TV links shut down and owner arrested

Aw I had wanted to catch ON E (1!!!111) episode of Heroes so I was back in sync with BBC 2/ BBC 3. Damnit.

Still a good thing though - my housemate is horrendous for watching it - I'm sure our ISP will be grateful regarding this news ;)
 
Surly they should be going after google then, it hosts far more links, generates far more revenue from then inadverts and even hosts videos its self.

THen again google can hire lawyers :rolleyes:
 
Can they even do anything to him just for providing links?

I was under the impression that because he provided disclaimers that the site wasn't responsible for the content on other sites, they would be fine.

Might be just trying to scare people doing the same.
 
Why's it sad? The site was blatantly breaking the law. I'm amazed the owner thought he could get away with it.
 
I was under the impression that because he provided disclaimers that the site wasn't responsible for the content on other sites, they would be fine.
In the case of copyrighted content you cannot restrict your liability under law by the use of disclaimers. It's either illegal or it's not.
 
Why's it sad? The site was blatantly breaking the law. I'm amazed the owner thought he could get away with it.


I currently pay for Sky and i have missed episodes before, i guess it's nice to visit a site and "catch up" .

other than that i do agree with you.
 
I don't think 'pirating' TV Episodes is that big of a deal. I mean the site the mentioned, I know a few people who use it and if you think about it your watching it at a lot lower res and on a computer screen so by usng that they anit getting much over. (by the way I know it's possible to get hold of much better rips but that's not what I'm talking about here)

Plus if you look at shows like 24, Prison Break they usually get aired anyway on FTA channels, like Five. So no one really loses money or anything and most people I know pay TV liecene regardless of this. Plus you get the advantage of watching it hours after U.S. airtimes which is usally more than a week early here and to some people that means a lot but I guess that's one reason for the arrest.

It is also TV on demand so you wont have to miss anything or record it on VCR, which they also used to moan about also which in theory really does nothing to harm the industy not everyone has an eased schedule.

I think arresting someone is alittle extreme and I'm sure they will go after a lot of recorded IPs/accounts too.
 
Last edited:
In the case of copyrighted content you cannot restrict your liability under law by the use of disclaimers. It's either illegal or it's not.

I guess it depends on the knowledge of the "linker."

The BBC for example provide a disclaimer on external links, just in case their viewers find something on there they don't approve of. However you're probably right because the BBC won't link to any site they think has illegal content in the first place.

The owner of TV Links knew full well that the content was going to be illegal, so I guess he can't run with that excuse. I doubt he'll get much though, as he didn't create or host the material.
 
Apparently there were some cinema recordings on TV links that allowed him to get busted, think it went beyond just hosting TV stuff, but i'm probably wrong, just trying to remember what I read earlier on.
 
In the case of copyrighted content you cannot restrict your liability under law by the use of disclaimers. It's either illegal or it's not.


But he didn't actually host anything, he just told you where you could find it.
So under that argument nearly all of the internet is illegal especially google or any search engine. It's like arresting the person that gave a shooter directions to the gun shop.
 
Back
Top Bottom