On a slightly different tack, Ofcom have fleshed out the details of their proposals for policing the internet :
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012...and-prices
http://torrentfreak.com/new-details-of-u...ic-120626/
It's the old 3 strikes policy. Those found to be downloading copyrighted content will be sent a warning letter, 3 letters within 12 months and you go on a list which means the copyright holders can make the ISP reveal your identity so they can potentially take you to court.
To be fair, it could have been a lot worse, but I still wonder if it is just an exercise in futility. Denmark has just abandoned it's own 3 strikes policy in favour of other initiatives, and past evidence seems to show that going after individual downloaders doesn't really have much positive effect.
At least in this policy, virtually all costs are down to the rights-holders making the claims.
(26-06-2012 14:27 )munch1917 Wrote: [ -> ]On a slightly different tack, Ofcom have fleshed out the details of their proposals for policing the internet :
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012...and-prices
http://torrentfreak.com/new-details-of-u...ic-120626/
It's the old 3 strikes policy. Those found to be downloading copyrighted content will be sent a warning letter, 3 letters within 12 months and you go on a list which means the copyright holders can make the ISP reveal your identity so they can potentially take you to court.
To be fair, it could have been a lot worse, but I still wonder if it is just an exercise in futility. Denmark has just abandoned it's own 3 strikes policy in favour of other initiatives, and past evidence seems to show that going after individual downloaders doesn't really have much positive effect.
At least in this policy, virtually all costs are down to the rights-holders making the claims.
They'll need to list every site that contains copyrighted material, so that we don't have any confusion. What will they do with Youtube??? I don't go to any site I don't think is legit, and find it wrong when people watch movies online that are already in cinemas, but there will need to be some clarifications.
(26-06-2012 14:27 )munch1917 Wrote: [ -> ]On a slightly different tack, Ofcom have fleshed out the details of their proposals for policing the internet :
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012...and-prices
http://torrentfreak.com/new-details-of-u...ic-120626/
It's the old 3 strikes policy. Those found to be downloading copyrighted content will be sent a warning letter, 3 letters within 12 months and you go on a list which means the copyright holders can make the ISP reveal your identity so they can potentially take you to court.
To be fair, it could have been a lot worse, but I still wonder if it is just an exercise in futility. Denmark has just abandoned it's own 3 strikes policy in favour of other initiatives, and past evidence seems to show that going after individual downloaders doesn't really have much positive effect.
At least in this policy, virtually all costs are down to the rights-holders making the claims.
I think the copyright holders have to start the complaints process, perhaps by identifying "pirate" sites and asking the ISP for everyone who has downloaded material from there.
Appeals will be possible but will cost £20 - even if successful.
No idea who people will appeal to. Ofcom? The ISP? An independent court - no way, not for £20.
In the warning letters the ISPs must notify people where legit content can be purchased. This conjures up images of BT, Sky, Tiscali, Virgin, etc sending people letters explaining where they can buy footage of Angel Long getting fucked live and Faye Rampton giving the cameraman a blowjob. They could even hand out contact details for TVX, Sport and Elite hardcore sites.
Sadly I suspect the information will be limited to general info only rather than where to find a specific clip.
The other problem will be Mums opening the letter and going round the family asking who downloaded Anal Annie Bukake Days (European Version).
(25-06-2012 18:47 )mr mystery Wrote: [ -> ]Ofcom's latest broadcast bulletin is out today , issue number 208 and dated 25/06/2012 ,
Not 1 single babe channel is mentioned in this bulletin for being found in breach or for being currently under investigation , 3 separate babe channels have had complaints made about them to Ofcom .
...
Ofcom assessed all these complaints made against these babe channels and decided non of them was worth investigating
Not upheld because they are tame as shit?
(25-06-2012 22:21 )continental19 Wrote: [ -> ]While we're on the subject of the Ofcom scum, can anyone tell what the state of play is concerning chief Tosser Ed Richards? is he still in the Ofcom hot seat, or has he finally made it to the BBC?
Thanks Guys
Seems the BBC were ovewhelmed with a whole 10 applications.
First round interviews were this week.
There will be a second round.
No telling if there will be role play or practical sessions after that.
Because of the large number of applications the selection process will take a month or so.
