Off Topic SKY WILL HAND OVER CUSTOMER DATA IN MOVIE PIRACY CASE

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Bodanki' said:
Thank you.....
Tobes...talking BS again! :p

Basically means that unless you leave the films on your HD (which I am sure they would need a warrant to get at anyway, or admit to downloading it, there is **** all they can do.
Click to expand...
I did give you the correct source of information to prove my point, but you'd rather believe a site with an obvious biased and very skewed angle than simply absorbing the facts then wallow in it mate <ok>

The subscriber will succeed in the appeal under the above grounds if he can show that he did not commit the allegedly infringing act, and took reasonable steps to prevent others from infringing via his internet connection.

The above describes the appeal process that a user has to follow under the new legislation.

http://uk.practicallaw.com/9-502-0116?service=ipandit
 
Tobes said:
Don't lose any sleep about it, but it is a warning shot. I've said for ages that people downloading file shares and watching illegal streams are skating on thin ice. There's too much money at stake around this entire issue for it to simply go away. The major corps who are losing revenue because of the practice, won't give up trying to reduce their losses.
Click to expand...

It's certainly making me think twice. There are safe sites and other methods of downloading and sharing but how long before they get around that? Regardless of whether this goes away or not I certainly don't want this hassle. And that is probably part of what they want, sometimes they will make money off people and sometimes they will just stop people from downloading films, it seems win, win for them but from what I'm reading it's not, as they are loosing court cases or pulling out before it gets that far and paying damages to a lot of people.
 
Reply from Die Troll Die.......

Don’t worry too much. In my opinion, (based how TCYK acted in the US) you should be fine. Don’t contact the Troll and try to reason with them. They don’t care and they will tell you that you could be taken to trial. Make sure any BT activity on your network stops and doesn’t start back up. Change your WiFi password and don’t give it out. No TCYK case ever went to a full trial in the US, so it is unlikely to happen in the UK. The business model they follow is to generate fear and the resulting settlements. They are scum – don’t feed them.

I've replied asking if I should respond to any letters at all.
 
luvgonzo said:
It's certainly making me think twice. There are safe sites and other methods of downloading and sharing but how long before they get around that? Regardless of whether this goes away or not I certainly don't want this hassle. And that is probably part of what they want, sometimes they will make money off people and sometimes they will just stop people from downloading films, it seems win, win for them but from what I'm reading it's not, as they are loosing court cases or pulling out before it gets that far and paying damages to a lot of people.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day mate, all of the sites we're talking about here are infringing someone's copyright.

People make the choice whether they want to break the law or not in accessing the copyrighted material.

Personally I think they are right to defend their property and attempt to discourage the populus from doing so, making people "think twice" is exactly their aim. Access from legit sources who can legally distribute is where they're trying to point the majority on this.
 
Tobes said:
At the end of the day mate, all of the sites we're talking about here are infringing someone's copyright.

People make the choice whether they want to break the law or not in accessing the copyrighted material.

Personally I think they are right to defend their property and attempt to discourage the populus from doing so, making people "think twice" is exactly their aim. Access from legit sources who can legally distribute is where they're trying to point the majority on this.
Click to expand...

Problem for me is that they are rich ****ers who have ripped us off for years, if the price of the product was within reach of everyone then there wouldn't be any need for mass pirating. There are some methods of paying and watching media now that are a decent price, Netflix for example but imo that drop in price is driven by people pirating. Take the old Blockbusters stores and the price of renting a video and then DVD, take HMV at £20 a film only a few years ago, it's the same with the music industry I remember £15 for an album!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Super G Ted'inho
luvgonzo said:
Problem for me is that they are rich ****ers who have ripped us off for years, if the price of the product was within reach of everyone then there wouldn't be any need for mass pirating. There are some methods of paying and watching media now that are a decent price, Netflix for example but imo that drop in price is driven by people pirating. Take the old Blockbusters stores and the price of renting a video and then DVD, take HMV at £20 a film only a few years ago, it's the same with the music industry I remember £15 for an album!!!!
Click to expand...
So are Sainsbury's, but we can't just walk in and help ourselves to 'get a bit back'

Netflix and the like give people access at a reasonable cost - legally. As does Spotify Premium for music - and yet people still persist with the illegal method.

They could charge £1 a month and people would still choose the wrong way if there was no perceived consequence............
 
luvgonzo said:
Lets not ave an argument in this one fellas as it'll derail and I would like sensible advice. I'm not ****ting it or anything but am slightly concerned that I will have to write letters denying everything and possibly end up in court.

