Come on guys, you don't want the ASA involved, what else could be done (and give a result)?:confused:

Well, if people draw attention to what was posted in a local paper then it becomes international news... leaving the ad alone would have kept it isolated to leeds......

And thats good, how, would Ntl learn anything from that, no:rolleyes:

And the extra people signing onto a congested network in order to download movies nationwide as a result of increasing the publicity, also paying NTL and covering the cost of any fine helps us NTL users how?

It's unlikely to get a fine - just a retraction.

my post on the .com got deleted because i showed the fecking picture!!!

was it because it was hosted here? they are paranoid about people seeing links to this site:rolleyes:

Can someone host the picture on their own space and link to it?? Iwould but dont know how to! :(

Done!

http://homepage.mac.com/towny/ntl-movies2.jpg

NTL should have put a disclaimer, saying that downloading copyright material is infringement thats all, had they done that then there would have been no problem with this ad, thats what they'll get fined for not the ad itself.

its just the same with video recorders, most of the ads for VCR's have a tag line somewhere at the bottom saying reproducing copyright material is illlegal.

In advertising terms this ad is good, it just didnt get checked by legal, had it done so this post wouldnt have got to 21 pgs

NTL will get rapped for leavig out a disclaimer, but it wont kill them and is a completely seperate issue from the cap , like it or not!

No it isnt you do not have the service to download the implied amount

This is nothing to do with the cap and trying to make it so will not advance that issue at all. No impartial reading of the advert could conclude that ntl is promising you the ability to d/l more than the 1gb limit. The advert doesn't use the word 'unlimited' (none of them do any more) and when it talks about 400,000 - 600,000 movies being downloaded a day ... well, there's absolutely no way any reasonable person could infer from that that they are saying one user could d/l that much.

Like it or not, this advert is controversial for one reason, and one reason only: ntl is advertising a service with the implication that downloading illegal material from the internet is a good thing.

I disagree with the cap; I think that on principle the internet is not a commodity and should not be sold as such. However trying to see the cap behind everything ntl says and does is not constructive.

I can see your point

Putting a disclaimer on an advert for this is problematic from my point of view.

Imagine, if they disclaim this then they have to also disclaim:-

Child porn
Music files
Software files
Hardcore porn
Offensive language
Offensive images
Racial prejudices
Terrorist bomb making info (jolly rogers cookbook et al)

By tthe time they had finnished there would be little space left for the advert anyway.

You cant disclaim against peoples stupidity.

But however you look at it, Reporting NTL to FACT and the ASA was pointless, it was detrimental to NTL and I am not happy having to pay ntl and have them pay fines, because of the actions of users here, instead of using the money to upgrade their services.
We may only be talking of a few thousand pounds but hell thats not really the point is it? I do not back ANY of the people that have reported NTL to relevant organisations I oppose you for this and will carry on doing so.

But yes I think the advert is stupid and badly written but as I said before, Its impossible to know how people will look at a wriiten passage and interpret it. You cannot account for peoples stupiddity and the fact that some people INSIST on reading in between the lines.

If the users had not reported it you can bet the competitors would have BT etc

Yeah but that isnt grassing on your own ISP is it?

And it STILL doesnt make it right.

Can I be a bit dramitic for a moment (why am I asking? I don't normally... :spin: )

There a Gunsmith in a village near me. How about if they placed an advert in the local paper saying "Remember Hungerford in 1987!" and "X number of people get senslessly blasted away in London every day!"

Distastefull, but surely not illegal to state as a fact?

And it certainly isnt saying its OK to go out and mindlessly kill people with a gun is it?

Oh and before anyone starts to comment on my morals, members of my family were involved in counsilling in the aftermath of Dunblaine, I do understand the grief and the emotions of situations like these.

I apologise if it brought the memories back. I specifially mentioned it was me being a bit dramatic as there's no way anyone can compare the two situations but I just wanted to use an extreme example.

No of course it's not illegal but certainly a questionable way of promoting a product/service.

again, it would not be unlikely to cause a fine.

No no Russ, for me that was a personal day in another way.
I had a friend die in a climbing accident on that very same day.
But I have relatives that worked for social services around the Sterlingshire area, and they dealt with the counsilling of children and parents and other people that were simply just shocked.

I think I am very broadminded. I'm not easily shocked or offended.

I understand why you posted what you did, and I think I got the point.
However as I replied it doesnt say its ok to go killing people, same as the NTL advert doesnt say its ok to download movies illegally.

