49 People Are Speaking Their Mind
Have Your Say
Ask a Question Or Offer Your 2 Cents:
Return to the full post
Keep up to date with Web TV, Video and IPTV News:
Subscribe to Web TV Wire via RSS
Subscribe to Web TV Wire via RSS
Ask a Question Or Offer Your 2 Cents:
Return to the full post
Keep up to date with Web TV, Video and IPTV News:
Gary Says:
October 24th, 2007 at 7:47 amI think the issue here is not what tv-links.co.uk were doing, but what charge (if any) will be brought against them and what precedent this will set in UK law.
If they are proscuted essentially for linking then this is something we should all consider carefully. I do not think anyone is naive enough to believe that the closure of this site is going to make the availability of these types of services go away.
This said the manner in which any charge or prosecution is brought about is of great importance. This case should be carefully watched to see that precedents in law do not get pushed through without considering there future impact on the Internet industry as a whole.
As a side note the owner of tv-links has been released without charge, pending further investigation.
http://humanopinion.org/support_for_tvlinks_update_2007102412h45
Tony Grason Says:
October 24th, 2007 at 1:28 pmI’m really pissed off men..!!
Linking is not illegal, hosting is… this is completely unfair. But don’t worry, there are plenty of other sites that can perfectly replace tv-links. For example, i found a site that has almost all the tv series, tons of movies and music vids. There’s also Dailymotion or Stage 6, thanks god thay can’t stop us..!! he he LOL
Elton1 Says:
October 24th, 2007 at 11:58 pmI have made the following site so people can post news and comment on this subject all in one place, and hopefully raise a good deal of support. Please check it out and tell people.
http://www.save-tv-links.co.uk
Anyone who has any ideas that would make this site more functional please get in touch.
Elton1
Tom Reynolds Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 7:32 amWhat this post is is a lot of supposition, where is your evidence (as opposed to guesswork).
Also he’s innocent until proven guilty.
But then, I guess that this post is linkbait.
Totz Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 7:43 am$80,000? lol are you on drugs? The site owner was in full time employment while running the site, any revenue created by the site was spent on hosting costs and site upkeep. This is the most ridiculous article I have ever seen, thanks for bringing some amusement to my otherwise dull tv-link(less) afternoon
jamie Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 8:25 amlmao..thanks for your article and like it has been mentioned, where is your proof..do you have anything at all to back up your assumptions..like totz said i would also like to thank you for your article of comedy value…ever considered going up in stage, you would make a fortune..move over billy connolly a new man is in town.
$80,000 a month *insert “killing myself laughing” smillie*
Flea Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 8:31 amyou my friend are retarded and have no clue on the facts of the tv-links website, please only comment when you know everything about the article. Tv-links made no where near this amount of money or do you think we would have been taken down so easily!
kind regards
Flea
fthrjack Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 8:57 amAs mentioned earlier, this article is just link bait, more folks link back to this fantasical chicken little story, the more his ranking benefits.
If TVL was making 80k a month USD, then Sin would be driving around in a new Merc every week, im sure the site would also have been much bigger, and harder to take down, and also FACT would be fighting off one huge ass lawsuit right now since TVL would be loaded.
One thing i WOULD like to point out though, is that TVL is not dead yet, and we will be back shortly, “stay tuned”.
Dougie Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 10:33 amYour off your head mate, if tv links made that much then I dont think the owner would be in full time enployment and not driving around in a flashy car. What you have done is madr tv links look bad, you have wrote your article in a biased way and havent defended tv links once. The main thing you havent done is give any evidence so for some reason I find your article VERY hard to be truthfull
??? Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 11:21 amDude your a pure dick, i was part of tv links – it was not illegal oh and there was infact no money involved to the site owner so before you go off with some thoeory, get some fucking backin
Ash W Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 amyou stupid twat. “the owner would be making over $80,000 each month!” you really do know nothing. please. so everyone a favour and shoot yourself.
Chris Tew Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 12:23 pmFor everyone saying that this guy did not make $80,000 a month then do the math:
The site had adverts on – you cannot deny that and you can see these adverts on there using wayback machine and Google Cache.
These Ads could have brought anywhere between $0.5 – $10 CPM – with $3CPM being an educated guess from my own experience.
Alexa tells us the rank of the site and having access to stats for monthly views from sites I can estimate the traffic to be at least 3 million monthly users. I know a site with an Alexa rank of about 4000 has 2 million monthly users – so 3 million is a conservative guess – and probably lower. Alexa also tells us the page views is 9 per user. 9 x 3 – 27 million page views a month.