Ed Richards will clearly get it because anyone talented enough to decide to apply at the last minute and write a really good application in limited time must be very able. [/sarcasm]
Until then his Edness is still head of the UK Tele censor, but has stepped aside from any decisions that might impact the BBC. And has other jobs.
What I find interesting is ever since Ed Richards has applied for the BBC job he has somewhat distanced himself with ofcom and interesting too that also not a single babe channel has been investigated since this, yeah sure people will probably put that down to how tame the shows have been recently but when has that stopped ofcom in the past
Is this a sign of things to come (hopefully)
Is this man the driving force behind all the ridiculous rules and regulations currently in place.
If he gets the BBC job, one would assume that he would then step down from his ofcom job
Could then whoever takes the top job at ofcom put his or her own stamp on it and regulate the channels more fairly than is being done at present.
Have we realistically got a chance of the rules being relaxed and changed in the future if this is the case.
Lastly is this the real reason why no babe channel execs are willing to take ofcom on at present for hope of a renegotiation.
We can all hope that the tide of change turns in our favour again.
However I still think you'd get very long odds of Cwpussylover becoming the next new tv regulator
(27-06-2012 19:20 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]...
However I still think you'd get very long odds of Cwpussylover becoming the next new tv regulator
The only
'tv' I can see cw regulating in the near future is the
transvestite variety
(27-06-2012 19:20 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]What I find interesting is ever since Ed Richards has applied for the BBC job he has somewhat distanced himself with ofcom and interesting too that also not a single babe channel has been investigated since this, yeah sure people will probably put that down to how tame the shows have been recently but when has that stopped ofcom in the past
Is this a sign of things to come (hopefully)
Is this man the driving force behind all the ridiculous rules and regulations currently in place.
If he gets the BBC job, one would assume that he would then step down from his ofcom job
Could then whoever takes the top job at ofcom put his or her own stamp on it and regulate the channels more fairly than is being done at present.
Have we realistically got a chance of the rules being relaxed and changed in the future if this is the case.
Lastly is this the real reason why no babe channel execs are willing to take ofcom on at present for hope of a renegotiation.
We can all hope that the tide of change turns in our favour again.
However I still think you'd get very long odds of Cwpussylover becoming the next new tv regulator
I would hope so. Where's the fairness in allowing the non adult channels to show everything under the sun at times, even in a non educational way, yet not allowing the adult channels to show brief flashes or even the equivalent? It's ridiculous that other channels can show sexual mutilation, explicit sexual content that is uncensored much of the time (Last night on Sexcetera, all of the full frontal shots were uncensored, from the twenty minutes I saw, and even some brief uncensored open leg, and that's tame compared to what they've shown before), yet the adult channels get fined huge amounts for even brief flashes!
Maybe these channels will be allowed the same leniency as the others, or at least close to that in the future.
I also hope that whoever takes over Ofcom next, realises that these channels can EASILY be blocked, and that a normal female body part is not going to cause harm, especially not at these hours if that's even a legit issue. Seeing the cameramen freak out at 3am when a little slip happens is beyond silly.
Yes Ed Richards would have to step down as Ofcum Chief Exec otherwise he could be in charge of investigations into channels he runs. Ofcom arent strong on the whole conflict of interest thing, with rule setting, investigation, judgement and appeal being handled by the same people or people who report to each other, but running the BBC and investigating it might be a step too far.
Sadly the Daily Mails attack on Dics Harder (anagram) will have endeared him to many Guardian readers thus boosting his chances.
There is a school of thought that getting an outsider in will be a breath of fresh air and kick up the arse for complacent time servers. But there must be experienced broadcasters who fit the bill.
He has sod all television creative or production experience, apart from a short spell as a researcher, no radio experience, no retail experience, the BBC budget and staff levels dwarf anything he has done, so on that basis he should stand about as much chance of becoming DG as cwpussylover has of becoming the next Miss World. Or scoring a penalty for England against Germany.
On the plus side if he is rejected his credibility will have taken a knock. Sadly he might try repair his reputation by clamping down.
Well ofcunt boss Ed Richards is edging closer to the top job at the BBC, he is now in the final 3, I am desperately hoping that he gets the job, fucks off from ofcom for good because watching the shows tonight they couldn't be any tamer if they tried, Ed Richards I'd say is probably largely responsible for this censorship which we have been subjected to now for too long.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ds-newsxml