:)

I see your point, but unfortunally the law is not as broadminded as that. Companys have lost millions for less than this. E.g. Napster/p2p, they didn't promote illegal activity just provided the means

And that takes me full circle, that is the reason I do not condone NTL customers reporting NTL to authorities such as FACT and the ASA.
What made things worse was the insistance that they were morally right and took the hypocritical approach i.e saying NTL are crap because of its service they need to spend money on it, then stating they hope NTL burn because of this and that they deserved a massive fine.

tut tut tut....

when the other AntiCap lads pointed this out to me well...

I knew ntl were stupid, but not THAT stupid. For that they must be punished ;)

Watch this space ...

You don't get it do you, its NTL'S actions that have put them in this situation not us, we didn't take out a 4PAGE spread did we.

Come on, you cant honestly think they should be allowed Cart Blanche to do exactly what they like just because you pay them a little money each month.

In regards to your comments about disclaiming everything illegal, thats just stupid, they have ACTIVELY promoted an illegal act. Thats the problem. They have made it. They need to learn, you still haven't come up with an alternative to the ASA or FACT.:rolleyes:

This isn't the play ground. Were not 'Grassing' up a mate to the police:rolleyes:

And yes your totally right, it is not right, Ntl should stop their illegal advertising, look here:

ntl Group Ltd 21/05/2003

ntl Group Ltd 21/05/2003

ntl Group Ltd 09/04/2003

ntl Group Ltd 02/04/2003

ntl Group Ltd 18/12/2002

ntl Group Ltd 18/12/2002

ntl Group Ltd 11/12/2002

ntl Group Ltd 09/10/2002

ntl Group Ltd t/a ntl:home 26/06/2002

ntl Group Ltd 19/12/2001

ntl Group Ltd 12/12/2001


ntl Group Ltd 12/12/2001

ntl Group Ltd 13/10/1999

ntl Group Ltd 11/08/1999

ntl Group Ltd 13/09/2000

ntl Group Ltd 21/03/2001

ntl Group Ltd 18/04/2001

ntl Group Ltd 12/09/2001

ntl Group Ltd 22/08/2001

ntl Group Ltd 22/08/2001

ntl Group Ltd 25/07/2001

ntl Group Ltd 29/08/2001

ntl Group Ltd 24/10/2001

ntl Group Ltd 07/11/2001

ntl Group Ltd 07/11/2001

All dates of ASA adjudications about NTL.:rolleyes:

http://www.asa.org.uk/Adjudications/...&show_letter=N

Have a look for your self. They need to learn, and reporting them is the RIGHT AND PROPER way of dealing with the situation. We owe Ntl NOTHING

listen to what I said, The people that I am opposed to on here are the ones saying yeah NTL need to spend money on upgrading the infrastructure so we can all have 2Mb services and a service thats reliable.
They then go and do what they can to land NTL with as big a fine as they can.

That to me is hipocrasy.
Its sheer minded bloody pettiness and the engineer has admitted to part of it in a response to orangebird.

NTL do not PROMOTE downloading of illegal movies from filesharing, it does not state where to get them from, or how to get them. It merely states that "movies" are available on the internet.
The fcat that Spiderman was such a success in the piracy stakes is FACT not a promotion by NTL.
you simply cannot say NTL must put a disclaimer on there against this illegal activity but dismiss all th eother illegal activites that are available on th enet purely because it doesnt fit in with you argument.

YES the advert is bloody stupid, but it doesnt say "with an NTL connection you must download illegal movies"
Neither does it say "NTL will do nothing if you choose to use yoiur connection for illegal purposes"

So what is the point of your arguments? yes badly written advert there is no contest there. The contest is purely that Myself and a few other think it is not just immature but Idiotic to report NTL to the likes of FACT, especially when one of those people was caught uncapping his modem therefor committing fraud (oh and the fact he offered NTL advise on how he did it, and didnt use the bandwidth still does not make it acceptable). Double standards is what I call it.

My alternative is do not go running to teacher telling little tales on th eother kids i.e the ASA and your own ISP.

I guess NTL have reported themselves to the ASA then, because putting the advertisement in th epaper in the first MAY have gotten NTL into trouble, there again now because of the likes of yourself, they WILL get into trouble.
Spending money that would have been better used providing a better service to the customers like yourself and myself.