Follow my workings and you’ll see that $80,000 is even a low estimate for how much this guy could be earning. But this is an estimate – only the owner will know how much he is making – and of course he won’t be shouting that from the roof tops. Even if you divide my realistic estimation by 4 then it is still $20,000 which is a lot of money.
Money being put back into site development and hosting costs does not seem true to me. Hosting costs would be very low – max $1000 a month and the site was community run meaning little up-keep costs. There was no professional design to the site either (again meaning no costs). The profit margins on that site would be very high.
It had more traffic than Ask.com – a company that has over made $300 million profit in 2006.
If anyone can come back and provide solid facts that this guy was not making money from TVLinks then I would love to hear it and would gladly admit my estimations are wrong. So far it looks like everyone who is commenting is just guessing he didn’t make money and can’t back it up with any facts.
Secondly the site is legal under U.S law – if any of you actually looked up any information on internet law you would find that the situation it looks very very bad for TVLinks. There’s plenty of info on that at this site.
Every past similar case ruled against people linking to pirate content – most of these were in the U.S – and UK laws are even stricter about copyright than the U.S although this is the first case of its kind in the UK.
Also I am not against sites like TVLinks as the current situation with TV and video sucks – but I do believe that all their profits from sites like TVLinks should be given to charitable organizations that promote a better distribution of TV content online – that would also put them in a stronger position in the court room – but I don’t see any evidence of TVLinks donating any money and just keeping it.
I speak out against TVLinks because the guy was making money from other people’s hard work – and not giving anything back.
All the other comments people have made are answered in the original article – which they obviously didn’t read properly.
Zippin ( TVL ADMIN) Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 2:01 pmWho are you? where are you getting your sums from? You are way off !!!
I know that the site traffic that Alexa stats is wrong! that site you can not realie on 100% and the only way to get the true numbers is from the data on the servers. Also the amount of money you say was being made is again wrong! Because you again does not have the figers and only using your own ones you “guessed” and probaly using figers that maybe other sites have given you… and also you may have run a site too and are using your own figers… Every site operates differently and has different objectives.
Ours was to serve the community and give them what they wanted, and all staff and members helped in this and gave up there own free time…. Every site makes money to a degree if they can for sure !! but to pay the cost of keeping it going and to improve things as time goes on. New ideas that need to be put in place sometimes cost money to do…
You will find alot of peeps will do and say anything to slander TVL and Sin just to get there site or name noticed somewhere along the lines….
I have not got the time for such people like you tbh nor will i engage with them. I only have time for thoses of real concern and wish to help out… but you i made an allowance for..
Also note we did not link to just vids still poss in copyright protection but we had lots of links submitted to us by members to vids out side of the copyright protection such as old films or TV shows etc.
You sir seem to have not got al lthe facts right nor do i expect you to or anyone elses for that matter..
laterZ
Max Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 3:17 pmAside from the figures, which I’ll leave for someone smarter than me to work out..
I agree that the artist and content creator should receive their dues… but this is persecution for the sake of legal precedent. The site has broken no actual law and so this is protectionism.
Arresting the owner does not offer a deterrent. It demonstrates how much the media networks stand to lose. And that will only bring more competition. Did shutting down Napster stop music p2p? No it just castrated a local enterprise.
You can’t legislate against technological innovation. If by design the site successfully offers the free market a more accessible distribution channel then dynamics demand that new business models be designed to accommodate that flow. Or else everyone loses out.
Chris Tew Says:
October 25th, 2007 at 3:51 pmHey Max
Thanks for the first intelligent comment – I agree – the popularity of these sites just shows how much people want it, and also that the technology is there (TV networks always make the excuse about the technology not being good enough).
TV Networks and movie companies are slowly starting to see this.
As for it breaking a law or not – it is still a grey area but I’d bet my money it goes the way of setting a precedent that linking to pirated material in a systematic way is illegal.
Zippin ( TVL ADMIN)
I’m not saying these figures are exact or spot on – I’ve stated they are estimates, my best guess based on the info available. It is not a random guess – it is an intellectual guess based on stats from Alexa, comparative analysis against other sites traffic and their alexa rank, and a solid knowledge of average advertiser payouts and earnings.
