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:

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.

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.

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!

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

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

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:

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

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

No incorrect

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

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

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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).

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

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 ) :)

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.:( :(

Wrong :rolleyes:

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

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. :)

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.

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

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

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:

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

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!

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!

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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?

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:

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 :) ;)

#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 ..!!

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 !!

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.....

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:

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:

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!!!!

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.

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.

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.

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

Yes, but so is downloading it.

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

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

You too! :wavey:

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?

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

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 ??

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

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..... ;)

What have you heard then ?

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

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.

Thats ieSpell for you. Oops:rolleyes:

Someones gonna report it sooner or later:shrug:

Serves NTL right for being so stupid.

link as requested here

Ntl ARE responsible for how the advert can be interpreted.

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.

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

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.

You make good points and make them well my friend!

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.

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

Whats all the bitterness for

:wavey:

If enough people see fault with it. And if you know the issues it's easy to see fault.

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!!!

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.....

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"

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.

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. :)

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.

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.

[quotes] 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.[/quote]

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

or

NTL support illegal downloading

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.

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....

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

But they are responsible for advertising illegal actions in order to get more business