3 ms·

Why should a service, that is advert free and wholly paid for by the UK licence payers, be free to people elsewhere? So, UK license payers enjoy the service th

by narag 10y ago

Why should a service, that is advert free and wholly paid for by the UK licence payers, be free to people elsewhere? So, UK license payers enjoy the service they paid for when they're travelling outside the UK, right?

stoozer 10y ago
So why not provide login access with TV licenses.
- jwdunne 10y ago
  They don't even do that here. You are only forced to pay the fee by law if you have a device that you use to watch TV as its aired (along with some other rules). The way this is enforced is by someone who goes round to each house and verifies you have a license. They can't force their way in. There isn't a way, as far as I know, where they can just turn your TV access off, unlike cable companies can. A pass for international use would be a bit odd without doing something like that here at home first.
  - vetinari 10y ago
    This would be actually simple. Encrypt the broadcast and require CAM for decoding. Each card has a number and while there is a payment coming for the card, the card is active. So next time the broadcast is changing and requires updated tuners (i.e. DVB-T2 and HEVC with 4K), just require one with CI. Everyone is happy - those, who want TV get TV, those who don't, do not have to pay.
  - IanCal 10y ago
    > They don't even do that here. They've not been allowed to until very recently, and it's likely that this will be added soon(tm).
  - DanBC 10y ago
    The iPlayer loophole is closing pretty soon though.
    - NTripleOne 10y ago
      How so?
      - DanBC 10y ago
        The culture secretary has said the loophole is going to be closed soon. Here's an article about it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35708623 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35708623
mynameismonkey 10y ago
More to the point, as a Brit living in the USA, I'd be more than happy to pay my license fee from here and keep watching. Right now I "steal" it, which makes me feel bad every time I fire up the VPN. BBC: I will pay you. Others will pay you. This will lower the license fee back home.
- jonlucc 10y ago
  I've never been to any part of the UK, and I'd gladly pay BBC similar to Netflix or Hulu rates for access without a VPN. I just like following British shows, and it's very difficult and expensive to get them through other channels (with long delays, for some reason).
- ptaffs 10y ago
  In simple terms, also a Brit living abroad, I agree. But I think the problem is Entertainment Industry layers of licensing. I believe the BBC pays actors, images and incidental music by industry association (eg BMI), license which may not be global, but only for UK territories. Geo-blocking is more of a problem of super complex royalties and intellectual property management, not simply they don't want to share. Compare with sports events which are licensed by territory for no practical reason except negotiating rights, the successful bidding media outlet is often required by the producer to geo-block.
- soneil 10y ago
  > I will pay you. Others will pay you. This will lower the license fee back home. As I understand it, this isn’t necessarily the case. I understand that the BBC actually investigated making iPlayer available in the US previously. The outcome was that cable networks told them they’d drop BBC America if it was to go ahead. For most networks in the US, BBCA sits in the middle tier - not a premium channel (eg HBO), but not in the basic package. It’s used as bait/value-add to provide incentive for customers to upgrade from the basic package. So for the networks, having the same content available online lowers its value. This is the basic crunch when it comes to geo-free online streaming vs traditional cable networks. We (customers) want both models available to us, but the two are in direct opposition. And in this case, it’d appear the traditional model is still winning, since BBC International decided that preserving BBCA’s income was more important. We tend to paint it as rather protectionist, but in most cases, the content-providers do have the option of walking. That they don’t want to, tells us that the existing model is still the more profitable. There’s not much we can do to fight it until this changes.

by narag 10y ago

stoozer 10y ago

So why not provide login access with TV licenses.

jwdunne 10y ago
They don't even do that here. You are only forced to pay the fee by law if you have a device that you use to watch TV as its aired (along with some other rules). The way this is enforced is by someone who goes round to each house and verifies you have a license. They can't force their way in. There isn't a way, as far as I know, where they can just turn your TV access off, unlike cable companies can. A pass for international use would be a bit odd without doing something like that here at home first.
- vetinari 10y ago
  This would be actually simple. Encrypt the broadcast and require CAM for decoding. Each card has a number and while there is a payment coming for the card, the card is active. So next time the broadcast is changing and requires updated tuners (i.e. DVB-T2 and HEVC with 4K), just require one with CI. Everyone is happy - those, who want TV get TV, those who don't, do not have to pay.
- IanCal 10y ago
  > They don't even do that here. They've not been allowed to until very recently, and it's likely that this will be added soon(tm).
- DanBC 10y ago
  The iPlayer loophole is closing pretty soon though.
  - NTripleOne 10y ago
    How so?
    - DanBC 10y ago
      The culture secretary has said the loophole is going to be closed soon. Here's an article about it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35708623 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35708623

mynameismonkey 10y ago

More to the point, as a Brit living in the USA, I'd be more than happy to pay my license fee from here and keep watching. Right now I "steal" it, which makes me feel bad every time I fire up the VPN. BBC: I will pay you. Others will pay you. This will lower the license fee back home.

jonlucc 10y ago
I've never been to any part of the UK, and I'd gladly pay BBC similar to Netflix or Hulu rates for access without a VPN. I just like following British shows, and it's very difficult and expensive to get them through other channels (with long delays, for some reason).
ptaffs 10y ago
In simple terms, also a Brit living abroad, I agree. But I think the problem is Entertainment Industry layers of licensing. I believe the BBC pays actors, images and incidental music by industry association (eg BMI), license which may not be global, but only for UK territories. Geo-blocking is more of a problem of super complex royalties and intellectual property management, not simply they don't want to share. Compare with sports events which are licensed by territory for no practical reason except negotiating rights, the successful bidding media outlet is often required by the producer to geo-block.
soneil 10y ago
> I will pay you. Others will pay you. This will lower the license fee back home. As I understand it, this isn’t necessarily the case. I understand that the BBC actually investigated making iPlayer available in the US previously. The outcome was that cable networks told them they’d drop BBC America if it was to go ahead. For most networks in the US, BBCA sits in the middle tier - not a premium channel (eg HBO), but not in the basic package. It’s used as bait/value-add to provide incentive for customers to upgrade from the basic package. So for the networks, having the same content available online lowers its value. This is the basic crunch when it comes to geo-free online streaming vs traditional cable networks. We (customers) want both models available to us, but the two are in direct opposition. And in this case, it’d appear the traditional model is still winning, since BBC International decided that preserving BBCA’s income was more important. We tend to paint it as rather protectionist, but in most cases, the content-providers do have the option of walking. That they don’t want to, tells us that the existing model is still the more profitable. There’s not much we can do to fight it until this changes.