You haven’t offered any real proof to show they are wrong and if you don’t see the bank statements of Mr TVLinks then I assume you don’t know how much he earns from the site.
“all staff and members helped in this and gave up there own free time”
This sounds like TVLinks staff were helping for FREE, meaning even less costs for the site and more profit for the owner.
FthrJACK Says:
October 26th, 2007 at 3:55 amOk, i will break this down for you step by step, since you are obviously lacking some grey matter, however it is possible to train even a lab rat given the time and patience so here goes:
>For everyone saying that this guy did not make $80,000 a
>month then do the math:
Do the math? if the figures you use from the very start of your equation are wrong, then the result from your math will be.. guess what? yes thats right, wrong. There is no point in GUESSING, then using math to try justify your groundless and fantasical figures, or even your slanderous comments.
>The site had adverts on – you cannot deny that and you can
>see these adverts on there using wayback machine and Google
>Cache.
So do many sites, however most sites are not the likes of Yahoo.com or such and can charge huge figures per ad or per length of time the ad appears on the site for. Most ads on most sites earn the site owner little to totaly zero. People usually have to click on the ads for the site owner to even earn one penny USD. You see, the companies advertsising need to make money in order to pay for ads, if they where just handing money out like you make out, then every site would be covered in ads, and all site owners would be multi millionaires! Hey, as well as being involved in the running of TVL, i setup and built another site some years ago, that is still running today, and has similar traffic volumes to TVL, with people viewing the site for longer (acording to Alexa) – so wheres my motor yacht and huge house? The ads on that site have made a few $ a month EVER, and just help towards running costs.
>These Ads could have brought anywhere between $0.5 – $10 CPM -> with $3CPM being an educated >guess from my own experience.
Id like to emphasise “COULD HAVE” – but as i mentioned earlier, tv-links was not the likes of msn.com or something. Educated guess? educated where – special school?
>Alexa tells us the rank of the site and having access to
>stats for monthly views from sites I can estimate the traffic
>to be at least 3 million monthly users. I know a site with an
>Alexa rank of about 4000 has 2 million monthly users – so 3
>million is a conservative guess – and probably lower. Alexa
>also tells us the page views is 9 per user. 9 x 3 – 27
>million page views a month.
9 views per user? this also including the forums? Also are you aware that not every page on TVL had adverts, infact most didnt? and our flashplayer appeared in a pop up window, with no ads. Often you could open such a pop up window, then nothing plays.. ok close.. open another.. you get the idea.
>Follow my workings and you’ll see that $80,000 is even a low
>estimate for how much this guy could be earning. But this is
>an estimate – only the owner will know how much he is making -
> and of course he won’t be shouting that from the roof tops.
>Even if you divide my realistic estimation by 4 then it is
>still $20,000 which is a lot of money.
Follow your workings… exactly, your workings, not the FACTS (no pun intended) – not the truth, just figures you have pulled out of your ass! also again emphasis on “COULD BE earning” — ad space is not paid for by placement! Placement ads are the kind of ads that pay you _just_ for appearing as they are directed at the individual user and their taste etc. Regular page ads such as those on TVL are usually paid for per clickthrough OR per click through that actually buys something as a result. NOT just for appearing.
>Money being put back into site development and hosting costs
>does not seem true to me. Hosting costs would be very low -
>max $1000 a month and the site was community run meaning
>little up-keep costs. There was no professional design to the
>site either (again meaning no costs). The profit margins on
>that site would be very high.
IF your imaginary figures where correct then yes that would be true, but as we know.. imaginary figures! Also, if these figures you came up with where true, then the site staff would have been charged with a crime.
>It had more traffic than Ask.com – a company that has over
>made $300 million profit in 2006.
Ask.com has OTHER LINES OF BUSINESS, it makes money in many ways. So now you are insinuating that 1) “Sin” is a multimilionaire hell a billionaire by now
2) is is THAT easy to become so rich doing something like this (err ok everyone would be doing it!)
3) Site hits = Wealth?
>If anyone can come back and provide solid facts that this guy
>was not making money from TVLinks then I would love to hear
>it and would gladly admit my estimations are wrong. So far it
>looks like everyone who is commenting is just guessing he
>didn’t make money and can’t back it up with any facts.
Aliens invaded 6 years ago and replaced the entire Congress and also george bush with clones to do their bidding with, but its all hush hush, even the clones think they are the real people! provide me solid facts that this isnt true – otherwise it must be!!
also FYI – people commenting here are ex TVL members and quite a few of them including myself are EX TVL STAFF YOU DUMMY.
