ReplayTV Users Sue Hollywood

Seth Schoen writes "A group of ReplayTV 4000 users, led by Craigslist creator Craig Newmark, today sued a group of entertainment companies to establish that plaintiffs' use of the ReplayTV (including skipping commercials) is not illegal. The defendants are the same entertainment companies which have sued ReplayTV. Here the end users of the product are getting involved to defend the legitimacy of their activity in the face of allegations that skipping commercials is "theft". The plaintiffs are represented by Ira Rothken and EFF. The case is Newmark v. Turner, in the Central District of California (at Los Angeles). (Some people are calling it Craig v. Hollywood.)"

Comments

Re:Better for me...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is said that every time a Tivo skips past a 1-800-CALL-ATT commercial starring Carrot Top, an angel gets its wings.

Re:What about snacks and VCRs?

[dasmegabyte]

I generally use that time to take a big dump. Maybe the RIAA should sue my colon. If I know ahead of time, I can have taco bell for lunch and guarantee a large settlement.

Theft?

[nochops]

Skipping the commercials is theft?

I guess if they can FORCE us to watch their commercials, then they don't have to be bothered with developing better, more captivating ways to get people to WANT to watch their commercials, and ultimately buy their products. Why don't they just skip the millions they spend in post-production of the commercials, and show a simple white background, with a huge black font, and static text like:

BUY CELINE DION CDS

for 30 seconds. I mean, if they can FORCE you to watch it, why spend all that extra dough trying to make WANT to watch it?

I can just hear it now:

"You veel vatch dees commercials, and LIKE THEM!"
"You veel go out and buy de Celine Dion CDs!"

I guess they're logic is: "We made a commercial, so if you don't like it enough to watch it, something must be wrong with you."

I thought the whole idea of advertising was to make the product look appealing, so that people want to buy it. If people dont want to watch your commercial, then something's wrong with the commercial, not the people watching it. That's why I like websites like adcritic.com. you can (could) go there and watch the really creative, entertaining, and captivating commercials.

Once and for all...

[GungaDan]

It's time-shifting, with an "f"

Your trolling powers are weak, old man.

[Lendrick]

By watching TV you are entering into a Hobbesian contract.

Excellent use of obscure terminology. The phrase Hobbesian contract makes you appear smart, because most readers don't know what a Hobbesian contract is. (Namely, an agreement to obey an authority as long as said authority does its duty.)

They agree to show a show, you agree to watch the commercials. It's a concept as old as the Magna Carta.

Citing historical documents. Excellent.

I can't wait until these self-delusional pirates are given the smackdown by a clueful judge.

Here's where you lose me. A skilled troll would have omitted this sentence, or at least softened the wording a bit. Referring to people who want to skip commercials (at last count, almost everyone) as "self-delusional pirates" is an obvious attempt at ruffling feathers.

One other note: you probably should have written a few paragraphs and explained your ridiculous opinion in more detail. It's far more effective to progressively piss people off than hit them with one insult four sentences into your post.

Final Grade: C

Keep at it. You'll get there eventually.

Re:Contract?

[jdavidb]

I wonder if I can get a clause in my contract that says I don't have to watch the ads for feminine hygiene products.