![]() ![]() give the content away for free and sell ads against the content Maybe, but just about all the ones that I've seen boil down to one of three methods: > There are so many other ways to monetize media content. The paper and plastic was never the valuable part. The latter part of that is true (setting aside quibbles about bandwidth and storage not being absolutely 100% free), but here's the thing: back in the days of physical media, of books and DVDs and CDs and what have you, the bulk of the price was never the physical media itself. > Data yearns to be free - sharing it and copying it costs nothing. I don't mean to pick on you, per se, but I think there's a long-standing confusion about creative works that's captured in your line: (This was a small 7 person startup so trust was super important).Īs for why the intern needed to ssh into a digital ocean box to run a torrent? The college internet (where he was working from) blocked torrent connections and he wanted to be the first one to download and release the episodes on the college intranet. ![]() But repeating the offense, failing to come clean and making us waste our time to locate who did it was not. Sure enough a couple of mkv files had been downloaded and deleted by an intern :( Making the mistake of downloading it was forgiveable once, since we lived in a culture where piracy was rampant / normal (this was before Netflix et al were available in my country). Then we got a second email (a final warning).Įveryone denied doing it, so I had to find the offender via checking the bash history of the box for all users. We sent an email to everyone with access, saying whoever was doing it to stop. We found out after Digital Ocean forwarded us an email from HBO (who presumably tracked Digital Ocean down via the IP) that we were engaging in piracy. In this situation, CoC admitted Adani Group-which was not even a resolution applicant-because it provided the highest value for the Piramal proposal.An intern once thought it was a good idea to torrent a couple of Game of Thrones episodes using my startup's Digital Ocean box. Only DHFL, which was won by Piramal Group, was resolved on behalf of a financial services company under the special authority of RBI Section 227. In repeated Supreme Court judgments, it has been held that maximisation of value is a crucial consideration in the CoC's approval of any plan. Given that the CoC will be concerned with any degradation of current security, the Hinduja offer is therefore preferable for execution compared to Torrent because it has no demand for sharing security. Maximising value for creditors is the goal of the IBC Code. According to earlier media reports, Hinduja's offer of Rs 9,000 crore in cash upfront defeats Torrent's offer of only Rs 4,000 crore in cash, with the remaining amount to be paid to lenders in three equal installments over the course of years 3/4/5 at a zero interest rate. ![]() ![]() However, Torrent Investments was informed that Hinduja Group, a rival resolution applicant, had tardily submitted a revised financial proposal on December 22 following the conclusion of the challenge procedure on December 21 and after learning that Torrent Investments had won the auction. Rajeshwar Rao requesting directions regarding Nageswara Rao Y, the manager of Reliance Capital.Īccording to the letter, the competition came to a close on December 21 with administrator's email to Torrent Investments confirming its NPV bid amount of Rs 8640 crore as the highest bid amount. On December 28, Torrent Investments wrote to RBI Deputy Governor M. The Committee of Creditors will be meeting on 03 January to assess the latest development in the case. Torrent Investments has taken the legal dispute regarding their bid for Reliance Capital to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and have requested the RBI to issue instructions to the administrator. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |