Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Almighty Buck The Internet Your Rights Online

BPI Defends Anti-File-Sharing Partnership With Virgin Media 98

Posted by Soulskill
from the choosing-sides dept.
MrSteveSD writes "The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has responded to criticism by Bill Thomson over its collusion with Virgin Media in targeting UK file sharers. BPI chief executive Geoff Taylor personally wrote to the BBC to set things straight, and he asserts that 'it's Mr Thompson, rather than music companies, who is stuck in the past.' Of course, Virgin Media customers who download music and TV legally often find their connections being turned down to unusable speeds due to Virgin's aggressive throttling policy." Mike also points out a blog entry that describes one of the letters received by a Virgin Media customer. In the letter were suggestions regarding the customer's router settings and anti-virus software.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BPI Defends Anti-File-Sharing Partnership With Virgin Media

Comments Filter:
  • difference ? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by unity100 (970058) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @11:19AM (#23800453) Homepage Journal
    you are talking about a company that has its real roots in record business, all its corporate lore, connections, even high level executives formed in there. just as microsoft is still 80s microsoft despite it runs in a very different format now, virgin is still virgin in corporate culture.
  • by mangu (126918) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @12:00PM (#23800707)

    there are some mega-hit songs and some blockbuster movies I would have to go without

    Try the following experiment: compare this movie [btjunkie.org] with this one [btjunkie.org]. Then compare this film [btjunkie.org] with this one [btjunkie.org].


    I have a feeling that modern "blockbuster" movies are a giant step backwards. We had much more fun when films were done with shorter budgets and more imagination. Fx are OK for a while, but they can't make a bad film good.

  • Re:Defence (Score:2, Interesting)

    by You ain't seen me! (1237346) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @12:12PM (#23800795)
    I've got hi-speed cable broadband and will almost definitely be getting one of their 'we like you, but piss off' letters. As I will no longer have any need for the hi-speed I use, I am at this very moment looking at a standard ASDL package as a replacement.

    I guess I can cut my monthly bill back from 60GBP($120)/month to around 20GBP/month.

    Virgin-media might not give a shit if I leave - but they've definitely given me the impetuous to save 40GBP/month.
  • by wvmarle (1070040) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @12:13PM (#23800819)

    Unfortunately the scope and enforcement of these laws is very narrow as punishing a successful company for being successful is viewed as a bad thing.
    And so it should be. I don't see a problem with a company being very successful to branch out in different fields. And what is a cross field, really? How about a bus company starting to run trains - is that cross field? If so why should it be illegal? A computer company producing both hardware and software, branching out in digital music players and mobile phones? Nothing wrong with that.

    Basically the only time the law will be enforced is if a monopoly power (e.g. Microsoft) in one area (e.g. operating systems) uses that power to get an unfair advantage in another area (e.g. web browsers).

    In case of Microsoft that was clearly abuse of monopoly power: forcing a web browser, media player, whatnot on users by installing it directly on the computer, and making it very very hard to remove.

    Though the area gets quite grey in case there was no such thing as a web browser, before it is integrated with the particular OS. Imagine Microsoft had invented the iPod and iTunes, and given everyone an iTunes application through Windows Update. Still monopoly abuse, especially if they were to be the first with such an application? It is quite easy to find arguments both ways in such a situation.

    Wouter.

  • reason is important (Score:4, Interesting)

    by unity100 (970058) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @01:29PM (#23801383) Homepage Journal
    if supreme court acts to protect corporate interests at the expense of the people, and 'interprets' law to that effect, i dont see any issues with a president trying to bypass supreme court.

    lets remember that not only the law but also tradition of france was that 'ruling and privileges are aristocracy's god given rights', and in years leading up to 1789 all aristocrats were defending the 'law', and courts were deciding upon that law.

    this example should make it clear that law is not always right. especially in a country like u.s. where corporate lobbyists can buy out laws as they please and make them pass through house and president by pressurizing them from different fronts.

    yes, in short you really need a president like fdr now. for the balance is WAY off to the corporate side.
  • Re:The "letter" (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rlk (1089) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @01:57PM (#23801607)
    Not to mention deliberately leaving his wireless network open for "convenience" (although securing a wireless network isn't all that hard in Linux) and so that he can share connections with neighbors. Deliberately running an open endpoint should mean having to take at least some responsibility for what flows through it, unless you're a common carrier and really are in the business of supplying pure bandwidth to your customers.

    I wonder if this person would appreciate being spammed through someone else's open relay.
  • Blog stupidity (Score:2, Interesting)

    by honeyp0t (1166499) on Sunday June 15, 2008 @02:26PM (#23801901)
    The blog entry is full of stupidity. He refuses to secure his wifi network because he has 6 pcs and 'finds it easier' without a key. Well Einstein, don't be surprised if you get more letters from Virgin and the BPI. /rant

Men love to wonder, and that is the seed of science.

Working...