BT ordered to block pirate links

Dj_Jestar · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:34

Saviola said:
All good services. However, a lot of them still charge the same price as the physical media format. How can that be right? Do DVDs and CDs now cost nothing to produce?

Lovefilm is £5 a month for as many DVDs/BluRays as you can get through in that time, in either physical media (via post) or streamed. They also do games on the PS3.

So that's multiple items of media a month for £5.. vs ~£12 for a single copy of a DVD, ~£20 for a BluRay, or anything up to the region of ~£50 for a game. Hmm. Which is cheaper, I wonder?

Vonhelmet · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:34

Hairybudda said:
You said yourself it's a grey area. I'm asking you, from a moral point of view, is lending it to one friend at a time until all your friends have seen it worse than sending them all a rip?

No, I don't believe it is.

kylew · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:35

Dj_Jestar said:
Or those breaking the law just need to realise they are breaking the law?

It's simple. You are downloading and viewing media you haven't paid for. It's illegal. There is no discussion.

It's so simple that you don't understand it yourself? It's not illegal to download and view, it's only illegal to upload.

Tefal · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:35

Dj_Jestar said:
Lovefilm is £5 a month for as many DVDs/BluRays as you can get through in that time, in either physical media (via post) or streamed. They also do games on the PS3.

So that's multiple items of media a month.. vs ~£20 for a single copy. Hmm.

they've recently ahd to change that though haven't they? now it's 2 separate packages for physical or online and the combined one is closer to 20.

or was that netflix?

Jambo · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:35

Saviola said:
Precisely, 70 year old codgers who think a BlackBerry is a fruit should be kept well away. We need to get a group together includes the industries being 'harmed' the ISPs, the piraters (in some shape) and technology leaders to really iron where we can go forward with this.

The record labels have all the knowledge they need. The sad fact is people are just not prepared to pay for things which cost a lot of money to produce. I think blocking sites that support piracy is the way forward for now.

How do they actually get away with it? Why are the owners not sued? Do they not declare their business either, not pay taxes on revenue?

Dj_Jestar · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:36

kylew said:
And that's enough reason to make it criminal?

Yup. Suck it up.

Saviola · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:36

Dj_Jestar said:
Or those breaking the law just need to realise they are breaking the law?

It's simple. You are downloading and viewing media you haven't paid for. It's illegal. There is no discussion.

Its not that black and white though is it. If all 'Piraters' refused to buy Movies and Music it would have a massive affect on the industry. So why not all parties get together to produce a happy medium?

Dj_Jestar · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:36

kylew said:
It's so simple that you don't understand it yourself? It's not illegal to download and view, it's only illegal to upload.

It's illegal to view licensed media you haven't been authorised to view, yes. Did you not know this? :confused:

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:37

Saviola said:
Yeah that's is fine, but we had to change that law as there were more and more cars and so more cases of DUI occurring. Plus it was a sensible one.

This new 'law' can not be judged the same, we are moving forward technologically but the industries that scream 'Copyright Infringement' are not. So they want to bring a law in to bring us back in line with their set of rules.

Just like we have to change the laws, to come in line with new technology. Identical to the car scenario.

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:38

kylew said:
That's not the point, it's obviously going to be a deterrent, but what for? Downloading movies, because it's such a terrible and immoral act? Do I have to post that link again in the hopes of you actually reading it instead of pretending the problem lies with just the public who download copyrighted media?

The problem like in many things lies with both supplier and demand.

Should we not have any drug laws for users? Only go after suppliers?
No what you do is have two levels, one for supply and one for demand.

meghatronic · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:38

AcidHell2 said:
And illegal file sharing can be proved to loss in revenue.

A tiny percentage of the time.

kylew · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:38

Dj_Jestar said:
Yup. Suck it up.

Suck what up? It's not illegal or criminal at the moment anyway, and again since you think it's so bad, read: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091207/1201017234.shtml

These companies complaining about how much piracy is hurting them have been caught out many times for copyright infringement and selling music and not paying the artists the money they owe them.

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:39

kylew said:
Suck what up? It's not illegal .

yes it is you are breaking a law, hence. It's illegal. It doesn't need to be criminal law to be illegal.

So you are happy they are being sued, but think it's totally wrong for individuals to feel the same extent of law. But it's always like that.

kylew · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:40

AcidHell2 said:
The problem like in many things lies with both supplier and demand.

Should we not have any drug laws for users? Only go after suppliers?
No what you do is have two levels, one for supply and one for demand.

Why are you selectively responding to me? I keep asking you about the problems highlighted in the article I've posted, and you're ignoring it.

Saviola · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:40

Dj_Jestar said:
Lovefilm is £5 a month for as many DVDs/BluRays as you can get through in that time, in either physical media (via post) or streamed. They also do games on the PS3.

So that's multiple items of media a month for £5.. vs ~£12 for a single copy of a DVD, ~£20 for a BluRay, or anything up to the region of ~£50 for a game. Hmm. Which is cheaper, I wonder?

Thats why I said 'some' I use LoveFilm myself very handy.

Jambo said:
The record labels have all the knowledge they need. The sad fact is people are just not prepared to pay for things which cost a lot of money to produce. I think blocking sites that support piracy is the way forward for now.

How do they actually get away with it? Why are the owners not sued? Do they not declare their business either, not pay taxes on revenue?

I think people are prepared to pay for things that cost a lot, if they perceive value.

kylew · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:40

Dj_Jestar said:
It's illegal to view licensed media you haven't been authorised to view, yes. Did you not know this?

No it's not.

kylew · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:41

AcidHell2 said:
yes it is you are breaking a law, hence. It's illegal. It doesn't need to be criminal law to be illegal.

The same way "unauthorised lending" is also illegal?

DiscoDave · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:41

nonhelmet said:
Apple TV costs £99, which is less than most Blu Ray players...

And I've just looked at the movie selection on iTunes, tested a couple of top rated movies and none are in HD.

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:42

kylew said:
Why are you selectively responding to me? I keep asking you about the problems highlighted in the article I've posted, and you're ignoring it.

What problems and where have you asked me?
I respond to points I feel are relevant.

If yur talking about the music industry being sued. That's nit a problem, they are in breach of the law and are in court, same as anyone who breaks the law.

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2011 at 16:43

kylew said:
The same way "unauthorised lending" is also illegal?

That depends, I don't think that falls under copyright law. If that's the case no. As it's more like a EULA. If it breaks copyright law then yes.