[duncant403]

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