.

Look at the bank robbery again.....

Robbers = Downloaders
Getaway Driver = NTL
Car = Internet

So do we ban all cars becuase they might be driven by getaway drivers?

Jonboy

05-09-2003, 18:03

can we not close this thread ive passed meself twice now :D

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 18:07

Originally posted by andygrif
Well lets take this argument to the next level.

Look at the bank robbery again.....

Robbers = Downloaders
Getaway Driver = NTL
Car = Internet

So do we ban all cars becuase they might be driven by getaway drivers?

Like I said, if NTL are operating in anything illegal so is every other ISP in the entire world. Lets just dissolve the whole internet, that way we can all obey the laws on whatever happens to go on online.
I guess technically because the way backbone systems are in place NTL may have even been to blame for terrorism, hell yeah lets all just wage a war on NTL HQ that'll teach them for allowing us to use the internet.:rolleyes:

Imagine if it wasnt for this internet there wouldnt be anywhere near as much crime. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Wake up, live in the real world.

andygrif

05-09-2003, 18:08

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Like I said, if NTL are operating in anything illegal so is every other ISP in the entire world. Lets just dissolve the whole internet, that way we can all obey the laws on whatever happens to go on online.
I guess technically because the way backbone systems are in place NTL may have even been to blame for terrorism, hell yeah lets all just wage a war on NTL HQ that'll teach them for allowing us to use the internet.:rolleyes:

Imagine if it wasnt for this internet there wouldnt be anywhere near as much crime. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Wake up, live in the real world.

You're hillarious!

:D

timewarrior2001

05-09-2003, 18:09

Originally posted by andygrif
You're hillarious!

:D

Ty I do try sometimes. :D

Shaun

05-09-2003, 18:10

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Well with that thinking lets abolish the internet because thats how a lot of paedophiles get their stuff.
Ban all ISP's destroy the whole internet and downt even allow online games.

after all the internet is aiding and abbetting the sick paedos isnt it?

Come on man, think real, thats all I ask.

So again I ask, should they be allowed to do it, just because you or I may be affected by the punishment that is handed out.:rolleyes:

No you come on, over dramatising the situation doesn't help anyone.:spin:

kronas

05-09-2003, 18:10

Originally posted by andygrif

You're not seriously telling me that he wouldn't buy DVDs or go to the cinema if that option wasn't available to him are you?

i dont know i doubt that he would seen as though he wasent going to the cinemas anyway.........

Originally posted by andygrif

There is a 70% reduction in DVD sales and a 50% reduction in cinema attendance.

propganda what a tool to use read my links in the previous posts they still make millions its not as bad as they make out :rolleyes:

Originally posted by andygrif

Do you think there will be as many new movies coming out now, with the huge advances in CGI, immense scenery and sets, major stars?

thats what is happening these days anyway

Originally posted by andygrif

How will they pay for that, as most of the studios will have gone bust - and that was just becuase no-one was buying classic back-catalogue movies anymore, becuase they were all on the net for free.

i think they should think of making decent storylines with decent actors its not about flashy footage onscreen for me

i have seen one or 2 movies as a rare thing and they are still crap these days compaired to 5-6 years ago T3 was the only one that got me really interested because its terminator

Lord Nikon

05-09-2003, 18:11

One last post....

Movies are downloaded via peer to peer applications.
People using p2p software download accross, not from NTL's infrastructure.
The news report mentioned how many movies had been downloaded, but did NOT say how or where from.

NTL are a bandwidth provider, the CUSTOMER decides what to do with the bandwidth.

The only way NTL would be culpable is if they hosted the movies people were downloading.

FACT and the RIAA / MPAA can go **** themselves really, as NTL are no more responsible for people downloading movies from p2p than the Royal Mail are responsible for people importing films / porn that would be illegal to sell in the UK.