>Secondly the site is legal under U.S law – if any of you
>actually looked up any information on internet law you would
>find that the situation it looks very very bad for TVLinks.
>There’s plenty of info on that at this site.
Ok, but without wanting to read up on US law for this one, id like to point out a few things to that shrunken raisin you call a brain: TV-LINKS WAS NOT IN THE USA. Therefore: DOES NOT FALL UNDER US LAW. Incase you hadnt realised, US law stops right off the coast of Hawaii, and goes no further. Just as Uk law doesent apply in Alabama — still not quite grasped the whole “WORLD wide web” thing yet have you?
>Every past similar case ruled against people linking to
>pirate content – most of these were in the U.S – and UK laws
>are even stricter about copyright than the U.S although this
>is the first case of its kind in the UK.
Case.. in the Uk.. erm, there isnt a case actually, just an unwarranted arrest and siezure of goods and information without true legal basis. Said goods then being held onto as “evidence” — its just a method used to shut a site down that wasnt breaking any UK or EU law, yet got up the noses of people with very big wallets. Remember, to get “justice” in this day and age in any country it is not about anything other than the size of your wallet and how many lawyers you have. Dont Kid yourself any different.
>Also I am not against sites like TVLinks as the current
>situation with TV and video sucks – but I do believe that all
>their profits from sites like TVLinks should be given to
>charitable organizations that promote a better distribution
>of TV content online – that would also put them in a stronger
>position in the court room – but I don’t see any evidence of
>TVLinks donating any money and just keeping it.
Keeping it.. it wasnt MAKING it. See previous paragraphs.
>I speak out against TVLinks because the guy was making money
>from other people’s hard work – and not giving anything back.
>All the other comments people have made are answered in the
>original article – which they obviously didn’t read properly.
Yes they did, i do hope that YOU now read properly, and realise who “those people” are that you are refering to, to make it a little clearer: they are people who dont have to “guess” and “make up” figures to suit some slanderous story they posted to try grab attention.
Also as for linking “responsibly” you may note those little “disclaimers” about “not being responsible for other sites” even google has one. Your child pornography statement is totaly flawed, if i link to this page from my site, then 3 months later you turn this page into a Scat website — might be perfectly legal in your country, but lets say it isnt in mine – am i going to jail??
Chris Tew Says:
October 26th, 2007 at 6:04 am"if the figures you use from the very start of your equation are wrong"
Not wrong – it is an estimate based on real statistics and information – as I’ve stated before. You have been unable to give a more accurate estimate.
"Regular page ads such as those on TVL are usually paid for per clickthrough OR per click through that actually buys something as a result. NOT just for appearing"
There are plenty of ads that pay a CPM rate (they pay just for the ad appearing). I have them here on WebTVWire. Even on a CPC or CPA basis an average $3 per 1000 views is still realistic. But as I said this does vary. I expect my estimates could vary 80% either way – but even at the very lowest it would be 10-20k a month, and it could even be higher.
"however most sites are not the likes of Yahoo.com or such and can charge huge figures per ad or per length of time the ad appears on the site for"
Firstly TVLinks was a huge site, secondly I took into account the level of ad spend on sites like TvLinks. Yahoo might get $10 – $50 CPM rate because of its brand and size. so $3 CPM is still a good estimate for TVLinks.
"Ok, but without wanting to read up on US law for this one, id like to point out a few things to that shrunken raisin you call a brain: TV-LINKS WAS NOT IN THE USA"
Yes I know – I stated the site is in the UK and will fall under UK law – have another read. The point I’m making is there are similarities in UK internet law and U.S internet law – with the UK and Europe being more harsh than the U.S – which is not good for TVLinks.
"Case.. in the Uk.. erm, there isnt a case actually"
He got arrested and will face a legal battle. A European lawyer specializing in linking law who knows more than anyone here will tell you this is true:
http://www.webtvwire.com/linking-law-expert-dr-stephan-ott-talks-about-linking-to-pirated-video/
I’ve actually dropped him an email to ask his opinion.
I’ve spoken to multiple UK and European lawyers about this in the past and they have all said this is illegal.
"Remember, to get “justice” in this day and age in any country it is not about anything other than the size of your wallet and how many lawyers you have. "
I agree with this to an extent – but the reason you don’t see legitamate companies operating a site like TVLinks is because they know they will go down for it, because it is illegal.
