BT (UK) to cut off 4,000 heavy users

Calibos

zuma wrote:

If you like downloading the MPEG2 version suitable for DVD players :eek: !

"I have heard" that HDTV versions of Lost are encoded using Xvid and come in at 350MB an episode.....a friend of a friend of a friend of a second cousins friend told me that:cool: .

A friend told me that they are recordings of a HDTV broadcast but have been scaled down to SD resolutions, thus the smaller file sizes. The friend told me that even though they have been scaled down the quality is great and one should always download these in preferance to the same episode recorded from a SD source. The friend told me that BattleStar Galactica is not shown in HDTV in the states and thus all BSG rips are recorded from an SD source. He says the picture is much softer and blurrier than the HDTV rips like Lost even though the actual resolution of the resulting XVid files is the same SD res.

The friend watches these on a 8 foot screen via his HD projector which would be as unforgiving as they come with regard to PQ, ie compression artifacts/ low res of these files etc would be easier to see. The firend says however that he is amazed by the PQ of these 'Low' Downscaled res, high compression 350mb Xvid HDTV rips on his big screen. He says that to his eyes they look almost DVD quality. ie somewhere between a very very good live showing of one of these eps on Digital TV (NTL) and an actual dvd boxset version of the same ep.

The friend does not feel too concerned with the legalities because he merely uses the internet to watch these episodes early and always buys the dvd boxsets when they finally go on sale over here, A fact he could prove if it ever went to court which I am sure would ensure leniency by the authorities assuming also that he promised never to do it again..........but what are the chances that it would ever happen.

Tech Pete

Fionn^ wrote:

This point is very well thought out and made. Very similar to eircoms attitude and one of the main reasons our broadband network is so far behind the rest of Europe.

I totally agree. Its **** that we are so far behind!
But sadly those are the only answers to your questions.

No company is just going to up the cap unless they are in dire need of customers and appeal to that market. Clearly the home packages arent aimed at heavy users and these are the only options left. Im a heavy user and a gamer and hence why i went with NTL even though its more expensive.

oscarBravo

slave1 wrote:

whilst there is a difference, both are illegal

Timeshifting is illegal? Can you cite either legislation or case law to support this?

slave1

The friend watches these on a 8 foot screen via his HD projector which would be as unforgiving as they come with regard to PQ, ie compression artifacts/ low res of these files etc would be easier to see. The firend says however that he is amazed by the PQ of these 'Low' Downscaled res, high compression 350mb Xvid HDTV rips on his big screen. He says that to his eyes they look almost DVD quality

All true, I watch 350mg xvid hdtv rips on my 44" screen - via RGB Scart out from the PC - and they are better than TV reception, so clear.

I like your explanation of BSG, I was wondering why the picture was so "soft"

kippy

A few points here:
slave1,
Your rant above falls a bit short of what is relevant here however you did bring up some good points.
The topic is related to a number of users getting cut off in the UK because of consistant abuse of the limited cap on their BB.
We are pointing out that in most cases 30 gig a month is MORE THAN enough for most users and those who break it at this moment in time (Good point by the person above mentioning about the imminent legal availability of movies and TV shows etc) may be doing so with illegal downloads of movies, shows etc etc.
You are saying that we should live and let live and compare downloading movies/ TV programmes ilegally with taping stuff of the TV illegally (although widely accepted as you point out)
In the context of this thread your point does not stand up. When you tape off the TV you do not cause someone elses TV "Connection" to run slower nor to you use any of the available "bandwidth". When however you download a movie etc from the net you do use bandwidth and also if you consistantly do it, degrade Qos for users- if you are paying for an extra bigger cap then this should be of no worry to you since you are paying extra for the service.
It's also still not "Easy" to break the 30 gig cap for the majority of users. It would cost you quite a bit to break it legally and as such you should probably be able to aford an uncapped connection.

