Slashdot Mirror


Odeon Orders Takedown Of Copycat Site

Tuxedo Jack writes "The Register reports that Odeon Cinemas, a British theater chain, has ordered a takedown of a copycat version of its site that was made by a disability activist. The original didn't work outside of IE on Windows and was in violation of the Disability Discrimination Act; the activist-recoded one worked on everything. Odeon has flip-flopped on the issue, too; they liked it when it was first up, and now they don't."

20 of 478 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong priorities here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems like they'd be better off using this energy to make sure their site works on all browsers instead of coming down on someone who is doing a legitimate service...

    1. Re:Wrong priorities here... by josh3736 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I wish they would use their energy to produce a site that is actually navigable.

      I spent no less than 60 seconds staring at the intro screen trying to figgure out how to get in to the damn site.

      I hate intro screens.

      When I finally realized that clicking the ad wasn't actually clicking an ad, I was presented with a just-as-mysterious layout on the homepage.

    2. Re:Wrong priorities here... by mriker · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Seems like if he were out to help, he should have responded with a tutorial detailing what is wrong with their site, and how to fix it.
      You're kidding, right?
      And if he were job hunting, the protocol is to create a copycat site in a password protected directory and email company bigwigs the site/password, while saying "look what your site could be!".
      Like he says on his site, Odeon has refused to do anything about it for 2 years, when they very easily could have. I get the distinct impression that they couldn't give a flying fuck. That they're more interested in hunting after someone trying to provide a positive service that Odeon is unwilling to provide is unfathomable.
    3. Re:Wrong priorities here... by Tim+Browse · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Odeon site has annoyed me for years. I literally used to not go to Odeon cinemas because I couldn't find out what was on. Doesn't work outside IE? Doesn't work that well inside IE, if you want the truth.

      The Odeon website is one of the crappiest sites I've ever seen for such a high profile company. It's annoying, arrogant and just plain stupid.

      The Dracos version was bloody great - I could bookmark my local cinema (imagine that!) and easily see what films were on. It had scrollbars that (brace yourself!) acted like normal scrollbars! Can you bear it? Not like the Odeon site where they have the usual 'hover to scroll' Flash nonsense. (What is it with bloody Flash designers who feel they have to code a new slightly different scrollbar control on every freaking site?!)

      Now the accessible site is gone, I'm back to the braindead Odeon site.

      Bottom line? I'll go to their cinemas way less. It's too much hassle.

      Great business sense.

  2. So What...? by dan_sdot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is this a big deal? I read the 2 emails from Odeon and the one sent to them, and I don't see why Odeon is being outragous in asking them to take down the site.
    Sure, their site should work in other browsers, but that is not the issue.
    The issue is that some guy is tricking people into submitting info to his site instead of the Odeon site like they think that they are. Maybe he collects the data before he sends it to Odeon, maybe he doesn't like he says. I don't know him, and thats not even the issue.
    I can very well understand why a company does not want someone they don't know collecting their customers information in their name. What if they guy ends up getting caught selling all these names to spammers one day? Then Odeon would really look stupid for not taking action against the guy.

    1. Re:So What...? by tonyr60 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The issue is that some guy is tricking people into submitting info to his site instead of the Odeon site"

      How did he trick them? The url for his accessable site clearly was part of his own site. If someone was using his Odeon page it was because they had deliberately gone there because they wanted an accessable site. Likely some disabled (or enabled if they used Mozilla) wanted to book a movie seat, but could not until their friend or what ever said "try Matthew Somerville's site, it has an accessable copy of the Odeon site".

      If he had spoofed the address, or used a Microsoft "feature" to silently link to his site that would have been trickery.

  3. Welll by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    IANAL, but 'letting people browse a website easier' doesn't trump 'copyright law' where I live. He (Somerville) is using their (Odeon) IP without their permission (now).

    So, why is this a bad thing? Yes their site may suck, but violating Copyright is violating Copyright no matter how you slice it.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Welll by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree that you can't just use someone elses work because you want to, but there is another issue I am concerned with, this Disability Discrimination Act and how it is a violation to have a web site that isn't accessible to everyone.

      I see the logic in making your site as accessible to everyone, and much logic in forcing certain buildings to be accessible to those with disabilities, particularly Government buildings. But this "Act" would seem to make it illegal to make a site that is all flash, or accessible to Opera only, etc. It seems that it is in the webmaster's best interest to allow the widest audience to use the site, but I don't see how it is any government business how a private company codes its website. Frankly, its no one's business if I want to code my own site to be inaccessible to anyone I want. Even Microsoft won't let you update Windows automatically without IE, which is their right.

      This is a theatre chain, they should have the right to design their website as they see fit. Going online to view movie listings falls far short of the what any government should regulate. Should we pass a law that requires all websites (blogs, family home pages, theatres, slashdot, etc) to have every bit of text, including the html source, as audio, to make the site accessible to blind people?

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    2. Re:Welll by magefile · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most pages are accessible to the blind, or mostly so. Screenreaders do text-to-speech quite well - but they are browsers themselves, and thus, since this site was only accessible with IE, blocked from Odeon's site.

      Furthermore, while I'm not familiar with UK law, I am quite familiar with US disabled rights laws (IANAL; I am disabled). "Reasonable accomodations" is the test in the US, and I assume something similar is the test in the UK; a site like Odeon's could easily (reasonably) been written in a more cross-browser fashion that would have allowed screenreaders to access it. A flash-only site might be flash-only for a reason, thus making HTML-only not a reasonable accomodation, and thus not legally required.

  4. Bastards by Mr+Smidge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Odeon might get less of a grilling for us if they had ever actually bothered to do something to make their site work correctly.

