Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Piracy Television Your Rights Online

UKNova TV Torrent Tracker Shut Down After FACT Issues C&D 195

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the anti-culture-conspiracy dept.
New submitter Volfied writes with bad news for fans of UK shows that aren't available for purchase anywhere. From the article: "The UKNova website has stopped letting users share links to copies of UK TV shows, apparently after legal threats from the copyright "enforcement body FACT. 'UKNova is being forced to change. We have been issued with a "cease and desist" order by FACT,' the message began. 'Despite our efforts to cooperate with the UK media companies, FACT have stated: "ALL links or access to content provided by UKNova are infringing, unless it can be proven that explicit permission from the copyright holder for that content has been obtained."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UKNova TV Torrent Tracker Shut Down After FACT Issues C&D

Comments Filter:
  • by freman (843586) on Monday August 27, 2012 @08:24PM (#41144113)

    If Links to content are infringement then I can sue them for linking to me, you can sue me for linking to slanderous content about you, everyone can sue the pants off Google.

    Not saying anyone in their right mind wants to do this, that would break a big part of the internet (yes, web site's aren't the internet but they're a big part of it)

    Am saying, how come FACT get to call a link to content infringing but the rest of us can't.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 27, 2012 @08:33PM (#41144189)

    The whole point of copyright is to ensure the works are created for the public good and made available to the public. If the works are not being made readily available at a reasonable price poin then the copyright should expire and the ditributors (torrent site) is legal. Anything short of this is unethical.

  • by TubeSteak (669689) on Monday August 27, 2012 @08:45PM (#41144277) Journal

    âoeWe immediately removed the alleged offending links to content that could be [connected to] the two companies and replied to FACT assuring them of our cooperation in the matter, but asking them to point out examples of potentially offending links,â a UKNova admin told us.

    âoeALL links or access to content provided by UKNova are infringing, unless you can prove that you have obtained explicit permission from the copyright holder for that content,â was FACTâ(TM)s response.

    If copyrighted content from only two Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) members was being shared, where does FACT get off telling UKNova that everything is assumed to be infringing?
    I mean, that's a lovely assumption, but unless FACT can show it represents the interests of those copyright holders, they have no standing to do anything against UKNova.
    Or is that not how the law works in the UK?

  • Thanks UKN (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 27, 2012 @09:38PM (#41144647)

    BBC iPlayer, 4OD etc. official streaming services was a direct response to UKNova.
    DVD releases of many, many UK shows immediately after the season ended (during in the case of Dr. Who) can be attributed to UKNovas no torrenting stuff available for purchase.

    Thanks to file sharing pioneers like UKNova, we can stream almost all the content (providing you use a UK proxy)

    It can also be credited for preserving many, many old shows that would no doubt be lost forever, by inviting users to raid their attics for VHS gems and convert/upload them. I once asked for an obscure one off BBC show about the music careers of the actors of the various Star Trek series 'Funk me up Scotty' - presented by the legendary John Peel. within a couple of hours someone posted it like it was nothing...

    now it's on YT... set your eyes to stun...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3k64LZNLD8

     

  • by OFnow (1098151) on Monday August 27, 2012 @09:43PM (#41144665)

    AC writes: "Actually, they last beyond the time the material is worthless".

    Actually even if the author wants a work released there is no practical way to release it that is accepted in US law. Plenty of authors have no illusions and plenty of works have very short useful lives. But existing law provides no way to deal with that.

    The book "How To Fix Copyright" by William Patry has details on this and much more. I have no financial or other interest, I just like the book.

  • by JRR006 (830025) on Monday August 27, 2012 @09:54PM (#41144721)

    Because I'd love to. Let me pay the licence fee and have access to BBC iPlayer, legally, and that would cover most of what I want to see.

    It wouldn't help for other channels, but what does Channel 4 really have? Jimmy Carr? Meh. Though I would like ITV for shows that only make their way to PBS years later...

    Fire all the lawyers everywhere and hire some more techs and make it happen.

  • by aekafan (1690920) on Monday August 27, 2012 @11:08PM (#41145155)
    So you are saying that Rosa Parks and Gandhi were both wrong? I mean, they were anarchistic lawbreakers, right? That the Jews Germany and political dissidents in Russia should have shut up with their whinging and worked within the system? Sometimes some selective anarchy is a great tool for change, when there are no other avenues. There are times when a government will not change no matter what, because the people support it, even when it is wrong. Hell, Plato recognized this in The Republic. Sometimes, to do what is right you simply have to break the law.

    You are quite right, the world is not a black and white place. Not all laws are right, and few leaders are good. Often, our leaders don't care if the laws are right, they simply want to use the laws for their own advantage. And changing leaders generally doesn't affect this

    I will fight against people like you who believe in their government and their laws, right or wrong
  • by Jiro (131519) on Tuesday August 28, 2012 @12:44AM (#41145557)

    I don't know. Which is more inconvenient, not being able to sit in the front of the bus for a 30 minute bus ride, or not being able to watch a 30 minute episode of a TV show?

    They both last the same length of time and you can do perfectly well living your life without either one. The bus discrimination can be repeated, but of course so can not being able to watch a TV show. The only substantial difference is that it's equal opportunity oppression that screws over everyone, instead of just screwing over blacks.

"You tweachewous miscweant!" -- Elmer Fudd

Working...