The bottom line here is that those users in the UK consistantly broke the CAP which was outlined in the terms and conditions of their contract with BT. BT has the right to cut them off-this is also the case with most if not all terms and conditions of BB contracts here in ireland.

As for the argument that we are way behind the rest of the EU.
Well we are-and for the moment we have to live with it.
If you want to be downloading gigs and gigs of data per month then pay the extra if not accept the caps that are there with the packages available at the moment and tailor your downloads to suit.
CAPS are there to keep it fair for everyone, we'd ll like a five bed house in a great location but not all of us can afford one so we make do with what we can afford.
Some day prices may crash, and we will be able to afford one then but for the moment we make do with what we have.

slave1

I get your points kippy, so maybe to provide some extra context to my post...

folk assume you can only exceed your limit by illegal downloading

folk make illegal steps - e.g. lending a film to a friend, taping a copyright broadcast off the TV, recording a record in times past - without thinking twice, yet cast stones at those doing a "similar" event using the net

my reference to live and let live, was to to put the arguement into the context of living with each other, whilst something to discuss/debate, we're not talking life or death

My post was in essence two fold.

Come to the argument with clean hands
Stop making every thread about illegal downloading

The thread itself digressed from the original spirit and it's bugging to see people bitching about illegal downloading which pulls most threads these days off the topic, ironically I fueled the digression

kippy

Slave1,
Yes, I see what you are saying.
However as I pointed out there is a difference in downloading material (whether legal or not) and recording/swapping/ dvd's videos etc......
While both illegal (none moreso than the other)-DOWNLOADING effects more people who also use the same internet connection-they are paying the same money as the downloader and should not expect to get a poorer service because some people download illegal material-hence the need for CAPS
I agree with your point about folk assuming that the only way to break a 30 meg cap is by downloading illegal materials. Many fold do assume this-myself included.
And to be honest I think that if a person is breaking a 30 gig cap by 20 gig or more each month CONSISTANTLY then they are more than likely breaking some law with the materials that they are downloading. (most people that is)This would obviously not be the case in most situations however it would be interesting to see the figures of the 4000 people who BT are cutting off.....of course we will never see these but it would be interesting.
Indeed we are not talking live of death - (in regards breaking the law-which is not the issue here as you rightly point out)
What we are talking about is:

The bottom line here is that those users in the UK consistantly broke the CAP which was outlined in the terms and conditions of their contract with BT. BT has the right to cut them off-this is also the case with most if not all terms and conditions of BB contracts here in ireland.

and as such I dont think there is too much else left to discuss as its pretty clear cut.

oscarBravo

slave1 wrote:

folk make illegal steps - e.g. lending a film to a friend,

Whoah. Lending a DVD is illegal now?

slave1 wrote:

...taping a copyright broadcast off the TV...

You haven't backed this up yet. If timeshifting is illegal, what legal purpose does a VCR serve?

grumpytrousers

OscarBravo wrote:

If timeshifting is illegal, what legal purpose does a VCR serve?

(most of this OT..sorry) Playback of commercially available videotapes innit.

Your're dead right OB...and I was saying this over on Legal Discussion that there were cases in the early 80's between the telly stations and the VCR makers (JVC, I think, mainly) about the whole nature of this, and I think the idea is that (and this test was forumalated in a more innocent age!) say if you had needlework classes on a monday night and would miss Lost, there's nothing wrong with you taping it to watch it later. The notion would be that you are effecively still 'in sync' with the rest of the plebs, and you're staying within the terms of agreement/license that the copyright holder has with the broadcaster.

Anyway - short answer, if 'timeshifting' was illegal, sky plus wouldn't exist, now would it!

oscarBravo

grumpytrousers wrote:

Playback of commercially available videotapes innit.

A recording head wouldn't be required for that.

grumpytrousers wrote:

Anyway - short answer, if 'timeshifting' was illegal, sky plus wouldn't exist, now would it!

Zing!