    Apparently it doesn't even work correctly in MSIE most of the time, and I found the copycat site particularly useful in finding out times of films. I'd normally then book via phone.

    A message to Odeon: Fix the site, and maybe then you might have some reason to complain. But so far, since the copycat site:
    * Allows more people to look up film times.
    * Makes it easier for people to do the above.
    * Does not detract potential revenue away from Odeon itself. .. I can't think what they're smoking.

    Probably a bigwig who has no clue of the situation made this decision..

  5. Pull out the data! by Eeeeegon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why couldn't they parse the info pages (via an HTML ripper or something), pull out the information they want, and post that on their own site? No cloned pages, but the data's the same. And of course, the new pages would work in all browsers.

  6. Well-intentioned laws by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's the problem with these well-intentioned laws. When someone wants to flout them, the effort to correct the problem seems to be insurmountable. I'm sure there will be lawsuits and court orders and a whole bunch of people's productivity being sucked down a black hole (willingly or not), before this is said and done.

    The problem stems from the fact that in our society (modern Western democracies anyway), we are so buried in an avalanche of regulations that there is no way you can even be aware of them all, and when one that is particularly useful... such as a law requiring handicapped access, enforcement becomes infeasible because so much effort is being wasted to meet the utter explosion of bureaucratic requirements.

    We already work about half the year just to pay taxes, and when we can work for ourselves how big does the proportion of time we spend dealing with red tape have to be before people get fed up. We are being nickel-and-dimed into losing productivity. Meanwhile this Web site apparently ignores the law and it will probably be months or years before anything can be done about it because the people who could do something about it are too busy making sure that all government contractors are using 7/64" bevelled grommets instead of 3/32" bevelled grommets.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  7. Marketing? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The original site only allowed access to people using Internet Explorer and Windows and was in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act.

    Despite predictions when his site first went up that the lawyers' letters would arrive immediately Odeon Cinema initially welcomed the site - as did many disabled people who could access the site for the first time.

    But this all changed with the arrival of an email from Luke Vetere, marketing director at Odeon

    Brilliant marketing. Piss off and lock out a demographic. And there's nothing better to improve a company's image than screwing over disabled people and breaking the law. Odeon is really getting its money's worth hiring this moron.

  8. Slashdot by bdigit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When will /. be getting a well needed HTML upgrade to XHTML 1.0 or 1.1? And have it fully validate?! I mean for crying out loud someone on alistapart.com did an article and rewrote slashdot as a completely standard website.. see the article and read more about it here

    Look at the savings in bandwidth he calculated out.

    "Most Slashdot visitors would have the CSS file cached, so we could ballpark the daily savings at ~10 GB bandwidth. A high volume of bandwidth from an ISP could be anywhere from $1 - $5 cost per GB of transfer, but let's calculate it at $1 per GB for an entire year. For this example, the total savings for Slashdot would be: $3650! All of that for just a couple of KB."

  9. Re:Open and shut, IMO by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is incorrect. Companies do not need to enforce copyrights or patents, only trademarks.
    He didn't say that they were in danger of losing their copyrighted material, which is presumably what you're referring to. He said "Corporations must act this way to protect themselves," which is a more general statement, and can be true for copyright infringement as well.

    Furthermore, the e-mail to Somerville says,

    "Also, by using the registered trade marks "ODEON" and "ODEON Fanatical About Film" on your website, our customers have mistakenly thought that your website was either associated with or endorsed by Odeon."
    So there is a trademark issue here after all.
    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  10. Re:Open and shut, IMO by nacturation · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What he should do is instead change the site with nothing but an explanation telling people to complain to whatever authority controls the disabilities act. If Odeon is in violation, then what would a thousand phone calls to the "Disabilities Department" (or whatever it's called) do? Maybe get a big fine levied and a court order to make their site compatible within X weeks.

    Odeon wants to use the law? Fine. Use it right back.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  11. Plenty of mud for everyone! by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I agree that you can't just use someone elses work because you want to, but there is another issue I am concerned with, this Disability Discrimination Act and how it is a violation to have a web site that isn't accessible to everyone.

    Lots of people are spouting lots of FUD here. Of course the site should be assessable. But the Disabilities Act does not require anyone except government agencies and a few other select public service entities to have assessable web sites.

    And by the way, Slashdot and OSDN does not comply with the act either, so if there is going to be some mud slinging, by all means be fair about it!

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  12. Re:Yes, but... by dillon_rinker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Odeon would have no problem tweaking their site to save themselves the bad press

    You are demonstrably incorrect. They did NOT tweak their site to save themselves bad press. I'm used to people not reading the article, but have you read ANYTHING in this thread?

  13. Slashdot - Fairly On-Topic by MooseByte · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Seems unfair for the parent to be modded Offtopic.

    Plus he/she brings up a good point: For all the nitpicking that we all do about non-compliant websites, it seems reasonable that the premier website for nerdly matters should set the example and lead the way.

  14. Re:Open and shut, IMO by lazyl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do you figure they were misled? Did you even read the emails? As Somerville noted in his email, the information that people submitted to his website was simply passed directly to Odeon's website. So if submitters thought their data was going to Odeon's site, they were correct. I don't see how they were misled.

    Because they thought they were interacting directly with the Odeon site but they weren't. It doesn't matter if he just transparently passes the data, he's still misrepresenting his site.

    The problem is that Odeon has no control over what he does. If there is a problem with his site or he screws up the customer's data, then they will think it was Odeon's fault. Even if his intentions are good, and everything seems to work find right now, it is still a dangerous liability for the company. Absolutly they have to shut him down. Or force him to make it absolutly clear to his visitors that his site is not affiliated with Odeon.

    --
    Aw crap, ninjas!