"Ask.com has OTHER LINES OF BUSINESS, it makes money in many ways"
Yes I know – hence why Ask.com makes $1 million a month and I estimate TVLinks to be at $80,000 – my point is that given the traffic levels TVLinks had the potential to be a very large company.
"Keeping it.. it wasnt MAKING it. See previous paragraphs."
How do you know – you seem to know less than me. You have provided very little facts or information to substantiate your argument.
"Also, if these figures you came up with where true, then the site staff would have been charged with a crime. "
How do you come to that conclusion – they weren’t staff because as far as I can see they weren’t been paid. Secondly a staff member working on site maintanence such as working on the sites HTML, or removing spam posts from the forum would not be a crime. Since when does a site’s profit levels make staff more or less guilty.
"people commenting here are ex TVL members and quite a few of them including myself are EX TVL STAFF YOU DUMMY."
That does not mean you know how much the owner was being paid for his ads. I have staff for my site and they don’t know how much each ad brings me. Have any of these unpaid staff seen the TVLinks bank account? It appears not and that they are just assuming the guy did not make any money.
"Also as for linking “responsibly” you may note those little “disclaimers” about “not being responsible for other sites” even google has one. "
Ask a lawyer and you will see disclaimers have very little weight in a court room – especially where a site was breaking the law.
"if i link to this page from my site, then 3 months later you turn this page into a Scat website — might be perfectly legal in your country, but lets say it isnt in mine – am i going to jail?? "
If you are informed by authorities that you are linking to an illegal site and you refuse/don’t remove the link then you will then be responsible for what you link to.
"9 views per user? this also including the forums? Also are you aware that not every page on TVL had adverts, infact most didnt? and our flashplayer appeared in a pop up window, with no ads. Often you could open such a pop up window, then nothing plays.. ok close.. open another.. you get the idea."
This is about the only useful info you have provided. I found adverts within the forums and most other pages of TVL but you are correct I did not take into consideration the flash player page which does not contain adverts. I would expect this to reduce the number of page views with ads on by 50-70%. This would reduce my estimation to about $20,000 a month – still a lot of money.
But this is based on a very low estimation of 3 million visitors a month – I know that sites ranked around 3000 have 3 million visitors a month and statistics from compete.com and alexa.com show TVL to be about 10x busier meaning $200,000 a month. Taken the lowest estimate this site was making $5-20k = higher estimates would bring it to $500k or more. Either way its making good money.
If you can provide hard evidence the site was not making money then I’d be happy to hear it, but the evidence available shows that it was.
Aled Says:
October 27th, 2007 at 11:34 amThey wern’t making £80,000 a week dipshit we would be loaded and it would have been big telivsed news by news
P.S and also no one clicks the ads so fuck you
Anon Says:
October 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pmYadi Yadi Yadi…I will be heading the same direction with everyone and like what one of the frustrated reader said, Google is illegal as well come to think of it Google is also indexing copyright materials.
Anon Says:
October 28th, 2007 at 12:37 pmFacilitation of Copyright Infringement…Voeh.com, youtube.com are also facilitating copyright materials lol
richwr Says:
October 28th, 2007 at 3:06 pmThe most working anime links ever man!…ever!
someone Says:
October 28th, 2007 at 4:28 pmI WANT TV LINKS BACK
I MISS IT
BRING IT BACK
WHY TV LINKS
there are lots of other web sites where you could watch free movies
why tv links
so what it had lot more movie (exelent)
some people are mad most angry
dont arrest the man who created tv links
some people dont want to by movie and watch for 1-2 hours and never watch it again
some people dont have enough money
i did not find youtube
i created it
by the way who created tv links
create another web site where you could watch free movies
how did you guys know who created it
thats why i didnt put my real name and my email addres
i am in 5th grade
10 years old
(idiot)guility)
spring creek elementry
garland tx
girl
from india
my name????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
so what i am trying to say?????????????????????????????????????
guess
give you a clue
tv links
by the way love tv links
knew about 1 year ago
only went there less than 10 times
hard to watch movies
he does deserve to be arrested
but i dont want him to be arrested
or her
hmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………
……………….hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
hhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm………..??????????????????????
