+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Broadcasting Regulations (/forumdisplay.php?fid=138)
+---- Thread: Ofcom Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=14756)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 02-05-2012 00:28
(30-04-2012 23:00 )shan_123 Wrote: Why not everyone chip in and help fund a legal case against ofcom lol? It's clear from what's said above that people can dig up evidence which can help challenge ofcom
Great idea Shan but the legal system is stacked against this. Anyone who chips in become liable for a fraction of ALL legal costs includuing appeals, and those can become a game of high stakes poker. Suppose 100 people chip in £100 to fund a £10,000 Crown Court case (supposing thats the right level). Ofcom appeals and takes it to the High Court. Costs are £100,000 for each side, £200,000 each, and original donors are told they are liable for £2,000 each. Ofcom lose, they appeal to the Supreme Court, no idea what that costs but lets say £400,000. Donors are then told they are liable for another £4,000 each. Thats £6,100 tied up waiting for the legal outcome and it could be 2-3 years before a decision is reached. If the other side lose and appeal you cant even pull out.
Thats one reason why the system is stacked in Ofcoms favour. In many other areas there is a low cost Tribunal system.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - shan_123 - 02-05-2012 08:33
(02-05-2012 00:28 )eccles Wrote: Great idea Shan but the legal system is stacked against this. Anyone who chips in become liable for a fraction of ALL legal costs includuing appeals, and those can become a game of high stakes poker. Suppose 100 people chip in £100 to fund a £10,000 Crown Court case (supposing thats the right level). Ofcom appeals and takes it to the High Court. Costs are £100,000 for each side, £200,000 each, and original donors are told they are liable for £2,000 each. Ofcom lose, they appeal to the Supreme Court, no idea what that costs but lets say £400,000. Donors are then told they are liable for another £4,000 each. Thats £6,100 tied up waiting for the legal outcome and it could be 2-3 years before a decision is reached. If the other side lose and appeal you cant even pull out.
Thats one reason why the system is stacked in Ofcoms favour. In many other areas there is a low cost Tribunal system.
Lol wow didn't know all that legal shit
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 02-05-2012 18:20
I'm really becoming exasperated with the Ofcom and Babe Channel's situation still dragging on for god knows how many years, the reason I posted the Ofcom video was to show the level of hypocrisy on Ofcom's part, I think we've all discussed all possible solutions until we're blue in the face. What is being shown on the channels these days would barely pass off as 15+ nevermind 18+ material.
Just how the hell did we ever end up in this situation in the first place, maybe the root of the problem was when because back in 2007 when Ofcom revoked the licence of Babestar TV that not enough fight was given by the channel to have the decision repealed aswell as the lack of support given to it by the rest of the channels, the rot had now set in. The same scenario happened when Bangbabes TV also had their licence revoked, the rest of the channels just looked on and more or less said good ridence to them, that's another of our rival channels bitten the dust so more calls coming our way I think.
From day 1 the channels have deliberately been run by selfish individuals not giving a damn about their rivals and some have even ratted each other out to Ofcom with the attitude, so long as I'm fine who gives a fuck. What happens to Elite for example will also happen to RLC and then Storm etc. It has a dominoe effect, just because your channel isn't the one being targeted at present by Ofcom doesn't mean the same won't happen to you tommorow.
A pact should be set up with all the channels, if you fall we'll back you up and you'll do likewise when the shit hits the fan with us. A unanimous we'll stand up together as one union should be implemented as the mentality. That way Ofcom will have a real fight on their hand's.
All the channels have to call a truce on the constant rivalry that current exisists for the greater good of the bigger cause instead of fucking each other over all the time.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - cmiller - 02-05-2012 18:32
you're using paragraphs now!!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - rj242 - 02-05-2012 18:50
The channels are run by individuals who want to make money. They are very realistic about what can and cannot be achieved unlike some forum members. Its all very well for someone on the sidelines to say "Risk your money and business - I'll be over here cheering you on" and its another matter entirely for the cheerleader to risk his money. I wonder how many of you would be so determined to challenge Ofcom if you had anything to lose in the matter.
Ofcom are being asked to rule on whether Rupert Murdoch/Sky are fit to hold a broadcast licence - do you seriously believe a few minor babechannels can do what Rupert Murdoch can't? This delusional fantasy, that by banding together the channels can force Ofcom to allow more explicit content is just that - a fantasy. Ofcom set the rules and you either abide by them or you don't play.
The constant whining about how bad the channels are and how they should challenge Ofcom is so utterly pointless. Things are not going to change and either you accept that and enjoy the channels for what they are or you find something else to do with your time and money. It's not like you don't have options - web porn, camera shows or even hookers. Life is too short to spend time doing something you don't enjoy.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 02-05-2012 19:26
Hmm..........One might question whether you've been drinking or not, we all have an option, I'm assuming you haven't been watching the news then recenty, the government is currently getting pressure added on to ban porn and make the customer opt it to it. Fucking great, I don't think so
As for the point on get yourself a hooker instead, eh..........I think you'll find that prostition is illegal. So you say we are all whining about nothing, will you be of the same opinion if the censorship does indeed hit another level
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mrmann - 02-05-2012 19:36
(02-05-2012 19:26 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Hmm..........One might question whether you've been drinking or not, we all have an option, I'm assuming you haven't been watching the news then recenty, the government is currently getting pressure added on to ban porn and make the customer opt it to it. Fucking great, I don't think so
As for the point on get yourself a hooker instead, eh..........I think you'll find that prostition is illegal. So you say we are all whining about nothing, will you be of the same opinion if the censorship does indeed hit another level
Well you both are right, and both are wrong
There IS a way around the censorship, though whether or not it's practical is another question.
As for hookers, well maybe not street walkers, but an escort shouldn't get you busted
RE: Ofcom Discussion - cmiller - 02-05-2012 19:57
(02-05-2012 18:50 )rj242 Wrote: The constant whining about how bad the channels are and how they should challenge Ofcom is so utterly pointless. Things are not going to change and either you accept that and enjoy the channels for what they are or you find something else to do with your time and money. It's not like you don't have options - web porn, camera shows or even hookers. Life is too short to spend time doing something you don't enjoy.
why read a thread that is so "utterly pointless"? people aren't going to stop posting on this thread, no matter what you say. practice what you preach, mate
RE: Ofcom Discussion - rj242 - 02-05-2012 19:58
Out of interest who on this forum would be prepared to risk their money and their business to 'stand up to Ofcom'? Its one thing to demand that someone else risks it all but quite another to risk it all yourself.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - rj242 - 02-05-2012 20:03
(02-05-2012 19:57 )cmiller Wrote: why read a thread that is so "utterly pointless"? people aren't going to stop posting on this thread, no matter what you say. practice what you preach, mate
But I am! Honestly this thread amuses me. Some people simply refuse to stare facts in the face.