Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

TV-LINKS site pulled

         

appi2

10:24 pm on Oct 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



One of the world's most-used pirate film websites has been closed after providing links to illegal versions of major Hollywood hits and TV shows.

Guardian.co.uk [business.guardian.co.uk]

Dabrowski

12:37 pm on Oct 20, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Oh man, I better make sure I don't miss any of the next season of Heroes. I used that site to catch up when I'd missed stuff.

vincevincevince

1:09 pm on Oct 20, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I do wish that the TV and Film industry would embrace the internet a little more. It is undeniable that an advertising-supported (ad-breaks etc. as usual) version of TV-links would be an incredibly profitable success story.

The economic model of TV-links is great in that for very minimal cost they are able to deliver vast quantities of video. That exact same business model with advertisments would mean that almost the entire advertising revenue could go to the production company as licensing revenues; as opposed to the much smaller fraction they now get from commercial television with its much higher overheads, shareholders to please, and distributor commissions.

On top of that, the viewing data obtained would be worth serious money. Entirely accurate viewing figures which can be geolocated and include gems such as when someone stops watching or pauses something, or which other shows a user has previously viewed.

Dabrowski

10:11 pm on Oct 21, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



very minimal cost they are able to deliver vast quantities of video

Actually, no. As the name suggests, they provide links to other sites that are hosting that particular video. I don't think I watched a single one that wasn't hosted elsewhere.

But I definately agree with the advertising arguement, if they licensed the content the production companies could turn it into revenue instead of spending money trying to shut them all down.

Especially as most of it has been on TV anyway and could have been recorded for free by anyone.

vincevincevince

12:58 am on Oct 22, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Dabrowski, you are right that they don't (didn't) host the content. The point I wanted to make there is that the high bandwidth costs which would have to be paid if it was hosted have been avoided, and that this same model could be used legitimately.

I've noticed a number of virtually exact mirrors of the site have appeared fulfilling just what was predicted - bring down one and a few will appear in its place.

The case raises issues of significant importance to U. K. webmasters in that if he is convicted then it would indicate that linking to illegal content is illegal in itself and that's a whole other can of worms. If a solid case can be built, I'd hope it ends in jury nullification.

Dabrowski

10:15 pm on Oct 22, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Bah!

We have to pay too much for TV as it is. Take the A1GP for example, it's on Sky Sports here which would mean I have to pay about 30 quid per month on top of my existing subscription to watch at most 3 races per month. That works out at £5 per hour of viewing.

But wait, here's the catch.....if there was no subscription TV in the UK, I could watch for free online.

So yet again, I'm subsidising poorer countries. I really wish I could switch sides sometimes.