+- 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 - LODOS - 02-05-2012 20:21
(02-05-2012 20:19 )rj242 Wrote:(02-05-2012 20:13 )StanTheMan Wrote: Well, it may very well be all talk, but I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.
Define taking on - what exactly do they hope to achieve?
your not very positive are you??
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 02-05-2012 20:25
(02-05-2012 20:19 )rj242 Wrote:(02-05-2012 20:13 )StanTheMan Wrote: Well, it may very well be all talk, but I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.
Define taking on - what exactly do they hope to achieve?
I don't have the fainest idea, rj242. You'd have to ask them that.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - cmiller - 02-05-2012 20:36
(02-05-2012 20:15 )dan g 27 Wrote:(02-05-2012 20:13 )StanTheMan Wrote: I understand that at least one of the babe channels is taking on Ofcom.Which babechannel is it?
not a babechannel covered by this forum
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mr mystery - 02-05-2012 20:42
Ofcom knows that they will have to break us on this forum or loose the war . If we can stand up to them then all babe channel land will remain free to move forward into broad sunlit uplands . But if we fail then the whole world including the United states , including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new dark age made more sinister and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of Ofcom's perverted science . Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the UK babe channel forum lasts for a thousand years , men will say "This was their finest hour".
The above is a speech made by Winston Churchill , adapted slightly
It's a pity these day that more people don't have the enthusiasm to fight corrupt sinister control freaks like Hitler and Ofcom .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 02-05-2012 20:49
Stan no offensive mate, but is this claim fact or made up, I mean it would be great if this is infact true, now for open forum purposes fair enough if you wish the channel to remain nameless, that I'll understand, but do you have actual evidence that a challenge is currently taking place, Yes or No.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 02-05-2012 21:05
(02-05-2012 20:49 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Stan no offensive mate, but is this claim fact or made up, I mean it would be great if this is infact true, now for open forum purposes fair enough if you wish the channel to remain nameless, that I'll understand, but do you have actual evidence that a challenge is currently taking place, Yes or No.
Evidence? No, but it did come from the horse's mouth, so to speak. All I'll say is this, take it with some salt and don't get too excited.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 03-05-2012 00:17
(02-05-2012 18:50 )rj242 Wrote: 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.
News International and porn channels are not the same. NI or elements within it stand accused of a corporate conspiracy to break the law through systematic phone hacking funded by company expenses, or at least a conspiracy not to ask, misleading a police investigation and lying to Parliament.
Porn channels have not been accused of breaking any laws.
However I agree that taking Ofcom through the Courts is not an easy option, or quick, and loaded with risks for any channel that tries it. Its an area where a channel considering their options would be well advised to tax the brains of an experienced lawyer. Perferably a media lawyer.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - continental19 - 03-05-2012 12:38
(03-05-2012 00:17 )eccles Wrote:(02-05-2012 18:50 )rj242 Wrote: 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.
News International and porn channels are not the same. NI or elements within it stand accused of a corporate conspiracy to break the law through systematic phone hacking funded by company expenses, or at least a conspiracy not to ask, misleading a police investigation and lying to Parliament.
Porn channels have not been accused of breaking any laws.
However I agree that taking Ofcom through the Courts is not an easy option, or quick, and loaded with risks for any channel that tries it. Its an area where a channel considering their options would be well advised to tax the brains of an experienced lawyer. Perferably a media lawyer.
A very good point you've raised there, however I agree with you that dragging Ofcom through the law courts will be extremely costly and very risky to say the least. That's why for me the best way to try and get what you want to some degree, is trying to get a foreign license.
Now I don't no how difficult it is to apply for one, but I feel if Babestation can do it, and in some way defeat ofcom then why don't the other channels try for one.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 06-05-2012 21:58
It's quite fucking sad we have our first ever European babe channel in the name of eurotic tv which has now decided to broadcast the first hour of their nightshow yet in order to do this they have to conform to Ofcom rules because unlike our European cousins we're not mature or grown up enough to see the vagina which will also effect the Astra/Hotbird Show, the only positive thing to come away from this madness is that more than us will now be pissed off with Ofcom to force their hand out of this OTT censorship
[split] Ofcom Complain To Dutch Regulator - cmiller - 06-05-2012 22:09
(06-05-2012 21:39 )StanTheMan Wrote: How about we invent loads of different Ofcom breaches that we know didn't happen? Ofcom will have no choice but to check on them - thus we will both be wasting their time and killing what little credibility they have left
that is a fucking superb idea!! we should do that! the petition has 650 signatures. if we make 30(?) complaints a week to keep them busy?
what is the process? if we rotate the complainants so everyone makes one complaint a month, this could work.
we need to get eccles on board asap. he knows his shit!