set top boxes

That is not card sharing and they were probably sharing DSTV so that is a valid reason to go after them. If one was selling DSTV on the boxes I would say hold your hands up. That is more the case if you are daft enough to sell it in your own back yard.
What is the difference if you put up a 5 meter dish and got them all clear to air ??? or used a sling box
 
The BBC couldn't be bothered to close any of these UK firms down where the servers are- bbc knows where they are but does nothing
 
How can one take this seriously! they seem to want to smash a walnut with a
Sledgehammer
 
So they have the rights to show BBC, ITV well they should produce that as evidence for us to examine prior to the court hearing. That will then put the BBC in the **** and ITV and all the others. I would love to see it as it's evidence they should give it to the solicitor as proof.
 
BBC might be tightening up. You now have to reply Y or N if you have a TV license. At this stage everything's done on trust but they're talking about putting further checks in place.
 
Watching Pirate Streams Isn’t Illegal, EU Commission Argues

NEWS
This week the European Court of Justice heard a crucial case that will give more clarity on the infringing nature of unauthorized streaming. Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN and the Spanish authorities argued that offering or watching pirate streams is a violation of the EU Copyright Directive. However, the European Commission believes that consumers who watch unauthorized streams are not breaking the law.
Online streaming continues to gain in popularity, both from authorized and pirate sources.
Unlike traditional forms of downloading, however, in many countries the legality of viewing unauthorized streams remains unclear.
In the European Union this may change in the near future. This week the European Court of Justice held a hearing during which it reviewed several questions related to pirate streaming.
The questions were raised in a case between Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN and the Filmspeler.nl store, which sells “piracy configured” media players. While these devices don’t ‘host’ any infringing content, they ship with add-ons that make it very easy to watch infringing content.
The Dutch District Court previously referred the case to the EU Court of Justice, where several questions were discussed in a hearing this week. In addition to BREIN and Filmspeler, the European commission and Spain weighed in on the issue as well.
The first main question that the Court will try to answer is rather specific. It asks whether selling pre-programmed media-players with links to pirate sources, through add-ons for example, are permitted.
Not surprisingly, Filmspeler.nl believes that it should be allowed. They argued that there is no communication to the public or a crucial intervention from their side, since these pirate add-ons are already publicly available.
The European Commission doesn’t classify selling pre-loaded boxes as infringing either, and notes that rightholders have other options to go after intermediaries, such as blocking requests.
BREIN, which covered the hearing in detail, countered this argument noting that Filmspeler willingly provides access to illegal content for profit. Spain sided with BREIN and argued that willingly including pirate plugins should not be allowed.
The second question is more crucial for the general public as it asks whether it is illegal for consumers to stream pirated content from websites or services.
“Is it lawful under EU law to temporarily reproduce content through streaming if the content originates from a third-party website where it’s made available without permission?”
Spain argued that streaming pirated content should not be allowed in any way. BREIN agreed with this position and argued that streaming should be on par with unauthorized downloading since a temporary copy of the infringing file is made, which is illegal under EU case law.
Interestingly, the European Commission doesn’t believe that consumers who watch pirate streams are infringing. From the user’s perspective they equate streaming to watching, which is legitimate.
Based on the hearing the Advocate General will issue a recommendation later this year, which will be followed by a final verdict from the EU Court of Justice somewhere early 2017.
 
Do you think Multichoice should produce the following in court

1. The rights for the UK channels to be shown in SA
2. The details regarding their company (Takealot connection- South Africa's Largest Ecommerce Site, During the February 2015 merger, Naspers acquired 46.5% interest in Takealot.com (Takealot Online).) who imported them
3. How many were sold and how many were imported
I have emails confirming everything and
News on which date will they be prosecuting their own company (Naspers owns 47% of Takealot)

Yes I think common sense should prevail
 
Maybe the MC hammer should spend more time going after the big guns like Apple iTunes Store

Free sports Yay


13e4e67cb2e2fac734ca985e8b047a80.jpg
aff8b639046a23aa6d35205279ab09b0.jpg
6a9407864a6a62bc9664d901ace52496.jpg

c6f7258cbe6d5f195e9b563268da8c08.jpg
afa0a987f1eab80ebcfabbe44e8d7caf.jpg

eb7da045b57c0dc8d3d306d421ec0d90.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X