PC World promotes internet movie downloads

With all the rules, regulations and laws that try to prevent or stop illegal downloads of movies from the internet why does this company, PC world, decide to make an advert to show that they can give you all you need to watch your downloaded movies from your computer on you TV.

You can clearly hear this guy say that he downloads loads of movies onto his computer..
Check it out...

www.visit4info.com...

Should be as he is in the aircraft as a pilot.. .

If they are serious about stopping internet piracy, then why do they give us the tools to do it.. why do they advertise that you can do it..

it seems they want us to get caught, after they have made a profit from you that is.

Um, there are LEGAL ways to watch movies from your PC. Netflix is actually pretty good for this, as is Hulu. There are also sites that will give you DRM'ed & time-bombed copies for which you pay a fee - like a video rental.

I don't see any implication of piracy in the article/video.

[edit spelling]

[edit on 28-5-2009 by an0maly33]

AND, the future is coming. And it's going to be this hybrid of computer and TV. I'll bet on it. Cable, internet, phone, etc, all the same. I've been saying it for years and I see it coming close.

reply to post by an0maly33


He says that he downloads lots of movies to his pc. He does not say how.
It leaves it open to interpretation.. anyone who has any knowledge of downloading movies illegally will also be targeted as a potential customer in this advert. PC world could be held complicit to promoting illegal activity.

The comment does not single out those who download legally.

Right, but would you suggest stifling innovation just because there are people that pirate movies?

reply to post by an0maly33


I'm trying to show the hypocrisy of it all. It was the same with VHS tapes/recorders. Even radio stations talk over the start and end of tracks to stop people recording them from the broadcast.

They give us the ability to use the latest technology, nothing wrong in that.
They create new gadgets to enhance the previous tech, nothing wrong in that.

But the moment we wake up and realise that we can do so many other things with this gear they sell to us, they try to stop us using the equipment to its maximum abilities for any reason they can think of. If we do not go through the proper channels, then they slap fines on us and /or send us to prison.

Again, the fact remains that they are promoting downloading movies, they do not define between legal or illegal.

It is not the tech that is the problem. It is the restrictions placed upon us as to what we do with this tech, how we use it.
If I buy a DVD recorder, you can bet your butt I'm going to record DVD's. Whether that is legal or not is down to interpretation.
What's the difference between recording a film from the TV and watching it on my tv at a later date or downloading a movie from the internet and watching that at a later date. Which action is piracy?

The Draconian copyright police are pathetic, bottom feeding leeches.

They're trying to fine the PirateBay for every day they are still live since the BS court case finding them guilty, but a judge dismissed the prosecution.

Torrent TV is the way forward, especially with Flash widgets for streamed content on your super sexy 60'' HD plasma TV.

PC World don't give two hoots whether they are condoning torrents or 'streamed content' as they put it, to avoid complicity.

I have no moral objection to downloading 'illegal' torrents; their (record labels et al) biz model is long dead and they should offer their products for free and charge nominal fees for content within that framework.

p.s. you can't view Hulu in the UK!!! Nothing a proxy won't sort out

reply to post by Extralien


It's all about copyright and the enforcement of laws - it has nothing to do with trying to trick people into breaking the law. I don't defend the idea of ruining a family financially because someone downloaded some mp3's or a movie, I'm just saying that's how it is.

The DVD recorders you mentioned actually prevent recording from a protected source - another pre-recorded DVD or VHS for example. One could argue that actually protects you from yourself in a sense so that you don't accidentally (or intentionally) break the law.

So let's get down to the meat of this - It's not about the technology. It's really all about the RIAA and MPAA's draconian mafia-style enforcement of their copyrights. They make it very clear that you do not "own" the content that comes on a CD or DVD (or through other legal sources). You purchased the right to hear/view that material. If they want to see it that way, fine.

I bought the first 6 Star Trek movies on VHS - boxed set. I've purchased my right to view that material anytime I please and the medium it happens to be on is VHS. Is it illegal for me to copy my friend's DVD versions?

I want to buy blu-ray movies so that when I finally do give in and buy a player, I'll have movies to watch on it. Is it illegal for me to buy the blu-ray version then copy the DVD version so that I can watch them in the mean time?

The argument could go both ways. Legally I'll bet it's a gray area - I at least have seen no case that addresses this. In a situation like that, I'll submit that it's up to interpretation. But, if you've not legally obtained the right to view the material then it's "piracy" by law. However I do feel the punishment is almost always unjustifiably harsh and only serves to line the pockets of people that rule the industry, not those that create the content.

Last December, the music industry's message to song writers, publishers, and musicians was that antipiracy help was on the way. Hopes soared after the major labels announced that they had convinced a group of telecoms to work with them.

Filing lawsuits against individuals accused of illegal file sharing was, for the most part, a thing of the past, said the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group representing the top music companies. The new strategy was to enlist Internet service providers, the gatekeepers of the Web, to issue a series of warnings meant to increase pressure on alleged pirates in what the RIAA called a "graduated response." Under the plan, those subscribers who refused to heed warnings could eventually see their Web connection suspended.

Six months later, the music industry is still waiting to hear from the RIAA which ISPs have explicitly agreed to work with the association. When the RIAA first announced its new antipiracy project, it didn't name partners. Behind the scenes, industry insiders assured the media that the group would disclose the names of partner ISPs "within weeks." Six months later, however, not one ISP has publicly acknowledged working with the RIAA on a "graduated response."

news.cnet.com...

December 19, 2008 5:01 AM PST
RIAA drops lawsuits; ISPs to battle file sharing

How successful were the RIAA's lawsuits in stemming music piracy?
Alienated consumers and hurt legit music sales 82.5%
Didn't make much difference 16.0%
Very successful - a win for the music industry 1.6%
Total votes: 7578

news.cnet.com...

Well, maybe it is the electronics industry that holds more power over the ISP's than any court of law or any form of legal system.
Those who do end up in front of a judge were just unlucky they were targeted.

Certain web sites, one of which has been in the news recently, was another 'example' that the legal system was using to try to show it had some power left.. funny really because that particular web site is still up and running.

This can only point towards the the manufacturers of all the electronics equipment we need to play back any form of media, be it an MP3 player or blue ray device, that are doing their best to ensure that illegal file sharing is continued as it promotes their sales far further than enforcing everyone to buy media from a shop.