Virgin media possibly getting serious on dodgy boxes?

[AndyCambs]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

No matter how you wriggle and deny it, you are a thief.You may not like the term but it is the only description that fits.You are typical of so many criminals..you blame the victim when the onus is entirely on you..It is not VM's fault you set out to steal by breaking the codes,it is YOUR fault.

Be honest and stop trying to BS me..I've heard every form of chopped logic for 34 years from those of far more wit and intelligence than you are presently displaying.

There's no difference in taking cable TV without paying to taking electricity without paying - do you do that as well?

[supremus]

Originally Posted by TheDon

Nope. Legally speaking it's not theft at all.

It's an offence of "fraudulently receiving programmes" and is covered by the copyright act and not the theft act.

Theft requires you to permanantly deprive the owner of something.

True, you do have a point about the exact definition of the term "theft", but my comment was really more aimed at highlighting how relatively unimportant an offense this is, both in the eyes of the law and the cable companies.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

And this week's winner of the "Richard of the week" award is........

Supremus!

I'd like to thank God, my parents, and everyone who believed in me...

for taking a subject so far off topic just to insult some of the CF members that it's in a different time-zone.

It's not an insult, it's a term of endearment, and the general point is entirely relevant, since people's personal values and beliefs are crucial to how they perceive and justify their own actions and misdeeds.

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

There's no difference in taking cable TV without paying to taking electricity without paying - do you do that as well?

There's a considerable difference, actually. If you have a minimum subscription, the signal the cable company sends into your house contains every single channel. There's no more or less drain on that resource, whether you're watching BBC1 legally, or using a dodgy box to watch a channel you haven't subscribed to. Clearly that's a very different issue from electricity, where you're obviously draining a finite resource.

Originally Posted by supremus

True, you do have a point about the exact definition of the term "theft", but my comment was really more aimed at highlighting how relatively unimportant an offense this is, both in the eyes of the law and the cable companies.

It's not an insult, it's a term of endearment, and the general point is entirely relevant, since people's personal values and beliefs are crucial to how they perceive and justify their own actions and misdeeds.
There's a considerable difference, actually. If you have a minimum subscription, the signal the cable company sends into your house contains every single channel. There's no more or less drain on that resource, whether you're watching BBC1 legally, or using a dodgy box to watch a channel you haven't subscribed to. Clearly that's a very different issue from electricity, where you're obviously draining a finite resource.

It doesn't matter how unimportant you view it as a crime it is still a crime and if prosecuted you still have a record.

As for the insult bit you are just using verbiage to try and cover the fact that you are just talking for the sake of appearing clever...

And your last point is entirely irrelevant..as usual...

Ok I think this thread has dramatically drifted from the VM dealing with dodgy boxes and into the rights and wrongs of the law as we see it. So everyone back to the topic of VM getting serious on dodgy boxes

[supremus]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It doesn't matter how unimportant you view it as a crime it is still a crime and if prosecuted you still have a record.

I agree.

As for the insult bit you are just using verbiage to try and cover the fact that you are just talking for the sake of appearing clever...

I am clever, I can't help it.

And your last point is entirely irrelevant..as usual...

No, it isn't. It's very relevant to the topic, since I'd suggest that the main reason a company like VM would be getting serious on piracy is because they're contractually obligated to their content providers to provide a reasonable level of security for their content. Let's say half of EON's customers were getting their electricity without paying for it, that would be a considerable drain on the company's resources, and it would hurt their bottom line. This is not the case for VM. As long as they're pumping the signal into your home anyway, there's no more or less drain on their resource, whether you watch the channels you're subscribed to or leeching premium channels. It's not costing them anything extra. It's for all intents and purposes an infinite source, as long as you have the cable there legally in the first place.

