NTL promoting copyright infringement - Page 26

Shaun · 08-09-2003, 18:19

Quote:

Originally posted by scastle
Craig's has gone back down to 1...

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

**Chris** · 08-09-2003, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Payer
Exactly!
Altough,in fairness to NTL,they are telling the truth in this advert

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!

moses · 08-09-2003, 23:54

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.

th'engineer · 09-09-2003, 07:05

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.

binary · 17-09-2003, 08:12

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.

RobStuart · 18-09-2003, 16:24

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

**Chris** · 18-09-2003, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by RobStuart
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...

Shaun · 18-09-2003, 17:40

Quote:

Originally posted by towny
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)

downquark1 · 18-09-2003, 17:44

Quote:

Originally posted by dellwear
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)

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

Shaun · 18-09-2003, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by downquark1
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.

Graham F · 18-09-2003, 17:51

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

Shaun · 18-09-2003, 18:37

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!

But they can't!

Graham F · 18-09-2003, 19:01

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

Shaun · 18-09-2003, 19:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Scooby
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

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

24-09-2003, 16:23

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?