Again I ask, what do you think should have been done then, should we let them do just what they like then?:rolleyes:

Let me see...

1) People complain NTL should reinvest some capital into service improvements. These people complain about service levels online, outdated equipt, why don't they offer 2mbit etc the explanation for this is lack of capital as they are emerging from chapt 11.

2) same people complain about prices

3) NTL run an article in the press about what people have done on the net. This article includes mention of activities people have used which have been illegal.

4) the same users complain about the ad, and report NTL to the ASA and FACT

lets continue with some speculation now.

5) ASA and FACT prosecute NTL and levy a large fine

6) NTL can no longer afford to upgrade

7) NTL have to put prices up to cover the costs of the fines.

8) NTL's services deteriorate further

9) the people from 1,2 and 3 have more reason to complain.




Alternative assuming no-one had reported them


4) possibly the ASA spot the ad. warn NTL and NTL no longer run it.

5) NTL get more subscribers from the ad anyway
6) increased revenue means upgrades take place
7) the people in 1,2,3 get what they asked for and everyone is happy.

Before anyone 'complains' to the ASA, it would be nice if we could get a statement from NTL about this....

You still haven't come up with a credible argument, Ntl HAVE done wrong, they need to learn that this sort of advertisement is not acceptable.

Just because we want things to get better with Ntl doesn't mean we should just look the other way when they do wrong.

STILL you haven't come up with an alternative solution to the problem.

Reporting Ntl to the ASA is the right thing to do, and is our right as a customer. This sort of advert is NOT acceptable and Ntl MUST learn this.:mad:

c'mon dellwear get of the bloody bandwagon.

Highlight on the actuall article where it say NTL insist you use your connection illegaly.

Just because we hate NTL doesnt mean we have to stir up trouble for them either.

Lord Nikon has posted very simply what I have stated form my first post.
That is simple, it is easy to understand and it requires no reading between lines to come out with a verdict at the end of it.


We all know somewhere theres a crime happening, why dont we all phone the police and report that theres a crime happening "somewhere". Morally yes you do have a point, you think its worng you did something about it. Would I be morally right to bring about a prosecution against S.W because he broke the law in uncapping his modem, it was illegal after all. No I have used my better judgement in the matter (as I need say, did NTL) and quite frankly I couldnt give a toss if he achieved 33Mbit on his connection......good luck to him.

Hang on, I have no where said that I have reported Ntl to the ASA (because I haven't) But what I have said is that I believe that reporting them is the right thing to do because they have done wrong.

You even admit that so why shouldn't they be reported, they aren't gong to listen to a few customers "moaning" on about it, they will listen to the ASA. Ntl do have to learn that this sort of advertising is wrong, morally and ethically, yes it happens but they shouldn't be trying to make money out of it.

Before you post you need to make sure you are aware of all the facts, because thats how wars start.:Peace:

Accepted I used 'You' instead of 'they'. apologies.


P.S I still dont condone you or think you are right ;)

So why do you think the bit about Spiderman being available on the internet was put in the ad? Surely it is only there to let people know that downloading of current cinema releases are available somewhere on the internet.
O.K. it doesn't actually tell you how or where to get them specifically, but some naive readers of that ad might not even have realised that downloading current movies was possible.
Thanks to ntl, they do now.

I can't see any reason at all why ntl included the piece about Spiderman (complete with picture), other than to promote piracy.

Thank you for that, respect, is not somthing you see much on some of these forums!:) ;)

Possibly the same reason a news item appeared a while back naming kazaa / morpheus / grokster / xolox / bittorrent / irc as places people traded MP3s / movies / software...


Because it is NEWS

A little courtesy never hurt anyone........now lets fight lol:)

But this is an advert, to get people to buy their product on the merrit of whats in said advert

Lets look at this from a logical, and geographic point of view.


Spiderman we shall use as a specific example.

The movie was released and ripped in the US.
The movie was placed on p2p after it had been shared on IRC

NTL is a UK based ISP, therefore it wasn't NTL that ripped, shared or hosted the film. (from the perspective we are talking about NTL UK operations)

The ad was run in the UK

NTL didn't state how or where it was possible to download films

They didn't report ANYTHING that wasn't already public knowlege from countless other news articles.

The only thing I can see that they did wrong was fail to provide a disclaimer along the lines of "While this is what some people use the net for, we cannot condone or support the usage of Broadband services for any form of copyright theft or illegal activities."