So when we're talking about getting serious on dodgy boxes, as per the subject, it's no coincidence that individual users are merely getting warning letters, and people who sell the illegal products and services are getting visits from the police waving search warrants around. That's where they're getting serious, because those sort of raids produce news stories that will satisfy their content providers. Going after or getting tough with individual users is nonsensical and not at all cost effective. If they wanted to get tough with known, individual users, they'd send a guy out to cut their signal from the box in the street, Instead they try the code changes we've heard about recently, where the aim is to take out as many of these dodgy systems as possible, and with individual, known leechers, all it takes is the cost of a stamp to send them a letter intended to scare them into going straight, as in paying for the service they're currently leeching. I don't know how successful the letter tactic is, but I think these are all important factors to consider in a discussion about where and why the cable companies are really getting serious. Considering the cost of upgrading the security on their network, it makes far more financial sense to try and live up to their contractual obligations to their content providers with the sort of tactics we've seen recently, but as we all know, it realistic terms, there's really nothing serious about what they're doing.

Originally Posted by supremus

I am clever, I can't help it.

Laus in proprio ore sordescit.

I always have taken the view that praise is more valid if said by others, as, imho, self-praise is no recommendation; in fact, it could easily be mistaken for empty boasting.

Self-praise is like onanism - you may find it enjoyable, but others would rather not watch you do it.

I think we had abide by David's request folks...

[cimt]

Apparently, the codes have been changed 3 times today? They seem to be starting to sort it because they've also been changing them for the last few days.

[TheDon]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

That's a very specious argument.

Nope, it's a very correct one.

You're not taking money from them as they never had your money in the first place.

Originally Posted by Sir John Luke

It is irrelevant which act applies. It IS theft and it IS an offence. End of..

No, it's very relevant which act applies, as the theft act DOESNT, it's NOT theft, however it IS an offence.

Infact, saying someone who uses dodgy boxes is a thief is technically slander.

You can't "End of" and expect to be right when you're wrong. You might think it's theft, but you're wrong.

Originally Posted by supremus

True, you do have a point about the exact definition of the term "theft", but my comment was really more aimed at highlighting how relatively unimportant an offense this is, both in the eyes of the law and the cable companies.

Indeed, my point just shows how even more unimportant it actually is. It's nowhere near theft on the punishment scale, and most of the time you'd just get a fine, or even a police caution for it.


Now, to get back on topic, anyone else notice they're really pushing the report dodgy boxes thing? there was a section in Play that was with this months bill about reporting people with them. I wonder how many people will actually bother as a huge amount of people seem pretty open about having them and in near enough every pub you can find someone who can sort you out with one so it's not like people are hiding underground with them.

Right I asked for this thread to go back onto topic I will not ask again . Any further discussion on whether it is theft or not will be greeted with infractions

[Fatec]

Did not take them long to get a proper fix to keep the boxes on did it.

3 Hours, what a waste of time that was.

[cimt]

But they've changed the codes like 4 times today. I'm sure that will be annoying the hell outta them.

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by cimt

But they've changed the codes like 4 times today. I'm sure that will be annoying the hell outta them.

No because the fix that's out auto updates again, not gonna bother them losin channels for less than 5 mins 4 times/day.

[supremus]

Originally Posted by TheDon

Now, to get back on topic, anyone else notice they're really pushing the report dodgy boxes thing? there was a section in Play that was with this months bill about reporting people with them. I wonder how many people will actually bother as a huge amount of people seem pretty open about having them and in near enough every pub you can find someone who can sort you out with one so it's not like people are hiding underground with them.

I don't know what Play is, but there's no downside for the cable companies in sending out snitch requests like that. Doesn't cost them a thing, and it makes it seem like they're being pro-active in cracking down on piracy. If they really wanted to get serious, though, they'd send some people out to disconnect the thousands of live cable feeds they have going into non-subscriber homes, or maybe even make some sort of effort to collect old set top boxes, so they don't end up chipped at car boot sales or wherever people get these things from. One of my friends used to be a Cable & Wireless customer, but cancelled his service many years ago, and he still has his two Pace boxes. Nobody even bothered asking for them back. VM may have stepped up their efforts a little bit, but I wouldn't really say it amounts to getting serious. I'd be interested in seeing them try to prosecute individual users, if only as a scare tactic or to set a legal precedent. The trouble is, if they're not successful, which could very well be the case, they would lose the ability to scare people with bluff letters threatening legal action.

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by cimt

But they've changed the codes like 4 times today. I'm sure that will be annoying the hell outta them.

Yeah.. I hope it is annoying them.. they need to keep this up and also think of otherways to disrupt their illegal activity!