clicked the link
no problem page displays im on demon this if the article correct shows how imposible it is to censor the net polititions take note esp. australia.
44 posts • joined 23 Apr 2007
I really cant see what the problem is with this. if someone is on the street they are in public therefore they cannot complain if some one takes there picture.perhaps better to complain on the number of CCTV spycams on our streets. The privacy people would do better complaining about Google / You Tube being forced to hand UK user details to a USA company (viacom) which is against the UKs Data protection act.
the spectrum covers much more than mobile phones look at the mess over TV in the UK changing from a system thats works to one that at best is flacky Digital TV and radio is not stable vision and audio break up ofcom have really made a c***e up by forcing people to change for change sake. mines the one with the transmitter in the pocket
Harmonic Harmony said.
Bandwidth of the transmitter (as a previous poster mentioned, turning the gain up to 11 which on FM means wider transmit spectrum)
and distorts to hell
everything you said i agree with surely the thing to do is to give a subband for low power 10watts should be enough unlicenced broadcasts like in the USA (theres is AM/MW) I would suggest 106 - 108
do we need HD I have a HD ready set the picture is quite good enough. as to greedy ofcom selling of broadcast spectrum to the highest mobile phone bidder really stinks. Digital is a step backwards I can see the transmitter from here still have it break up and i cant record one channel and watch another without buying another box crap. absolute c**P
if i buy something its mine il do what i want with it use it on any network if a phone. If I buy music il do what I want with it that includes sharing it if i wish either with friends or my radio shows (both over the air and internet).
It wont be long before you buy a TV but have to watch one channel all these restrictions are simply crap.
And how, exactly, do you decide which artists get what out of the ensuing glob of money?
What makes you think the right artist gets the money now most get pennies if anything from copyright most ends up in the labels pocket. with broadcasting the split is even more unfair with the major labels taking 80% of revenue. even if the station plays only indie labels so it dont matter as long as its paid. The above being a long term argument against the presant system.
1 Be dictated to as to what web site I visit. they have tryed to tell people what site is allowed even when at home.
2 Be told i cant have my Mobile phone (some try to get employees to leave them with security or not bring them to work in the first place.
3 be told well anything of a personal nature by an employer.
If they dont like it i see no point in working there.
BTW I now run my own business
James said "you offshore pirates can continue going about your business ". Not everyone lives in the USA just because we don't live their does not make us pirates. Though having said that I started in broadcasting many years ago. On a ship. So I guess it does. Strange to think now that the station that defied the British government is still on air the government that tried to stop it has long gone. think about it.
You don't seriously think this is about artists do you it is to stop Internet radio particularly the smaller stations. How can it be about artists when the major labels tie the artists down in contracts so they keep the copyright money that the artist should rightly receive. Where I do agree with you is that all forms of broadcasting is a promotional vehicle weather that is Radio or Streaming. What also escapes you is that if the RIAA get their way in America then they will start to force the same on the rest of the world.
As the BBC in the UK is paid for by a license charged to all who have a TV, It is in their charter that ALL services should be free and available to the citizens of the UK free of charge hence the argument with open source operating systems.
Some commercial tv companies ITV and Channel 4 are already public with their players but the ISPs have not said a word about them. I and many others will NOT pay extra to receive a BBC service.
either to the BBC or a third party. It is ours as a right granted by government, ISPs can get ready for several court actions if this goes ahead.
I cant see this working unless google has every film on its data base ever made and even some not yet released dont think the film comps would agree to that.
As too the league I still say if the film was taken from the stands then it is not INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT, Only if it is taken of the TV .The person who takes the film owns the copyright and the football league can stick it.
The Chinese government love their censorship. Even to the extent of jamming Voice of America and the BBC radio. whats this got to do with the internet you ask I run a 24/7 rolling news internet station we get loads of hits from China even though we talk about what they are trying to stop their people knowing like Taiwan for example.
VM 10 meters from our door cant get it. My wife is blind she has audio description don't know if VM supply it Sky Do. Freeview do. The new recently published throttling of bandwidth my wife is a computer programmer Myself a archaeologist we both spend hours on line researching for various projects. The measly amount allowed wouldn't last 5 minutes when we have a video conference. maybe even 2 separate conference going on at the same time in different rooms Work that out vermin sorry virgin. by the way virgin is described in some dictionaries as a female who is inexperienced so they have the right name.
the IrAA will charge for non members material and keep the money.
through their soundexchange personally i think that the record companies should pay the radio stations for the free plugs they have had over the years all copyright is theft to either the end user who hands are tied with DRM or the radio stations. They cant tell me that the artists receive the money paid as they pay it to record companies the artists are tied up with contracts that do not give the artist money bands make money from gigs not records they just get the band known and liked. and fleesed by the record companies
so you buy your ipod you put your finger print into it then you connect to your computer unknown to you your fingerprint is then sent to a government site stored on a data base then acessed by anyone with a internet connection. Brillant oh and yes MI5 call to arrest you for the MP3 you downloaded from a peer to peer site six years ago and you get questioned about an email you sent to your girlfriend who was touring the world and was in Iran at the time. I could go on but theres a knock at the door.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019