So why didn't they?

Hindsight is 100% more accurate than foresight.

What looks like an effective slogan to some, is tantamount to an incitement to slander to others.

Coca Cola had a problem with an advertising point

"Coke Gives you life" was translated into chinese as "coke brings your ancestors back from the grave"

Vauxhall Novas had to be renamed as "No Va" in spanish means "Won't Go"

It can be hard to see the impact of an advertisement you have worked on, as you can be too close to the subject material to spot the obvious.


Since it is a weekly news paper, we have yet to see if NTL place comments in the next edition apologising for the ad and explaining the context of the quote.

This has been round in so many circles I'm getting dizzy. :spin:

http://homepage.mac.com/towny/ad-highlight.jpg

The CONTEXT of this item is what makes it damaging. It is an advertisement for ntl's services, and therefore everything contained in it can reasonably be understood to be supporting the general proposition that Ntl's broadband service is excellent and worth subscribing to. That is what an advertisement is.

In the main subheading they say, as I have highlighted, 'have we got an internet service for you!' Then they tell you how great it is. In the sidebar they say, 'Don't just take our word for it'. Take our word for what? That you can do illegal stuff with the internet? Clearly not. They are saying, 'We're brilliant - but in case you don't believe us, here's some third-party endorsement. Spiderman was out on the net before it was in your local Odeon!

It is absolutely crystal clear from the context of this statement that they intend the availability of Spiderman to be a understood as a good thing. They don't have to insist you break the law; to break the ASA code they merely have to 'incite' you.

Timewarrior, you need to look further than the end of your nose to understand this. Just because someone doesn't use the precise words, 'illegal downloads are great' doesn't mean that they are not suggesting that might be the case. And it is not a matter of chasing shadows or reading between the lines; it is a deliberately planned inference taargeted at gullible customers by a professional advertiser who should have known better.

It is not 'grassing' to report NTL for this. 'grassing' is a word used by criminals and schoolboys to try to intimidate others into not doing the right thing. Like it or not, there is a rule of Law in this country and there are people and organisations charged with upholding it. With the greatest of respect to all of you who oppose what I have done by reporting this to the ASA, but you do not have the right to decide whether NTL should get away with this. All I have done is report them to those who do have that right, and from now on the properly appointed people will make the decisions.

It is not shooting myself in the foot because I believe that in the long run if NTL are forced to confront their shoddy practices they will change, and this will be for the better.

Lord Nikon, in your two suggested scenarios, what is the logic behind your suggestion that if ntl are reported for this, they get a big fine, but if the ASA spot it themselves, they get off with a warning? I don't see any difference in the severity of the breach of the Advertising Standards code just because they are caught by the 'police' instead of a member of the public.

As a footnote, I did not join this forum to snipe at ntl at all possible opportunities and I am not on an anti-cap crusade (although I disagree with the cap). I have no agenda to 'get' ntl. However I think they have made a huge cock-up on this occasion and I have taken the appropriate, correct, legally allowed for action as a result.

Towny once again you are the you are the light of reason in the fog of confusion.

When was this Andre?

I know they are paranoid about this site, but this is going too far. :grind:

Good job you have a good password!

Can this go in another thread? I think it would be a good idea to keep this subject clean and unbiased.

And you need to stop reading between the freakin lines at words thast simply just are not there. I also doubt highly that you are more professional than the people designing this advertisement. therefor you are condemning NTL before ALL facts are made clear.

As for the text I have made bold.
what gives you the right to decide this warranted reporting?
Why did you need to interfere and not simply let the relevant people investigate it anyway?
Had BT made the same advertisement would you have done the same?
Are you going to stop here, or are you going to get a lynch mob arranged for every slight mistake made by EVERY company?

Then why are you victimising NTL, that sadly is what this whole episode does amount to.
I have a passionate dislike for people that insist on "interfereing" yes my choice of word, but it seems to me they just coudnt wait to get one over on NTL.

Let it be noted, None of the people reporting incidents to the ASA in relation to this advertisement speak for neither myself nor my family I/we can not and will not condone such actions.

The difference lies not in the severity based on who reported it, but in whether or not the matter has been given significance in the public eye.

The legal system in the UK is such that matters in the public eye are dealt with much more severely than one which has an element of discretion.

Had the matter gone no further than the leeds weekly news, and the ASA had dealt with it then the chances are a warning would have been deemed acceptable.

