Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Re: ABC News Now

 channel free to anyone. :)
They didn't actually offer it free to anyone. I think this is a
back-door access to what is actually a premium service. Let's hope
they don't catch on.
Joe from Massachusetts

 they don't catch on.
You may be right.
 
The link I provided is from 
lyngsat.com
, a web site listing
international TV stations, including net TV channels, so it looked as
something legal and publically available. Sorry for posting it in case
it isn't.
Besides, the piece of news about "ABC News started offering its online
24-hour free to anyone willing to sit through a few ads", starting
january 19th, while in the past "users have been required to pay
either $39.95 for an annual subscription or $4.95 for a month",  is
reported on a number of web sites, e.g.
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&art_aid=38710
But then, right you are, on the ABC News web site users are still
required to subscribe and pay a fee!   
That's why I later canceled that post of mine, but it was too late!
Anyway, a rather interesting net-TV that is definitely for free is
Pentagon Channel Live: 
http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/
"The Pentagon Channel broadcasts military news and information for the
2.6 million members of the U.S. Armed Forces."
 

 january
...January!


I don't think it is illegal to use any link which is accessible
without hacking, as this one is. It may be that AOL allows
its subscribers access to the ABC service, but AOL has
failed to make the access from AOL to ABC secure.
Joe from Massachusetts

 without hacking, 
In America, maybe.
In China and in Italy I'm afraid it could be illegal:
http://misticanza.moduli.it/2006/02/02/censura-in-italia-come-in-cina/
Peltio
from the third world.
-- 
Invalid address in reply-to. Crafty demunging required to mail me.
(Hint: use peltio at despammed dot com)

> 
http://misticanza.moduli.it/2006/02/02/censura-in-italia-come-in-cina/
More on this here
http://punto-informatico.it/p.asp?i=57600&r=PI
http://www.popposoft.it/2006/01/30/litalia-come-la-cina-parte-seconda/
Ma quello che importa sapere agli italiani è "chi è il travestito nella 
casa del Grande Fratello?".
saluti,
Peltio
sempre più disgustato da questo paese da strapazzo.
(La p minuscola non è un refuso).



I don't think it's the same thing. If a football game is transmitted
on pay-per-view, or over the internet via a subscription service, but
there is a technical glitch, and the game is available to anyone who
goes to a certain url which the broadcaster has failed to secure,
there is no crime in watching it.
This occasionally happens on pay-per-view TV, when computers fail, and
rather than deprive paying customers of the service they have paid
for, the encryption is removed from the pay-per-view broadcast.
But if the game is received by an authorized subscriber, and then
retransmitted via another medium (which is apparently what the
Chinese were doing), with the express purpose of avoiding the fees,
this would be a crime for the person who puts the stolen broadcast on
the internet. I don't think there is any mention of a crime on the
part of anyone who watches the illegal Chinese broadcast.
During the upcoming Olympic Games, the American NBC networks will
carry 416 hours of coverage on "free" TV for viewers in the US. (RAI
will only be carrying 244 hours). NBC paid $1.5 billion for the rights
to the Olympics, so the other networks in the US will not be able to
show any Olympic events, but they may be able to "buy" some highlights
for their news broadcasts from NBC. NBC will make up the cost by
selling commercial time on their networks, and will probably still
make a profit. If any other US network were to retransmit any of the
NBC coverage, they would be committing a crime. I'm sure the Chinese
will be doing just that.
Joe from Massachusetts

 I don't think it's the same thing.
In my opinion it's worse.
    "due siti sono stati chiusi dalla Guardia di Finanza [...] non si 
capisce su quali basi, visto che si limitavano a fornire i link."
    "Questi siti sono stati oscurati dalla magistratura italiana, a 
seguito di una denuncia di Sky, perché spiegavano come vedere le 
partite a sbafo. Ma la cosa veramente preoccupante è la richiesta 
avanzata ai provider italiani di bloccare il traffico internet verso la 
Cina."
    "secondo tutti i giornali, la Guardia di Finanza avrebbe ora 
ottenuto da tutti i maggiori provider italiani che gli indirizzi IP 
delle suddette emittenti cinesi vengano resi irraggiungibili ai clienti 
mediante filtri sui router."
They want to block the access to a whole portion of the net only 
because they are afraid someone could *read the instructions* on how to 
steal their stupid soccer matches.
Fock them matches! (I recently saw a Robin Williams sketch about 
Scottish pronounciation : ))) )
Why should I (and every Italian as well) be deprived from a part of the 
Net - a part that could contain  my favourite chinese course, for 
example - when I don't give a damn about twentytwo decerebrated 
millionaires kicking a ball for 90 minutes?
Can a tv broadcaster decide what I can and cannot see on the Net?
I fear that with TCPA this sort of censorship will be automatic and 
fully transparent to users. More or less like it is now in the 
traditional media (I haven't seen this news reported in any newspaper, 
radio or TV broadcasting)
cheers,
Peltio



The people who watched the matches were not penalized, only those who
facilitated the transmission. The ABC news is available probably
because of a technical error on the part of AOL or ABC, or because
they have not yet figured out a way to make AOL subscribers get the
ABC news without paying an extra fee, and are hoping we won't notice
their back-door fix. It would not be illegal to take advantage of it.
The question of shutting down web sites is another kettle of fish.
Joe from Massachusetts