“Rephrase quote, putting it in quotation marks (quoting yourself I guess?), instead of just explaining.’” <Don’t forget the apostrophe before the end quote.

You are an asshole. Please crawl back into your hole and learn to not be a total dick.

Excuse? What you try to saying?

It seems the BPI is too busy suing people to learn English.

That sentence makes no sense and should read ‘Talk Talk either seeks to misrepresent our position or just doesn’t get it.’Not that that statement makes anything clear…[/quote]

this bothered me too

“When Rory Cellan-Jones of the BBC went to see Charles Dunstone, CEO of Talk Talk owners Carphone Warehouse, he didn’t find a happy man. “They’ve sent us the most unbelievably rude letter” said Dunstone of the BPI.”

I though that sentence was talking about the Talk Talk CEO. The BPI guy said that the rude letter was sent to them?

This needs to be proofread.[/quote]

You must be from the US because you did not read it correctly. The sentence said:

“Speaking of the BPI, Dunstone said: ‘They’ve sent us the most believably rude letter.’”

It was Dunstone that said he’d received the rude letter from the BPI. The author of the article has written it at a level that you have yet to attain, so get back to school and learn the English language.[/quote]

Read my quote jackass. The author has since edited his. Nice try though.

Enjoy your strangled connection. 5KB/s anyone?

Este ISP, Talk Talk, el tercero en Inglaterra, ha decidido ponerse combativo tras recibir una carta "increíblemente grosera" de parte de la industria fonográfica británica, en la que se le ordenaba desconectar a todos los usuarios que comp…

[quote comment="330892"]“The BPI says that it doesn’t want Talk Talk to become the internet police, rather it wants the ISP to act on evidence it supplies about file-sharers.”

LOL yeah, because acting on evidence and enforcing laws isn’t what the police do, right? Talk about a contradictory statement…

BPI must attract the dumbest of the dumb employees. Usually this type of stupidity only comes from gov’t institutions.

The funny thing is, they are causing sales losses with dumb shit like this. The herd sees this type of aggressive corporate action against consumers and it’s the last time they ever spend a penny on product (me included.)

In short, fuck the recording industry, they’re a bunch of right-wing crackpot authoritarians, so don’t give them a fucking penny.[/quote]

Probz one o the reason they dont want to get into it… thier support Sux for “normal” usage !

Making a threat like “comply or face legal action” isn’t very intimidating when THEY CAN’T FUCKING MAKE AN ISP FACE ANY LEGAL ACTION FOR SAYING ‘NO’.

These little MAFIAA parasites have devoted so much of their fleeting brainpower to just sitting around and sucking their own cocks(figuratively, inbetween literally doing lines of blow), that they’ve long since taken permanent a vacation from reality.

Why doesn’t the BPI just announce that unless filesharing ends forever in the next 10 minutes, everybody on the entire fucking planet is gonna get sued for six trillion dollars, their first born child, and a kidney? Come on, Geoff Taylor… There’s no way it could make you look like any *more* of a clown. Go for it!

Not only that, but they additionally missed that you can refer to a company with both a singular and plural verb (“Talk Talk seeks…” or “Talk Talk seek…”). It depends on whether you wish to place the emphasis on the company as a whole or the individual members.

These record companies are so used to getting their way by bullying and threatening people, that when someone actually stands up to them, they don’t even know what to do.

Go talk talk! (but seriously, reconsider your throttling policy.)

It will smell realy nice after shipping..

However this is GREAT news, and about time that we have some British voice in a world the media likes us to think is controlle solely by out-of-reach european politicians and multinationals (and their puppet the BPI)

Well done Talk Talk. Now PLEASE stop the throttling!

anyway, yeah I hope the internet stays as free as it is now, any less freedom and it would immediately begin to suck. seems like it’s headed in that direction, too.

Excuse? What you try to saying?

It seems the BPI is too busy suing people to learn English.

That sentence makes no sense and should read ‘Talk Talk either seeks to misrepresent our position or just doesn’t get it.’Not that that statement makes anything clear…[/quote]

this bothered me too

“When Rory Cellan-Jones of the BBC went to see Charles Dunstone, CEO of Talk Talk owners Carphone Warehouse, he didn’t find a happy man. “They’ve sent us the most unbelievably rude letter” said Dunstone of the BPI.”

I though that sentence was talking about the Talk Talk CEO. The BPI guy said that the rude letter was sent to them?

This needs to be proofread.[/quote]

You must be from the US because you did not read it correctly. The sentence said:

“Speaking of the BPI, Dunstone said: ‘They’ve sent us the most believably rude letter.’”

It was Dunstone that said he’d received the rude letter from the BPI. The author of the article has written it at a level that you have yet to attain, so get back to school and learn the English language.

CPW: “Rather than threatening us, the BPI’s time would be better spent facing up to the reality of our times and adapting its business model accordingly.”
vs
BPI: “In fact, what we are looking for is a progressive partnership that will ultimately create new services for their customers.”

I’ve wondered for some time why the media companies haven’t struck deals directly with ISPs for content distribution. My thinking is media companies obviously have the content, and ISPs have the ultimate distribution network already up and running and the consumers. ISPs could distribute content directly to their subscribers and take a cut of the takings, with the rest filtering back to the media companies. Subscribers could be billed for content they consume directly through their already-established ISP billing accounts. Give the content compelling prices at least up until well established (and competitive services are still challenging, e.g: piracy), and don’t piss around with artificial release delays and biased regional distribution policies. If the ISPs have the potential to make decent money from a system like this then they’re going to be much more interested in fighting piracy. They could of course do the obvious and progressively hamper the competitive file-sharing protocols (as is often already done though with less incentive). They could do the obvious and exempt their own content services from traffic/bandwidth regulatory policy whilst retaining decent control of subscribers habits through use of global bandwidth caps. They might also be more inclined to work with government to enact more forceful regulations so they don’t risk being seen in subscriber’s eyes as the big bad ISP… risking loss to competing providers. Any ISP revealed to be taking anti-file-sharing initiatives these days gets fried pretty quick online. No company wants that unless all companies are bound by the same governing policies… cue government protocol…

That’s kind of my thinking anyway. It’s undoubtedly poor in many ways, laughable maybe, but I still don’t really understand why it seems nothing like this has ever come about? It seems to make some sense to me, more sense than what’s happening now anyway as it seems the media companies are just going to go down in a ball of flames if they don’t start acting more amicably.

[/bullshit] ?:)

I think clearly they are the one’s who don’t get it. They outright claim no no we aren’t trying to police the internet, we’re trying to “move forward together” with our telecom “friends” but yeah still, you better do what we say. Lol

Sounds like Davenport Lyons – I wonder if the BPI are pirating DL’s letters

I hope all the other ISPs follow suit and try to defend their customers. I love my current ISP, which is owned by o2, and they’d better have the guts and enough business savvy to do the same as this guy.

The BPI – British Phonographic Industry have asked ISP Internet Service Provider Talk Talk to act on information provided by them regarding customers of Talk Talk that are downloading illegal copyright material.
Under this agreement, Talk Talk would be…

INTERNET.. SERVICE.. PROVIDER..

can someone tell me where it says they do anything but provide internet?

Fucking morons.

But you have to expect the beast to make a few cries before it dies, its almost over people hang on.