BT use cleanfeed. Imagine there's a problem with Cleanfeed, and BT need to "turn it off and on again" - they are not allowed to do so without the written permission of the studios, or without a Judge telling them that it's okay to do so. ( http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/... ) 16 & 18. > BT also requests the inclusion in the order of the following provision: "In the event that [BT] forms t…
Wow. Public rights completely inferior to Studios' rights.
I was amazed.
BT's request (essentially, "in emergency we'll shut down Cleanfeed for maintenance, and ask for permission from the court within 72 hours of doing so") seems very reasonable, but is not allowed.
If you live in the UK or have any personal or professional interest in the UK internet, I'd encourage you to make a regular donation to the Open Rights Group. They do fantastic work and the money goes a long way.
It would be interesting to see a media company that loses revenue due to wrongly being included in a list of blocked sites taking legal action against the entity that blocked them. I suspect the daily ad-revenues of a website like radiotimes.co.uk are sufficiently large to make it worth them pushing for a settlement, whilst effectively blocking a genuine streaming website has essentially zero impact on the Premier League's revenues. Making misdirected blocking expensive is probably the most effective way of undermining censorship efforts.
ironically i have had to deal with this precise problem. in the real world you deal with real world problems - you don't get to negotiate because you feel entitled - in the general case at least people have zero tolerance for such behaviour and it gets you nowhere. we have a capitalist society after all... supply, demand and competition rule supreme in our economy. don't downvote this guy his point is perfectly valid…
i would add as well that i work in the entertainment industry... i have nothing against artist, performers, production staff and feel they deserve rewarding for their work - but (and i have personal bias) i have no love for the leeches that tie them into exploitative contracts then winge when they don't get the benefit of their /should be illegal and are certainly immoral/ business practices because they went out of…
While it's good to get rid of exploitative contracts, denying the ability for copyright holders (which includes starving artists, indie game developers, artist-owned publishing collectives, etc.) to litigate against those who are ripping off their work goes too far. Without legal tools at their disposal, the small guy WILL get ripped off by larger, more powerful entities. Or small entities for that matter; it's not like copying bits poses any technical hurdle.
i would add as well that i work in the entertainment industry... i have nothing against artist, performers, production staff and feel they deserve rewarding for their work - but (and i have personal bias) i have no love for the leeches that tie them into exploitative contracts then winge when they don't get the benefit of their /should be illegal and are certainly immoral/ business practices because they went out of…
While it's good to get rid of exploitative contracts, denying the ability for copyright holders (which includes starving artists, indie game developers, artist-owned publishing collectives, etc.) to litigate against those who are ripping off their work goes too far. Without legal tools at their disposal, the small guy WILL get ripped off by larger, more powerful entities. Or small entities for that matter; it's not l…
you have to pay the price both ways with these things... i still think copyright is garbage. if people can do a better job by ripping me off they deserve it and so do the customers who get a better product. everyone wins except for me... i can't cry too much about that.
While it's good to get rid of exploitative contracts, denying the ability for copyright holders (which includes starving artists, indie game developers, artist-owned publishing collectives, etc.) to litigate against those who are ripping off their work goes too far. Without legal tools at their disposal, the small guy WILL get ripped off by larger, more powerful entities. Or small entities for that matter; it's not l…
you have to pay the price both ways with these things... i still think copyright is garbage. if people can do a better job by ripping me off they deserve it and so do the customers who get a better product. everyone wins except for me... i can't cry too much about that.
The biggest problem is when someone comes and takes your software and doesn't do anything except sell it online for half the cost. This happened to me a number of years ago. They didn't do a better job or offer a better product. They didn't compete on functionality or user experience. They sold my unmodified, identical binaries (at a lower cost) as if they were an authorized reseller and kept all the money for themselves. I fail to see how this individual was deserving of the pure profit they made from my hard work.