![]() |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
The only ones who will be getting annoyed are those that don't know how to install the patch. Shame. :D . |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Only thing VM can do is change the Nagra 1 encryption used to say Nagra 3 even then it has been hacked on the continent. Mind you if updating to this encryption coupled with a firmware update would speed up my shonky Samsung 2100 then :). But a change in encryption will be costly to a company already 4.3 billion in the red as new cards would be required to be sent out at a cost and also the N3 encryption would cost them also. I would also think there would be the hassle to the normal subscriber as cards and boxes need to be paired so they could get some very angry customers if 1 their card does not turn up/is not paired correctly with their box. It also depends if they think it will actually increase revenue enough to make it worthwhile or if these people who take the signal atm and are on a basic subscription would move over to sky if they are forced to pay for TV as atm Sky has the best HD content available to watch (excluding On Demand from VM)
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
Quote:
Section 16(2)(a) of the Theft Act 1968 actually covers this but it was repealed, but the the principle of obtaining pecuniary advantages (where you should have paid for something but didn't) remains in Theft Act 1978. For the context of this thread, the relevant section would be; Section 1. Obtaining services by deception. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1978...9780031_en.pdf VM could prosecute under either act (and relevant court) above. Of course the burden of proof is far greater in a criminal court, and the accused has the option of a trial by jury and the costs involved are prohibitive (and no g'tee of a conviction) compared the 51% needed in a civil court (where you can claim for damages and is a heck of a lot cheaper) hence the reason why organisations nearly always opt for the civil route. It is indeed theft, as stated under section 1 of chapter 31 of the Theft Act 1978. And for those who wish to understand this in real English rather than the jargon that is legalese here is a nice article regarding this from auntie beeb. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A580312 INAL ( ;) ) PS, did anyone read the news today where a russian businessman trade marked the ; - ) and states that as : - ) and other deratives are similar they too fall under his licensing terms. Ho ho ho. Merry christmas :) (TM) |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
Quote:
This is the very reason why it's a specific crime in its own right, if it was covered in the theft act there wouldn't have been a need to create a seperate crime for it. Even if it was covered by it it still wouldn't make it theft. The theft act covers far more crimes than just acts of theft, and very clearly defines theft, and thief in it's very first paragraph: "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and 'thief' and 'steal' shall be construed accordingly." |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
Quote:
my Bold :) |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
To quote a former CF colleague .
Quote:
In other words this thread is not about whether it's theft or not..it's about Virgin Media's attempts to deal with illegal chipped boxes being used on their system. |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Is it still financially viable for Virgin to catch people with chipped boxes?
I ask that question because ntl used to make a token effort to catch these people, just enough to keep the program providers off their back. It was due to the fact that the program provider pricing to ntl meant more £ from a basic subscriber than they made from a customer taking a premium package. In the older days customers who subscribed to the basic package but had a chipped box to receive premium services were a good money spinner for ntl, and the effort to catch them was mainly hot air. Those legally paying for the full service earned the company less money than those stealing. |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
Just because they don't tell everyone what they are doing, doesn't mean they are ignoring the issue ;) |
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
oh boy, that tickles!
|
Re: Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:43. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum