NTL promoting copyright infringement - Page 11

orangebird · 05-09-2003, 13:05

Quote:

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??

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

Quote:

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.

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!!!!

05-09-2003, 13:09

Quote:

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.

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?

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, 13:09

Quote:

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, 13:12

Quote:

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

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, 13:13

Quote:

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, 13:15

Quote:

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, 13:27

Quote:

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, 13:30

Quote:

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, 13:35

Quote:

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, 13:36

Your probably right, but nice arguing with you

orangebird · 05-09-2003, 13:39

Quote:

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

You too!

05-09-2003, 13:44

Quote:

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, 13:53

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

orangebird · 05-09-2003, 13:54

Quote:

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, 13:55

Quote:

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 ...

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