So if anyone disagrees with advice please post reasons why and lnfo backing it up where possible. Thanks it's been good so far.

I'm waiting for a response from Die Troll Die.
Click to expand...

Listening to know it Johnny big Bollocks types on here isn't the best source of advice. It's a bit like Mafia trying to figure out who is right and wrong <laugh>
 
luvgonzo said:
It's certainly making me think twice. There are safe sites and other methods of downloading and sharing but how long before they get around that? Regardless of whether this goes away or not I certainly don't want this hassle. And that is probably part of what they want, sometimes they will make money off people and sometimes they will just stop people from downloading films, it seems win, win for them but from what I'm reading it's not, as they are loosing court cases or pulling out before it gets that far and paying damages to a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Just pay someone else to do it <whistle>
 
Tobes said:
So are Sainsbury's, but we can't just walk in and help ourselves to 'get a bit back'

Netflix and the like give people access at a reasonable cost - legally. As does Spotify Premium for music - and yet people still persist with the illegal method.

They could charge £1 a month and people would still choose the wrong way if there was no perceived consequence............
Click to expand...

I agree and that's why I use Lidl because the ****ers at Tesco and Asda have been ripping us off for years and now they are feeling the strain. I can honestly say that if the prices are reasonable then I'll pay and maybe now that they are I should toe the line.

The problem is the more people like me they get the more power they have and the prices will start to rise again, you can't beat the man eh?
 
Tobes said:
So are Sainsbury's, but we can't just walk in and help ourselves to 'get a bit back'

Netflix and the like give people access at a reasonable cost - legally. As does Spotify Premium for music - and yet people still persist with the illegal method.

They could charge £1 a month and people would still choose the wrong way if there was no perceived consequence............
Click to expand...

Because the cheaper options were only developed one people started selling alternatives. One people find very cheap alternatives they won't go back to passing unless there is absolutely no choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luvgonzo
Gerrez said:
Because the cheaper options were only developed one people started selling alternatives. One people find very cheap alternatives they won't go back to passing unless there is absolutely no choice.
Click to expand...
The cheaper LEGAL options were developed in response to the massive ILLEGAL issue.

It's theft mate, same as buying snide DVD's off the dodgy fella at the market was for years, only because it's on t'internet, people seem to think that it's Ok for some reason. It isn't.
 
Tobes said:
The cheaper LEGAL options were developed in response to the massive ILLEGAL issue.

It's theft mate, same as buying snide DVD's off the dodgy fella at the market was for years, only because it's on t'internet, people seem to think that it's Ok for some reason. It isn't.
Click to expand...

Well it's not as ******ed as dodgy DVDs beause in that case you are actually paying money for something that's completely ****e quality

But still, it's the guy selling it that's going to jail not you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Super G Ted'inho
Tobes said:
The cheaper LEGAL options were developed in response to the massive ILLEGAL issue.

It's theft mate, same as buying snide DVD's off the dodgy fella at the market was for years, only because it's on t'internet, people seem to think that it's Ok for some reason. It isn't.
Click to expand...

It is theft but it's something they brought upon themselves. I've said similar to you in the past about watching football or buying music, they all got greedy and priced average Joe out the market.

Fair enough that they're looking to offer cheaper alternatives now such as the Now TV option that I now use.
 
Gerrez said:
It is theft but it's something they brought upon themselves. I've said similar to you in the past about watching football or buying music, they all got greedy and priced average Joe out the market.

Fair enough that they're looking to offer cheaper alternatives now such as the Now TV option that I now use.
Click to expand...

So it's ok to steal something if you can't afford it?
 
Tobes said:
I did give you the correct source of information to prove my point, but you'd rather believe a site with an obvious biased and very skewed angle than simply absorbing the facts then wallow in it mate <ok>

The subscriber will succeed in the appeal under the above grounds if he can show that he did not commit the allegedly infringing act, and took reasonable steps to prevent others from infringing via his internet connection.

The above describes the appeal process that a user has to follow under the new legislation.

http://uk.practicallaw.com/9-502-0116?service=ipandit
Click to expand...
If he can show that he did not commit the allegedly infringing act - Which he can, quite easily. By showing a) that he is not in custody of the offending material and b) IP's can quite easily be cloned by anyone.
Like I said, an IP address is not proof of guilt, if it was, then explain why not a single person has been taken to court over it?
By your rule I could walk up to your house with a smart phone, hack in to your wifi (easily done if you know your stuff) and download the nastiest beastiality porn on the market and then you would get banged up, no question, no defence, Your IP, you're guilty........No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back