LOVE TV LINKS
LOVE 5TH GRADE
Who cares about my problems
lets worry about tv links
worry about tv links
i am not asking you to worry about tv links
just to do it
DO IT
I Command YOU to do it
NOW
YOU OWE ME????????????????????????????????????????????????
DOLLARS
(2)CENTS)
Mike Says:
October 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pmUmmm….your entire point seems to be flawed, since he received about 50 takedown notices and acted appropriately on all of them by taking down the videos….
Maybe you never noticed it…the little report button?
Dan T Says:
October 29th, 2007 at 12:51 pmA lot of you need to do a little more research before blindly leaping in and attacking the author of this text.
I also recommend the dictionary, it makes your argument more coherent.
James Says:
October 29th, 2007 at 2:10 pmYour facts are wrong thus making your calculations wrong. Having this article up just makes you look like a dickhead. With that said CPX Interactive (Ad provider) dont pay 3.00 CPM its more like $0.05-$0.30
TVL earning $80,000 p/m…. Bullshit
Glynn Says:
October 30th, 2007 at 7:15 amThis isnt the first time TV-LINKS has faced some…how shall i put this attention, it was shut down by its origanl american host earlly last year and before that it was also shut down(cant recall where), he then decided to have a UK domiain and a dutch host. i know this because…….a friend…….yeah a friend of mine uploaded tv shows to sites like Dailymotion for listing on this site. the site had grown a lot over the last 12 months and at its end was looked after by a team of admins who checked, updated and removed links. There are other sites (hosted in Germany) that inform you of the risk and link direct to the hosting site such as YouTub where as tv-links prob shot them selfs in the foot by only linking the player within there own pages. This gave the impression that a lot of files where on TV-LINKS as he used his own flv player with the url taken direct form the hosts site.
The only thing MY FRIEND needs to worry about is if either the owner of TV-LINKs or his host(more likey) kept logs of emails to show who provided which link (as this could lead to convictions of the users who uploaded copyrighted material)
orgthingy Says:
October 30th, 2007 at 11:12 amBefore u read this u agree to NOT WATCH ANY VIDEO THAT BREAAKS THE LAWS OF COPYRITE! (:P) !
this is bullshit! i hate these copyrite laws!
we will all stand with u MR. TV-LINKS!
billy h Says:
November 1st, 2007 at 1:24 pmThe guy didn’t deserve to go to jail and saying that he did is just ridiculous. I understand what he did is TECHNICALLY against the law, it shouldn’t be though. You’re just playing the devils advocate so you can get your stupid blog a few more ratings. Shame on you, that guy doesn’t belong in prison, murderers and rapists belong in prison. Also since you hold such a strong conviction against pirated material, i’m sure you have NEVER watched a pirated video online ever. sure….
Rob Davy Says:
November 5th, 2007 at 9:43 pm$3 CPM is very hard to believe. You get $3 CPM from a decent, targeted campaign from a national brand. Sites like tv-links.co.uk don’t get $3 CPM campaigns – they get stupid 15c CPM campaigns from people like Smiley Central who will take any traffic they can get at that price, regardless of the content of the site.
At 15c CPM (much more realistic), they’d be making $4,000/month from the site, which I can believe. I can also believe that they were spending that much alone on hosting for a site as popular as you claim it is.
(These numbers are not pulled out of my ass – I’ve worked extensively in online advertising, particularly for large sites with hard to monetize traffic, like tv-links.co.uk.)
Chris Tew Says:
November 6th, 2007 at 4:11 amHi Rob,
Thanks for your comment.
I also work extensively with a variety of ad networks over a wide spread of websites and also network with a large number of website owners and have experience in this area too.
I know the run of the mill untargetted Ads can bring as low as $0.15 CPM – how this is an extreme scenario and applicable to sites that are generally ad heavy, and have the Ads in very poor positions, this was not the case on TV-Links.co.uk. A site as large as TV-Links.co.uk can dictate, and attract larger advertisers.
You’ll also notice in most pages there are two ads per page (google cache is still showing this). Even at your conservative estimate of $0.15 CPM – with two ads that is instantly doubled to $0.30 CPM ($8000 a month).
My very lowest estimation of their CPM rate would be in the $0.5 $1 CPM range. But that is the very lowest.
Based on lowest estimate of traffic levels that puts them at:
10-20k, at higher traffic level estimates it puts them at over $100,000 a month.
No matter how you look at it the site was making good money.
lppoj Says:
November 10th, 2007 at 8:13 pmi think he did deserve to be arrested
movie linking is just as illegal as selling bootlegs.
which in these cases the producers or artists arent getting their credit for it .
its only fair.
