NTL promoting copyright infringement - Page 13

downquark1 · 05-09-2003, 14:14

Quote:

Originally posted by orangebird
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?

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

andygrif · 05-09-2003, 14:16

Quote:

Originally posted by orangebird
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.

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!!!

orangebird · 05-09-2003, 14:16

Quote:

Originally posted by th'engineer
Come on ob read the thread its taken from return e-mail to me from ASA.

Whats all the bitterness for

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.....

05-09-2003, 14:16

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"

Shaun · 05-09-2003, 14:16

Quote:

Originally posted by orangebird
I'll take that as a 'no' then.....

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.

orangebird · 05-09-2003, 14:18

Quote:

Originally posted by andygrif
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!!!

Because we're turning into the bloody USA - compensation! writs! supenas!

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.

05-09-2003, 14:18

Quote:

Originally posted by dellwear
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.

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.

andygrif · 05-09-2003, 14:19

Quote:

Originally posted by orangebird
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.....

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.

downquark1 · 05-09-2003, 14:19

[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

andygrif · 05-09-2003, 14:20

Quote:

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
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"

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.

Ignition · 05-09-2003, 14:20

Quote:

Originally posted by th'engineer
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

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....

Ignition · 05-09-2003, 14:22

Quote:

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
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"

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.

Shaun · 05-09-2003, 14:23

Quote:

Originally posted by timewarrior2001
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.

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.

What would you rather we did about it then, just bend over and take, maybe we should ask for more when they are done.

05-09-2003, 14:24

Quote:

Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
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.

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

andygrif · 05-09-2003, 14:25

Quote:

Originally posted by orangebird
Because we're turning into the bloody USA - compensation! writs! supenas!

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.