BPI Demands Removal Of Ads

[GhostShip]

This seems to be a new attempt to choke the sources of revenue to sites distributing or carrying p2p related content.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1590754,00.html

The British record industry has urged Napster and Apple's iTunes to stop advertising on illegal music download sites, a practice that has also seen brands such as Sky and Barclays appear on pirate internet services.
Napster and iTunes, which offer legal music download services, have placed banner ads on sites that allow members to illegally share music, film and TV shows. Sky, O2, BT Broadband, Easymobile, msn Messenger and Barclays also use these networks to promote their services.

The BPI described advertising legal music download services on sites that promote illegal file-sharing as a "sick joke".
Steve Redmond, BPI director of communications, said: "We deplore the unauthorised distribution of music on internet sites which prosper by selling advertising on the back of copyright theft. It is hugely ironic that iTunes and Napster, two companies which have done so much to encourage legal downloading, have been caught up in these sites. We urge all companies to be vigilant and put systems in place to ensure they do not advertise on such sites, even unwittingly."
Lawyers have warned that the companies could be risking litigation.

Notice the language being used here folks "Theft" "Illegal" "Pirate", this then it seems is another worthless industry attack on any who disagree with their way of doing thing.

What new words do our users have for them ?
"Extortionists" "Bullies" "DRM Theives" and my own favourite "Cartel", please feel free to mention any of these keywords when discussing  the RIAA/MPAA/BPI and associated monopolies.  

[lysander]

Well, it seems rather odd of a legal sharing filesystem to give money to support an illegal one. (via ads) I can see where they're coming from on this, and I love teh language used in teh article. It's not very often you hear one industry calling another huge corporatino a "sick joke."

[..Ñøßߥ..]

I couldnt disagree more lysander, if i were running an add campaign for itunes, i cant think of many better places to advertise than the "illegal" sites, firstly your appealing 100% to your target market, and secondly, i bet ads on such sites would be way cheaper than many other advertising options.

I do join Ghost in his anaylisis of the terms used, at least i could see somthing good coming from this, hopefully the BPI will get caught up with internal industry arguements about this and leave us alone for a while. Only trouble with this is, it reminds me of the same issues closer to home than most of us would care for.

[KM]

I do question their choice of add space, sure you get your target audience, sure it is cheaper... but... "Hey, you are currently on a website to get this for free from, why not come and pay for it instead?" - does that work for any of you? lol

[..Ñøßߥ..]

Yeah i follow that, but i guess its all part of the appeal, some users who arent too sure of whats allowed and whats not, MIGHT just think, hmmm i could click this link and stay legal, in my experience, companys dont continue to use Ad space that doesnt work, and to attract BPI's scorn, they must have be ad'ing there a while!