J-man Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 4:15 amHow can we go and shut down a website that isn’t even in our jurisdiction? Big corporations will do anything to get their greedy little hands on as much money as they can. So I can’t figure out why the owner of the site can even be sued because its totally legal in Europe to do what he’s doing.
johnnyd Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 10:46 pmlast time i checked child pornography is a little fucking different from watching family guy.
bob hunt Says:
November 24th, 2007 at 3:39 amall the people not down with tv links i think if you were making 80,000 dollars a month i don’t think you’d be complaining! you guys go on the net and complain about how much money the guy made… and that he was letting other people like me watch their fav shows for free. you guys suck and after all the court fees this guys has he’ll be sitting with his 80gs laughing at you guys
BRING TV LINKS BACK!!!!!!!
Scott Says:
December 20th, 2007 at 4:33 amWell, this has sort of turned from a discussion of the reasons for his arrest, to an argument of how much money he was making. Whether it was 80,000 a month, or 4000 a month, he was still making good money by facilitating copyright infringement.
Saying linking is not a crime is similar to saying something along the lines of “Speech is not a crime”. True enough, but only when it is used responsibly. Walking around telling people where they can buy drugs. guns, and stolen goods is illegal, and linking to copyrighted material should be too.
As much as it pains me to see this broken-link riddled saint go, it kind of deserved it.
Leanne Says:
December 21st, 2007 at 2:33 pmI’m sure the website was illegal, but still it doesn’t affect the laws in the UK, unless they reqrite the laws just for this case I duobt he’ll face the full arm of the law.
Also TV links wasnt all bad, you’re taking out your big guns at a website that also hosted content you cant see on normal television anymore and for some people that was the appeal, old films and old shows that virtually dont exist on the internet.
Also you’re throwing around numbers in dollars, whoopdee fecking do da. If he was payed in dollars, I doubt it would be paid into his bank account, which means paying for currency conversion, then money transfer, 20,000 dollars at best is 10000 pounds a month, minus possibly upto 6% for transfer fee’s based on methods of payment, minus hosting costs which for a website as -huge- as you claim would be through the roof.
Lets not be extravagant, he wasnt making a fortune, and so what if he made a couple of hundred at the end of the month from adverising, so do wow gaming websites, or even more controversially their *illegal* hacking and gold sellling websites, full of scams.
Its a bad world darling, but my goodness, the post seems clearly about ONLY your personal opinion, we can all give them, its a pure flame fest, expected only from a rookie writer. I’m not a journalist expert, but if someone payed you to write this they really have lost out. (Forgive me if i’m wrong, perhaps this isnt a website article
)
michael Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:51 pmSounds like the author is just pissed that they weren’t getting the money.
Rich Says:
February 15th, 2008 at 5:31 pmTVLinks did have advertising on its site and if it made just $3 out of every 1000 page views (again a very low estimation) then the owner would be making over $80,000 each month!
That’s a pretty fucking ridiculous claim. That’s not a very low estimation, that’s a very high estimation. And that doesn’t factor in server costs.
Also, you quoted me and my site a lot without any link back or credit. Which is fine, but dick.
Jessica Says:
March 14th, 2008 at 9:13 amStop bitching, calm down, it just a website ok.
He was trying to make money like everyone else in this world does.
Owner Says:
April 5th, 2008 at 12:25 amYou’re a fucking moron. Bringing the idea of linking child porn into this is totally different then what the tv links guy was doing. Another simple case of picking on the little guy.
Wiley Says:
April 9th, 2008 at 2:08 pmI’ve just come across this post and although it is old I thought I would correct your sums as I am better placed than you to know how much a site such as TVL can make.
Sites such as TVL, torrent sites, emule sites whatever. They all fall under the same category of “copyright grey area” content and therefore are rarely acceoted by Tier1 advertisers such as Doubleclick, Adsense, Casale, tribalfusion etc. Indeed you will often find that Tier2 advertisers do not touch sites such as TVL due to their questionable content type.
