FACT

[deathboy]

Interesting, if not surprising, to see after being taken down, TV-Links is being characterised (by FACT) as profitable, and OiNK as "lucrative".

I've not used OiNK, and I can't remember entirely if TV-Links had ads, but even if it did, I would venture a gues that they barely offset the hosting costs of such popular sites.

As I say, I didn't go on OiNK, but if it's like any one of the long list of torrent sites I'm a member of, far from making a profit from donations, they depend on them to soften the server rental and rarely break even.

I'm pretty sure that TV-Links did not, as reported, allow you to download anything, too, but again... I can't act surprised that people can't be bothered fact-checking and have swallowed FACT press-releases.

I wonder if FACT did, knowing his contact details, ever try talking to the TV-Links guy instead of just showing up and arresting him? And, as this article mentions, I wonder how they justify not going after Google (who own YouTube), but snapping up this small-fry (who won't be able to afford quite as robust a legal defence) instead...

Rather than improve their business practices, they make criminals of us all. Roll up, roll up, to buy your DRM-laden tracks and re-buy your favourite movies on this year's new format. Watch shows on TV, because we love the ad revenue, but don't you dare get interested in any streams we don't control. Piracy funds terrorism! You're all guilty, all of you! Wait... wait... come back... where did they go?

Comments

[ephemera.livejournal.com]

tv links was streamed, rather than downloads, as I recall...

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

I certainly never saw anything to download on there when I used it.

[stevek.livejournal.com]

As ephemera correctly pointed out, not only did TV-Links stream the programmes, in fact (IIRC) they merely provided the links to other sites which hosted the actual content.

Therefore, FACT have only busted the middleman in all this. I recall watching Heroes via TV-Links and often ended up watching it via a Japanese website.

I've been at a Film Fair which got raided by FACT, they only targetted one retailer who was selling film merchandise rather than dodgy DVDs (which were in abundance if you knew where to look).

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

Tv-links offered nothing to download, and hosted nothing themselves. It was, in effect, a portal site, merely linking to content on other sites, for example tudou, which is like you tube, as far as i can tell, but I can't read the site for obvious reasons!

Your not the first to point out that google video/youtube are getting away with it here - they seem to be deliberately targeting the individuals who are easily threatened. Even if they have done nothing wrong, Big Business can bankrupt them easily by dragging out legal threats as long as possible.

I've said this SO many times this week, on LJ, in conversations both on line and in person - the media industries need to CATCH UP. They need to realise that people WANT to watch TV online. They WANT to download films. They WANT music on mp3 format. And these people aren't fools, and they know how much this information is worth, and how much they are willing to pay for it.

I only hope that more bands follow Radiohead + the Charlatans lead, and make their music freely available (or at least for nominal charge) which sends a clear message to the record companies in between - We Do Not Need You.

Demand for online tv/music/films won't 'go away' by getting rid of the 'pirates'. The pirates feed a demand which is already there, which is not being met by those with the money and the technology to do it.

All for the sake of power, control and revenue, eh?

I miss TV-Links :(

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

your = you're.

AARGGGH.

[madkatsjournal.livejournal.com]

Thing is, downloading an album in MP3 format usually costs the same as the CD with the packaging & artwork. I seem to remember them saying they couldn't make CDs a fair price because that's where most of the cost was tied up. So now that cost has been obliterated, and bandwidth is bloody cheap, why should we settle for the prices being just as high?? It all just goes to line pockets which don't need any more bloody lining.

Unfortunately, the kids suck it up quite gladly and there's no slowing of the market because The People are fucking tards and believe that to own an iPod is to know as much as there is to know about electronically reproduced music.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

Which is why i sincerely hope others follow in the footsteps of Radiohead and the Charlatans. There's a post (and long subsequent commentsation!) over on my journal, as i've ranted about this quite a lot lately!!

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

http://www.onlineout.com/browse.php?showitem=62

Because yes, the download should be cheaper.

[madkatsjournal.livejournal.com]

Indeed!

[shesmymonkey.livejournal.com]

Streamed. Used TV-Links a lot, here. And anything else I'd say has been said.

It's at this sort of time I can start on about having just been made redundant because people are proving that they'd rather watch tv/listen to tracks from the 'net than buy them from my place of employment. And I don't see why not either. It's a convenient method, I must admit I prefer shopping in a town/city but for convenience and price of public transport or parking and petrol to get to said town, internet wins!!! I mean, it's even free in all my local libraries of which there is one by my home.

If people like you and I can figure out the middle-man from the actual content-streamers, why can't the system figure that out and arrest the right person?

[markeris.livejournal.com]

It`s scum like this that stop decent hard working people from being able to shove cocaine up their noses whilst braying at each other over their new reality hit "your life is shit you awful proley scum, just look at you, you make us sick". So well done FACT.

[lineoutrecords.livejournal.com]

Better coverage:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/23/tv_links_trademark_law/

[markeris.livejournal.com]

Also "CLIP!" (shouted in same fashion as Choon).

Is there anything that Matt Berry can`t make better?

[aazell.livejournal.com]

Funny innit.

The music industry were in denial when they nailed Napster.
It didn't work for them and they had to conceed that making MP3's available for a small fee was the way to go.

Now it's happening with TV and movies. They have learned nothing!

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

After about a decade, Old Media still can't admit that people don't want to rip them off - people just don't want to be ripped off themselves. There are any number of people out there who'd gladly pay a reasonable fee to watch a silly TV program online. They just don't want to buy the stupid thing so they can watch it Wednesday morning instead of Thursday night...

