I think it's more likely that the Times are on safer ground, being owned by the same company as Sky and having sufficient money and legal counsel to not be a soft target, in the event of being sued by, erm, themselves effectively.

Nah rubbish. tb and the other biatches need to man up.

Still, if that is the case, I find it odd that one of those companies threatening to sue sites and their owners for hosting or linking to copywritten footage, are then happy to then embed said footage posted by someone who has defied them and pirated it.

Because it suits them to do so in this case.

It has little to no bearing on whether they'd come knocking if it were rlfans doing so.

If you say so.

GO BURGESS!

There is no threat to posting links to youtube. It's youtube that would get into trouble, not RLFANS. Embedding the video is probably another matter, but links are fine. No one is going to get sued for posting links to youtube.

It's not a question of 'whether'. And putting this site at potential legal jeopardy isn't really up for debate either.

Oh look, it's another tough-talking keyboard legal warrior - posting from a position of anonymity and zero risk to himself.

and of course your name is J Willard Gibbs.

I'm not the one proffering legal advice encouraging other to do things that will land them in hot water, and telling them they'll be fine.

If the poster in question were to sell and mortgage everything he owned, put the money into an escrow account and sign a contract to underwrite any legal costs rlfans will incur, I'd take him seriously.

Until then, he's a set of flapping gums talking big about other people's financial peril, secure in his own anonymity and lack of risk.

Our experience suggests otherwise. And as I said: it's not a matter for debate.



And that is the last word on the subject.

edit: emphasis added for those of you who had difficulty understanding it.

big eorl will smash him

back on topic

I must admit that I did see Burgess make a few mistakes in the first two games which negated the over the top hype surrounding him here in Oz. He is classy, big and skillful as described though.

Poor fella. With all that hype, if he's not perfect the media here have built him up to shoot him down.

Moi Moi is a far, far better player now than he was two years ago. Then he was Paleasina (sp) Mk 2. Now he has the engine to keep going and not be a defensive liability.

I hope so, but imo, for his size, Crabtree doesn't put in enough big hits.

I thought that was the Sydney medias hobby anyway!

fair call JB.

In contrast, has Burgess really developed at all since the 3-0 series win over NZ? I suppose it's difficult to tell given the decline in standards at Bradford in the same period.

I've a feeling Moi Moi might just get his revenge. A couple of years ago Burgess was relatively unknown - this time NZ will be ready for him and he will be a target. I hope Burgess can prove me wrong though.

Moi Moi is a beast but so is Sam Burgess. He's a top player and is solid as a rock and if Moi Moi runs at him full tilt i'd back Burgess to put him on his ar*e again.

The good thing about Moi Moi though is that he'll keep coming back for more. I watched both the semi and the final of the Nrl play off series and he was put on his backside on a few occasions but he just keeps coming back for more and will eventually start charging over the top of people as they get tired.

It should be a classic battle between the 2 of them but the likes of Peacock and Morley shouldn't forget they can get involved aswell. I thought both were pretty quiet against the Aussies and need to up their games if England have a chance of winning.