Should it become mainstream UK news then the ASA will feel more obliged to make an example.

I shall quote the persecution of Gary Glitter as an example of this. (but I am in NO WAY comparing the 2, merely the treatment based on public knowlege)


Gary glitter took his PC in for repair, as do thousands of people daily. Child porn was found on his computer and the matter was reported to the police, he was prosecuted.

This has happened since with people who were not formerly media icons. Their names haven't been placed in the paper and they haven't been pursued ever since.

There was no evidence that he had been involved in the taking of the photos, yet he has been pursued ever since by the media around the world because of it.

Had he not been a media icon before this then the matter would probably not have been pursued as it was.

I am not saying NTL fall into the category of "media icon" but I AM saying that the more publicity a matter gets, then the more severe the penalties tend to be to make an example of them

Any member of the public may report something that they consider illegal.
Revelant people only investigate after a report is made
If it had come to my attention - yes
As a community dedicated to NTL who else should we be watching???

sorry guys, some horrible family news, my cousin died at 5:15pm.

Please excuse me whilst I leave to be with my family at this time.

In that case you prolly won't be here to read this but my thoughts are with you.

Take care mate, we're thinking of you.

Where in the Advertisement,for that is what it is-Not an article,does it say that downloading movies like Spiderman is illegal?
I showed that advert to a friend who is,shall we say,"not too bright when it comes to computers & the internet".She was impressed that films like Spiderman were freely available.
Had NTL left it at the bit that would have been OK,but by mentioning Spiderman they give the impression that it is legally available to download.
Some of us know what is & what is not legally available.It is our choice if we wish to download those movies that we shouldn't.
Some people don't know.Some believe that because they own an album on CD they are entitled to store a copy,in mp3 format,on their PC or mp3 player.Why not,we did the same with LPs & cassettes.But,you only own a copy of the music.You are not legally entitled to make copies.
But,I digress.
NTL left themselves open to criticism by mentioning Spiderman.Someone within NTL is going to get his/her ar$e kicked over this.

The meaning of the advert is the whole point of contention and the proper, legally appointed body is now looking in to it. I will be happy to be proven wrong in my interpretation, and I hope you will be happy if you are proven wrong.

I am a fully qualified journalist with three years experience at a regional newspaper and a further 4-and-a-half years experience of Corporate Communications at an international hotel company. I am perfectly professional and experienced enough to come to my own conclusions, thank you. I am not, however, qualified to condemn, and you are not qualified to exonerate. Those with the jobs at the ASA are, and they will decide.

I don't have that right, and neither do you. The ASA has that right. I have the right, granted me by UK law, to ask the ASA to decide. That is what I have done. If ntl get a fine, it will be because the ASA decide they have committed an offence, not because I have judged and condemned ntl.

The relevant people areinvestigating it. I don't understand your point here. In what way am I 'interfering'?

Had BT made the same advertisement would you have done the same? as an ntl customer I feel a sense of affinity with the company and its practices that is stronger than that which I have for those with whom I have no such relationship. Every brand desires a relationship with its customers ... that's what builds brand loyalty. I would imagine that BT, about which I care far less, would have had to do something far more heinous before I would complain about them.

Your attempt to make this issue seem trivial by drawing ridiculously extreme conclusions is transparent and quite silly. I have tried to keep my comments on this subject confined to the narrow legal issue of whether ntl have committed an offence or not. I hope you can try to do the same.

That is so plainly not my intent to anyone who has actually read my posts, that I see no point responding to you on this.

Great, someone who would rather walk on by than actually be bothered whether what they're seeing is acceptable or not. How community spirited of you.

Again, I am not going to wear out my keyboard any further re-stating my position on this.

Firstly, ntl's action is offensive to me. With the greatest respect to your family, this is nothing to do with them.
Secondly, who do you think you are that you need to 'condone' my action in using a legitimate, legal process for its correctly intended use?

I can tell, I've said what you said in just 4 lines:D

(just kidding);)

edit withdrawn comment, I misread what towny said.

russ thanks for your kind words at this time.


But in reply to some of the comments made:-

:upyours: I am not going to explain my thoughts and my actions at this time I quite frankly have more things to think about right now.

With all due respect, why are you still here then?