That leaves Tier2 advertisers such as Mediashakers, CPXInteractive, Realnetworks etc. Advertisers that resell the Tier1 and 2 ads at a much lower price and take a hefty chunk out of the profits. When running banner ads from these advertisers you can expect to see no more than $.15CPM, TVL if I remember had 1 banner per page which is probably the worst way to make any money as they pay terribly. Still let’s take your own figures and apply them to what we know now is a correct CPM figure:
27 million impressions/month \ 1000 = 27000
27000 x .15CPM = $4050
Still a decent amount but wait, a site that is 127th in the world needs some serious server power to keep it at that place. I have no knowledge of the specifics of TVL’s servers but I would be suprised if they were costing less than $2500-3500/month which would leave the owner with around $500/month if he’s lucky. I bet he didn’t even make that.
You’ve shown a complete lack of understanding about advertising for sites such as TVL and without any research into the reality of the situation have posted a story with a headline worthy of a red top. Good job!
Wiley.
Chris Tew Says:
April 10th, 2008 at 5:35 amWiley – see comment:
http://www.webtvwire.com/tvlinks-owner-deserved-to-be-arrested/?comments=1#comment-19507
Babysham Says:
April 11th, 2008 at 12:11 amYou clearly have no idea of how advertising works. Ads are only worth something if they are “above the fold” that is within the 1st 400px of the page, TVL’s were at the bottom (or 1 was).
Also you don’t seem to realise that the more ads you show the less CPM you make, this is certainly the case with CPXInteractive who TVL was using. Just because you can show high volume does not mean you make more, also it does not mean that you get to attract larger advertisers. If it did then why was TVL using a 2bit outfit such as CPXInteractive rather than Adsense?
The poster above said .15CPM was the lowest but I have seen $.07CPM on a site that did 300k impressions a day! Indeed from just emailing a couple of torrent site admins I know they have confirmed that $.10 is the most they have ever seen. In the words of 1 “we’re the subprime of the advertising industry, only the sharks will give us ads and when they do they feed heavily”.
Maybe you need to rethink your outlandish figures Chris. It’s all very well saying this guy made over $100k/month (possibly) but it has no basis in truth, why not say $500k for the hell of it!
The guy probably broke even is all. I guess that doesn’t make such a good story though.
rhys Says:
June 7th, 2008 at 4:22 amI don’t think i did actually deserve to get arrested so this blog post is a bit unfair in my opinion.
Despite the controversy, I have started a new TV Links website but on a new domain. the reason for this is because the old domain was taken off me by officials.
if anyone is interested then please click on the link below
tv links
Ricardo Says:
July 19th, 2008 at 4:20 pmI dont care if it is illegal or not to link pirate content: it should not be! Because we have to have one measure for everything, like if we are robots, we cannot have a law with different interpretations that is suitable for different situation. The law must be objective and non- flexible, like science! No rrom for doubt, no room for speculation and no room for adaptation! Google and Tv-link do the same, doesnt matter the context, no morals no ethics, rigid law, if one is illegal, the other is! and that is all… And yes in that case it should also be totally legal for someone to provide links to porn or pedophile content, whatever! It doesnt matter, one law, thats all! if its not fair… well the world is not supose to be..
IsoHunt Sues CRIA | Torrent Tracker Claims Linking To Torrents Isn’t Copyright Infringing Says:
September 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pm[...] other torrent tracker and search engine merely links to content, be it copyrighted or not, and so shouldn’t actually be liable for these kinds of copyright violation [...]
Did the MPAA Secretly Kill Peekvid? | Video Linking Site Disappears Due To “Server Fees” Says:
September 24th, 2008 at 12:08 pm[...] against it, but only because other similar sites bailed before it got to that stage by shutting or moving operations at the first sign of legal [...]
Anonymoosew Says:
January 18th, 2009 at 3:41 pm$3 per 1000 page views are you fucking crazy?
bit Says:
March 7th, 2009 at 8:30 amChris Tew… what a DUMBASS!
are YOU somewhat stupid? this whole article is one big fictional world you created for yourself.
You obviously believe yourself because this article reeks with envy, it’s disgusting really, to go as far as saying someone should have been arrested because he chose to keep money he earned for a service he provided, and not donate it to some stupid charity.
If we go by that logic, everyone reading this article is right now shouting “Chris Tew should burn in HELL!”.
Your “own expirence” bullshit you’re trying to feed people about $3 per 1000 VIEWS is in no way a reliable source. not to mention that NOBODY relies on Alexa, its usage share sample is practicaly unkown.
We’re talking Google ads here, these are pay per click services that barley squeeze out a cent per click, even IF you’re little equation was related to reality, it would have been more like $200.