But, no, if you don't want to pay for ridiculous levels of packaging and feature creep and advertisement etc, if you'd rather pay a reasonable cost for the actual product you're buying (that is, the half hour of entertainment etc), you're an insane criminal. You have to wait for the show's xth Series Box Set and buy the 5 DVDs with blooper reels and story boards, promos for other programs, subtitles in 8 languages and commentary from the actor, the director, the producer, and the producer's cousin's gardener, for the low-low price of sixty quid... If you don't... the terrorists win!

[nevalicori.livejournal.com]

Spot on. Get this: if the TV companies were to make downloads available internationally at the same time that they aired the shows on television, they'd make a mint from the ad revenues if they sold the rights separately from TV ads (and it's somewhat less regulated too, which would make the agencies twitch) and they'd find that the number of people going to the trouble of downloading currently-airing shows via BitTorrent would drop dramatically (who wants to hang around waiting for people to strip out the ads when you can just watch it there and the?)

There's no need for silly DRM—it's not like I can't plug a DVD recorder into my Freeview/Satellite box, after all and get a much higher-quality recording—just release H.264+AAC videos and let popularity and ad revenues do the rest.

(But, they'll whinge, what about screening rights in other countries! Who cares? Organise the rights properly and shows will premiere internationally. The majority of people watching mainstream shows will still watch it on TV because it's more convenient/less complex anyway, even more so if they don't have to wait 12-18 months for it to arrive).

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

*nod* The problem isn't "those durn kids", it's that the companies are so locked into the failing model, they can't imagine the successful one. The movie industry commented on how this was coming back in the days of the original Napster, and it seems all they did after that prognostication was beef up their legal budget, instead of sitting down and going "Hey, people want us to deliver product in a new way, let's make that profitable."

Then, of course, they shutdown the most well-known or popular methods, forcing folks to learn more about the process, and generating even better pirates. All the DRM crap that gets slapped on any digital product... it gets cracked within 24 hours by the real pros, and it then proceeds to just get in the way of actual customers who want access to the product.

So, you make it harder on the guy who wants to catch last week's "Dr. Who", and you delay the guy burning and selling illegal copies on the streetcorner by... about a business day.

Seriously, kids. Theatres aren't going under because I download movies - they're going under because all the movies out there aren't worth paying ten quid just to see one time. They're going out because people have lush entertainment centers at home now, and they wait for DVDs. Legal ones, even. The theatre is not really competing with some dude who got a shaky camcorder shot of Spiderman Forty-Seven, they're competing with the fact that Spiderman Forty-Seven is a rehash of a remake of a piece of crap.

I've never downloaded a single product that I'd otherwise have gone to a store and paid cash for... except for, say, an MP3 of a song on a CD I damaged, and I'm not searching through stores and shelling out the twenty for a new CD because one track skips... So, yeah, I may have downloaded some of the product... but trust me, it didn't decrease anyone's revenue stream.

I mean, here's the deal. I'm not a criminal. But I'm not paying exhorbitant prices for overhyped crap. I'd like to hear a CD before I buy the whole bloody thing. I'd like to watch an episode or two of a show on my schedule without plunking down for all of them. If I like what I see, I'd pay to A) have better quality sound and B) watch it fullsize on my TV.

But the companies are locked into their own importance. They know the main purpose of a record label/film studio isn't to make a good product... it's to promote a band/movie/show and make money off it. Most of these models *gasp* cut around the promotions to find out if the band is good, or shite. Then people pay for good music/movies/shows, and don't shell out for highly-advertised ones... the next thing you know, people would start cutting back the middlemen... and then where would Hollywood be? How would they continue to gross big on big-budget low-plot bad-acting sequels?

And if you released things all at once, all around the world, how could they stay on the news and hype it up on the cheap? There wouldn't be a red carpet opening with all the stars every other day for a month in LA, then NY, then London, then... there'd be a single premiere night, and poof! The horror... the horror...

Yeah. The whole thing is pretty ridiculous. I keep envisioning these guys as a modern-day Canute, ordering the tide not to come in... but at least Canute knew it wouldn't work. They seem to think this'll somehow work, if they just hire enough lawyers, strongarm enough customers, put enough pressure on lawmakers.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

*applause*

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

don't encourage him.

;)

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

Too late! The comment spamming is affirmed as a method of getting attention! Which is almost as good as daddy's love!

...

Why, daddy? Whhhyyyyyyyyyy?

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

because of Something You Did.

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO - *deep breath* - OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

*sniff* Deep down, I knew it all along.

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

Oh, no applause, please... just throw money... ;)

AND ALSO!

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

A Cleveland Police spokesman said: "This ... creative scheme consisted of a private file-sharing website being set up."

Hi. Police, this is the internet, internet, this is the police force. Familiarize yourselves. At least vaguely, please. Howabout "This completely unsurprising idea"?

[nevalicori.livejournal.com]

“YOU WOULDN'T SHOOT A POLICEMAN”

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

"You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet, and then send it to the policeman's grieving widow..."

[devalmont.livejournal.com]

And THEN STEAL IT BACK!!!

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, YOU WILL FACE THE CONSEQUENCES!

[devalmont.livejournal.com]

Fucks me right off. And what fucks me right off the most is that I pay for a TV Licence. So Therefore I have the right to watch all this shit anyway, just at a different time. But if everyone in the world videod 'My Name is Earl' and watched it back at a later time, what difference would it be to watching it on TV Links? Fucking none.