This has been a very interesting thread with good arguments from both sides but theres no need to get personal. Have a rest guys. :)

I'm glad you think so, we all try our best to entertain:p

shall we all go and get lives now?

some do need to indeed !!!!! :rolleyes:

I thought we were doing well. A debate on interpretation of text and advertising law. At least it hasn't degraded into a conversation about sexuallity or Avil Lavenge.... whatever.

Indeed ... and from my point of view that's exactly what this is. An interesting (and very lively) discussion about a real live legal issue. No handbags, not a personal slanging match, and no Bovril Latrine.

I trust those I've been engaged with in this thread have taken my comments in that way - I certainly haven't been taking anything anyone has said to me personally.

PS

Timewarrior - this is my first time on the forum since you posted your sad news. I think you gathered my last post on topic was penned having not read what you had put. I'd have backed off and left our discussion for a more appropriate time otherwise. :( Sorry things have turned bad for you all.

Sorry to hear that. I will be thinking of you..

i expected better from you :nono: :nono: :nono:

and there we go turns in to a jibe match now


it just seems some people are consumed in there time on this particular topic or should i say NTL ?

its no big deal really i cant understand why people want to screw NTL i mean its a bit sad really IMO

they have not made a mistake in my opinion they stated what they think is a fact about the amount of movies downloaded per day also mentioned in the article that they are available not commenting on how to get them they are not inciting to cause copyright infringment

the only reason they should have action taken against them is the reference to being able to download movies which im sure the movie studios would be less then impressed with

You started it :D

For those who don't know the argument is being continued on the site that must not be named
http://www.nthellworld.com/forum/sho...ewpost&t=46252

How/Why did it switch ?

I imagine the death of Timewarriors cousin affected the debators emotionally.

That and a thread was started on .com and hasn't stopped.

To please the "pro Ntl" lot

*did I say that? Oops

Just looked at .com for the first time in weeks. I hate the new colour scheme!

I don't think I'll be moving over there to continue this, as much of the discussion is along the same lines. It was interesting to sample some of the bizarre views not expressed in this forum though, usually from the usual suspects of the 'defend the indefensible' brigade.

After close to 400 posts in this thread I'm not certain there's much new ground to cover here, although as usual I'm happy to be proved wrong. I'm planning to post anything I hear from the ASA here.

KRONAS - Just a wee joke, I actually think B...eerrr...Avril's quite a good singer ... ;) :D

I know its :notopic: but have you noticed their new "reputation" system? Very strange!! Shame Craig's already hacked his so its perfect.:rolleyes:

I see that,on .com,everyone is repeating what they said in this thread. :zzz: I won't post on there as a matter of principle.

As customers of NTL,any fine that they receive as a result of this advertising error will be paid for by Us.So,maybe we have shot ourselves in the foot.

Perhaps,we should have contacted NTL & pointed out the implication of their advertisement.:) NTL & customers working together. :)
Dream on!
Since when have NTL listened to it's customers?

Craig's has gone back down to 1...

I think this latest violation - if that's what the ASA decides it is, and personally I think they will - is only the latest in a long line of wrist-slapping. Ntl gets fined so regularly I expect they budget for it, so the effect on our subscriptions should be negligible. I tend to think that in the long run, the effect of them getting a fine will be a positive one. Eventually some bright spark is going to say, "d'uuuhhh ... if we stop publishing screwey adverts, we won't get into trouble...".

Well, I can be optimistic, can't I? :spin:

Exactly!
Altough,in fairness to NTL,they are telling the truth in this advert;)

Just shows ho easy it is for them to alter the reps though. :erm:

Yes, there's no doubt the statistics are true ... it's the way they're using them to suggest that d/l-ing ripped movies is acceptable behaviour that's a bit surprising!

so much for staying on topic

whilst banter is good its crap on actual interesting content, at least strive to make at least one relevent point per post.

I guess some people have way too much time to spend on a board...time better spent doing something constructive, like going to the pub.

Anyway now the relevent point i was talking of.

Whilst i would like ntl to suffer for that blatant blunder I would hope that that does not involve a big fine. As we all know ntl are in financial turmoil and whilst a financial penalty would be a perfect way to punish them ultimately it would push them ever closer to the edge.

Whilst ntl are the isp you love to hate, i wouldnt like to see them go under, it would be bad for the consumer, competition is good. If ntl were to go under then BT would have the monopoly, they would dictate the price which would result in a worse deal for us all.

I would like them to make a massive apology for the advert, if needs be readvertise in the paper in question to say how wrong they were to be promoting copyrighted material in such ways.

