Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes? - Page 60

Juo · 26-09-2010, 11:00

I've just read through this thread, well about 20 pages of it, this might be a stupid question but why are you all (the vast majority of you, sorry to generalise this thread is a bit to long to read in its entirety) so against people having hacked boxes?

I pay full price for my 50MBps (well halfsies with my girlfriend) package but if someone can get it for free and can get away with it I dont really care, id never call Virgin to report them, no one likes a snitch

RobboEdin · 26-09-2010, 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juo

I've just read through this thread, well about 20 pages of it, this might be a stupid question but why are you all (the vast majority of you, sorry to generalise this thread is a bit to long to read in its entirety) so against people having hacked boxes?

I pay full price for my 50MBps (well halfsies with my girlfriend) package but if someone can get it for free and can get away with it I dont really care, id never call Virgin to report them, no one likes a snitch

Then your attitude says it all. You are condoning illegal activity. Stealing is stealing.

Those that have a conscience don't steal or break the law and hence are unhappy at those that do so without any remorse.

Juo · 26-09-2010, 11:31

Im not condoning anything im just playing devils advocate to see whats got you guys all riled up. It seems to me its more a question of, "If I have to pay for it why shouldn't then" rather than some moral high ground.

This is a company with a revenue of $16.5 billion in (2008) im sure they can handle a little loss.

Sirius · 26-09-2010, 11:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juo

Im not condoning anything im just playing devils advocate to see whats got you guys all riled up. It seems to me its more a question of, "If I have to pay for it why shouldn't then" rather than some moral high ground.

This is a company with a revenue of $16.5 billion in (2008) im sure they can handle a little loss.

But why should they handle a little loss because some thieving git decided he is not willing to pay for something he should pay for. ????

Peter_ · 26-09-2010, 11:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juo

Im not condoning anything im just playing devils advocate to see whats got you guys all riled up. It seems to me its more a question of, "If I have to pay for it why shouldn't then" rather than some moral high ground.

This is a company with a revenue of $16.5 billion in (2008) im sure they can handle a little loss.

If you have read this thread then surely you will have seen numerous mentions of the illegal boxes causing noise and interference on the network plus they are obtaining their services illegally and that is reason enough for anyone to be happy that these *******s are now losing their freebies.

Also why shouldan y company have to suffer a loss to enable *******s a free ride.

RyanB · 26-09-2010, 11:38

Hasn't it been said before that if one steals then they make a loss of say Â£30... if 10,000 steals then its Â£300,000.... etc etc... i hate thieves. if it gives me a better service then i like it... get rid of the thieves.

from a loyal XL customer since 1998... (yes i had analogue back then!)

Kymmy · 26-09-2010, 11:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

But why should they handle a little loss because some thieving git decided he is not willing to pay for something he should pay for. ????

totally agree there, it though is normal for those with an inclination to steal to have the "Why should I pay for it when I can get it for nothing" attitude..

The bottom line is that it is illegal and is counted as theft to bypass subscription protection without payment

colin25 · 26-09-2010, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanB

Hasn't it been said before that if one steals then they make a loss of say Â£30... if 10,000 steals then its Â£300,000.... etc etc... i hate thieves. if it gives me a better service then i like it... get rid of the thieves.

from a loyal XL customer since 1998... (yes i had analogue back then!)

agree...too many think it is victimless crime..no such thing..someone always pays

LondonRoad · 26-09-2010, 12:16

I know I'm stating the obvious here but some people seem to overlook it.

The cost for VM to have to secure against the thieving **** is paid for by you and I through our subscriptions. Nagra 3 doesn't come free or even cheap.

colin25 · 26-09-2010, 12:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juo

Im not condoning anything im just playing devils advocate to see whats got you guys all riled up. It seems to me its more a question of, "If I have to pay for it why shouldn't then" rather than some moral high ground.

This is a company with a revenue of $16.5 billion in (2008) im sure they can handle a little loss.

Personally, I'm sick of the "The world owes me" attitude. And stealing is stealing, you aren't honourable just because you don't get caught

Those who are happy to steal cable, probably also think that lifting something out of my wallet is ok..as long as they are not caught

If a company used questionable tactics doing business, I wouldn't like that either..it is the attitude of some who I dislike

Lew · 26-09-2010, 12:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

But why should they handle a little loss because some thieving git decided he is not willing to pay for something he should pay for. ????

Plus the fact that the smug gits often like to rub our noses in it because we're "fools who pay for services that they're getting for free". It's always nice to see them taken down a peg or two.

Sirius · 26-09-2010, 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew

Plus the fact that the smug gits often like to rub our noses in it because we're "fools who pay for services that they're getting for free". It's always nice to see them taken down a peg or two.

Agreed

pabloo · 26-09-2010, 13:29

It is quite funny tho that Virgin is now more secure than Sky.Its all about cs Sky now,now that this cat is out of the bag people who were into cable boxes are getting into cs sky.loads of bars in the uk are now showing sat 3pm through buying (grey/legit) yearly itilian/german subscriptions and others are obviously cs those.

How do members on here who are 100% bonafida legit feel about not being able to watch sat footy at 3pm?
would you think about going semi legit by purchasing a sky itilia card and box?

colin25 · 26-09-2010, 13:33

nope..never considered it

My 3pm..is watching sky sports panel

Felim_Doyle · 26-09-2010, 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanB

Hasn't it been said before that if one steals then they make a loss of say Â£30... if 10,000 steals then its Â£300,000.... etc etc... i hate thieves. if it gives me a better service then i like it... get rid of the thieves.

from a loyal XL customer since 1998... (yes i had analogue back then!)

I too have been a customer since about 1998 back in the analogue days on Cable & Wireless. Happy days!

As we were pretty much all capable of having TV service without paying for it but chose not to, the situation could be that VM would have only been making revenue from about 80% of those taking the service (allowing for those who take a basic package but steal the rest) and so by now there would be no service at all. I, for one, would have a problem with that. If VM were to have a write-off policy for 10% of service being illegally obtained then soon enough it would be 80% or more and the business would become untenable.

As Masque pointed out, some of these unscrupulous installations cause interference on the network and, hence, potential loss of service to genuine customers. I've seen a real humdinger of a DIY cabling job here in Aylesbury and I reported it.

The fact that VM have to invest in protecting themselves and their customers from this kind of theft is a crime in itself.

I remember when a baggage handler was caught on CCTV stealing from passengers' luggage at Gatwick the union threatened industrial action for him being fired stating that it was a perk of the job. In my view, any union member supporting that stance should also be liable to termination. They are in a position of trust and if they can't be trusted they should have that position taken away. Sadly, if you do a search for this kind of thing, you'll see it is still going on at UK airports as well as in other countries. Cleaners in Luton have been caught doing the same.

My point is that the crime is bad enough but trying to defend it or just turn a blind eye to it is as bad.

From Morality on Wikipedia: Immorality is the active opposition to morality, while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles