Ofcom Discussion

(02-05-2012 21:19 )rj242 Wrote:  

(02-05-2012 21:13 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Well, it may very well be all talk, but I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.

Define taking on - what exactly do they hope to achieve?

your not very positive are you??

(02-05-2012 21:19 )rj242 Wrote:  

(02-05-2012 21:13 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Well, it may very well be all talk, but I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.

Define taking on - what exactly do they hope to achieve?

I don't have the fainest idea, rj242. You'd have to ask them that.

(02-05-2012 21:15 )dan g 27 Wrote:  

(02-05-2012 21:13 )StanTheMan Wrote:  I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.

Which babechannel is it?

not a babechannel covered by this forum

Ofcom knows that they will have to break us on this forum or loose the war . If we can stand up to them then all babe channel land will remain free to move forward into broad sunlit uplands . But if we fail then the whole world including the United states , including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new dark age made more sinister and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of Ofcom's perverted science . Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the UK babe channel forum lasts for a thousand years , men will say "This was their finest hour".

The above is a speech made by Winston Churchill , adapted slightly
It's a pity these day that more people don't have the enthusiasm to fight corrupt sinister control freaks like Hitler and Ofcom .

Stan no offensive mate, but is this claim fact or made up, I mean it would be great if this is infact true, now for open forum purposes fair enough if you wish the channel to remain nameless, that I'll understand, but do you have actual evidence that a challenge is currently taking place, Yes or No.

(02-05-2012 21:49 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  Stan no offensive mate, but is this claim fact or made up, I mean it would be great if this is infact true, now for open forum purposes fair enough if you wish the channel to remain nameless, that I'll understand, but do you have actual evidence that a challenge is currently taking place, Yes or No.

Evidence? No, but it did come from the horse's mouth, so to speak. All I'll say is this, take it with some salt and don't get too excited.

(02-05-2012 19:50 )rj242 Wrote:  Ofcom are being asked to rule on whether Rupert Murdoch/Sky are fit to hold a broadcast licence - do you seriously believe a few minor babechannels can do what Rupert Murdoch can't? This delusional fantasy, that by banding together the channels can force Ofcom to allow more explicit content is just that - a fantasy. Ofcom set the rules and you either abide by them or you don't play.

News International and porn channels are not the same. NI or elements within it stand accused of a corporate conspiracy to break the law through systematic phone hacking funded by company expenses, or at least a conspiracy not to ask, misleading a police investigation and lying to Parliament.

Porn channels have not been accused of breaking any laws.

However I agree that taking Ofcom through the Courts is not an easy option, or quick, and loaded with risks for any channel that tries it. Its an area where a channel considering their options would be well advised to tax the brains of an experienced lawyer. Perferably a media lawyer.

(03-05-2012 01:17 )eccles Wrote:  

(02-05-2012 19:50 )rj242 Wrote:  Ofcom are being asked to rule on whether Rupert Murdoch/Sky are fit to hold a broadcast licence - do you seriously believe a few minor babechannels can do what Rupert Murdoch can't? This delusional fantasy, that by banding together the channels can force Ofcom to allow more explicit content is just that - a fantasy. Ofcom set the rules and you either abide by them or you don't play.

News International and porn channels are not the same. NI or elements within it stand accused of a corporate conspiracy to break the law through systematic phone hacking funded by company expenses, or at least a conspiracy not to ask, misleading a police investigation and lying to Parliament.

Porn channels have not been accused of breaking any laws.

However I agree that taking Ofcom through the Courts is not an easy option, or quick, and loaded with risks for any channel that tries it. Its an area where a channel considering their options would be well advised to tax the brains of an experienced lawyer. Perferably a media lawyer.

A very good point you've raised there, however I agree with you that dragging Ofcom through the law courts will be extremely costly and very risky to say the least. That's why for me the best way to try and get what you want to some degree, is trying to get a foreign license.
Now I don't no how difficult it is to apply for one, but I feel if Babestation can do it, and in some way defeat ofcom then why don't the other channels try for one.

It's quite fucking sad we have our first ever European babe channel in the name of eurotic tv which has now decided to broadcast the first hour of their nightshow yet in order to do this they have to conform to Ofcom rules because unlike our European cousins we're not mature or grown up enough to see the vagina which will also effect the Astra/Hotbird Show, the only positive thing to come away from this madness is that more than us will now be pissed off with Ofcom to force their hand out of this OTT censorship

(06-05-2012 22:39 )StanTheMan Wrote:  How about we invent loads of different Ofcom breaches that we know didn't happen? Ofcom will have no choice but to check on them - thus we will both be wasting their time and killing what little credibility they have left

that is a fucking superb idea!! we should do that! the petition has 650 signatures. if we make 30(?) complaints a week to keep them busy?

what is the process? if we rotate the complainants so everyone makes one complaint a month, this could work.

we need to get eccles on board asap. he knows his shit!