Possibly a few apologies from higher up the food chain find a scape goat (possibly from the guy that actually OKed the ad) , fire his ass and move on.

The last thing that ntl's BB customers need is a big who ah about it...it will only prolong things like the arrival of the 2mbs service.

So I say No fines, but made to make a big public apology.

PLUS

DIVX is to video what mp3 is to music, long gone are the days of 40mb wav files and so too are low quality, 2 disc mpgs... we are now used to seeing mp3s as selling points for broadband in the media... how long did you think it would take b4 DIVX (and lets not beat around the bush, DIVX is responsible for the boom) was also used as a selling point?

DIVX films are no more illegal than mp3s

Why look so surprised...you all do it!

Also like mp3s it is something the industry is going to have to deal with because they certainly cant stamp it out. The internet was designed to withstand nuclear war, let alone a few people trying to stamp out the distribution of naughty material. All they can do is prosecute the indivdual.

I would agree with some of moses observations think that who ever approved the advertising should not be got rid of but retrained and counselled.

In fact here is an idea put them in charge of the new community site they must have some form of flair for communication.

Which would be ideal for the community site.

Ho ho ho!

Have just seen the article about this advert on the nthellworld.co.uk front page, and am most amused!

It suggests behaving in a manner at odd's with NTL's own AUP, & leaves NTL liable for encouraging unawful activities.

The sales people who wrote and approved this will be getting a wrap on their knuckles at the least.

It goes to prove that NTL, 'the complete communications company', are pretty incapable of communicating amongst themselves, something that many of us have known for a long time.

The advert also appears in/with this week's (dated today) issue of Leeds Weekly News...

Presumably the ASA either haven't contacted ntl yet, or ntl aren't bothered...

At a guess I'd think its the latter. When they were rapped for calling 150k high speed I still received bills advertising "High Speed Internet 150K) :rolleyes:

I think it was that they couldn't call it broadband.

Ah, you see I thought that but it was high speed! Either way, it said high speed broadband on my bill, I'll post a copy if I have time.:)

I am led to believe they can call it both broadband and high speed as long as they make reference to the lower 150k speed which they have in this case

see here:

http://www.asa.org.uk/adjudications/...cations_id=all

And more importantly here:

http://www.asa.org.uk/adjudications/...cations_id=all

They seem to think they can call it what they like! :rolleyes: But they can't!

all they both said was to call the 150k service Broadband without qualifation is wrong. The 'high speed' bit is something that ntl said they would stop doing not something they were asked to do, so they have obviously changed there mind :shrug:

The ASA didn't take it further because they said they wouldn't. Just shows what they are like at keeping their word!

Well its now the 24th September and Lo and behold, todays edition of my local free rag carries the very same advert that set this thread off.

Now call me cynical but if the ASA were going to act surely they would have prevented this advert being used again?

http://www.nthellworld.com/forum/sho...&postcount=266

Apparently the ASA are investigating now

I have also had one of these letters from the ASA, confirming that they are investigating. I will post the outcome in this thread.

Did anyone report this to the RIAA or MPAA as well? Just curious!!

Not that I'm aware of from reading the thread, although there were threats.

There would be little point however, as the RIAA and MPAA have no jurisdiction here, whatever they might like to think.

wonder if someone might have done it because they are a US company;) then the RIAA or MPAA can talk to the NTL bondholders.

please scan it in - what paper is it in?

Re: NTL promoting copyright infringement
 

OK, an update for you all. I have received the following letter from the ASA today.

According to the attached leaflet, we are now at a stage where the the investigating executive has already decided that there is a case to answer. We are now at the Investigation stage, during which NTL has the opportunity to accept a breach of the code, or deny it and produce evidence in its support.

More details when I hear from them again.

Re: NTL promoting copyright infringement
 

Cheers Towny, nice to know that we were right. I wonder what will happen?

Re: NTL promoting copyright infringement
 

The leaflet is vague on that point. Once all the evidence is in, there is a draft adjudication which both NTL and I get to comment on. After that the ASA Council decides. If they find against NTL, the advert 'must be withdrawn or amended'. There is no mention of fines, or any other penalty, but I thought the ASA had fined them in the past over other ads so I'm a little confused on this point.

Re: NTL promoting copyright infringement
 

I think that pretty much sums up the ASA - sometimes there's not much rhyme or reason as to the judgements they reach, but of all of the regulators out there they are one of the better ones.