BBC Episodes Legally Available Via Peer To Peer 212
Kript writes "According to the BBC they are going to make a number of their shows available on the Azureus network. A number of old favorites will be available such as Red Dwarf, Doctor Who and even Little Britain."
That's ok though (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's only my opinion.
Smeghead
It's a trap! (Score:4, Insightful)
They got so bad at one point that I actually wrote to them refusing to partake in any further correspondence until they sent me a civil letter. They wrote back - with a threat about how large the fine will be when they haul me in.
The fun part? I don't have a television. But I'm not telling them that until they ask politely. Yes, it's probably stupid and it's certainly obstinate but I refuse to be intimidated.
Now, of course, with them making a move like this I actually feel like I might *want* to give them money. It's a pretty cool thing to do and I'm proud of the BBC for being forward looking and generally a great service. So that's what this is all about folks. They are just trying to shame me into paying up. The worked out what my buttons were and pushed them. As soon as I hand over the cash, the whole thing will go away. It's a freaking trap I tell you.
Fortunately for all of you I'm holding out for them to switch to ogg for their radio streams before I buy a TV license. You should be safe to enjoy this content for another couple of decades. My present to all of you!
Re:Misleading Headline & Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Misleading Headline & Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Yah, it solves the issue of media companies who want to charge money for content but don't want to pay for the distribution of that content. If I purchase a DVD, I am paying for the content, and the distribution of that content (getting the DVD to the store so I can purchase it) is paid by the content provider (albeit rolled into the cost of the DVD). Now, thanks to P2P I can pay the same price for the same content, only this time without a physical copy, and I have to pay for the distribution (bandwidth) myself. How is that a good deal?
If they want to provide this content at a discount that reflects the fact that they're getting distribution of their product for free, then maybe it would be a good deal. As it is now, though, it's just content providers getting something for nothing.
Re:In typical Slashdot fashion... (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that it's a legally acquired, licensed download approved by the BBC.
Try to RTFA next time and the student will be enlightened.
Matching legal to reality (Score:4, Insightful)
The only way to really deal with it is to give it some leeway while trying to make some revenue, somehow, out of it all. The fact that those files will be tacked down with DRM will surely keep this from flying, but generally the idea is a good one. It could've been done with a "members only" torrent tracker (where you gotta pay the BBC to become a member), with the torrent info only available on their tracker.
THEN it is possible to crack down on sites offering that torrent, too, because the torrent hash itself is owned by the BBC, not by someone who just "allows" others to use it. It's their 'content', so to speak.
Yes, that could've been a success. Devaluating it by adding enough DRM to weigh it down certainly doesn't help it.
For a moment I thought the BBC had a clue... (Score:2, Insightful)
"The titles will be protected by digital rights management software to prevent the programmes being traded illegally on the internet."
this is a non-starter (Score:2, Insightful)
Overlooking the fact that they spelled "programs" incorrectly (this is, after all, for the US market), media outlets still don't "get it" that DRM is a non-starter with many consumers.
Re:Misleading Headline & Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
My main point is that there is no way for them to make the programs available to you that doesn't cost them money. This is especially true for older programs. They have to get them from the old tapes and such and convert and encode them. Then they have to distribute them somehow. Even if they used p2p, they would take a hit from being the initial seeder. Someone would need to manage all this, and IT stuff isn't cheap. So they would have to get money for this from somewhere. What are their sources of money? 1) The TV license, 2) govt money, 3) money from doing deals where people pay to see BBC programs. Both 1 and 2 are going to be coming out of the pocket of UK citizens. So you'll really just be paying to watch anyway. So they pursue #3. Assumedly, the money that is made from this is what causes your TV license to be the price it is. Or does the BBC make a profit that goes to shareholders? If not, then I would think adding new costs for making shows available to the UK for "free" would just increase the license price. And as others have pointed out, if they start putting stuff out for p2p, it makes it more likely that these files will be redistributed worldwide, eroding their ability to make deals for #3, which would think decrease their money and raise your TV license again.
So while I wish they would make all their shows available on p2p for free with no DRM for anyone to download, I think the reality is that if this happens, it will come out of your pocket.
Bollocks... (Score:1, Insightful)
Nothing to see here, move on.
Re:Count your blessings (Score:3, Insightful)
The Wire, Deadwood, Rome, the Sopranos, Battlestar Galactica, Good Eats...
These are just some that I like. Others could probably name a dozen more of comparable quality. Granted, Deadwood and the Sopranos will be off the air soon. Also granted, the cable subscription required to obtain these legally from basic cable + premium cable (HBO) costs at least 6 times the BBC license fee.
Sadly, the closest US-equivalent to the BBC news is... BBC news. It's why we're going to hell in a handbasket. Even NPR doesn't compare. It doesn't do much for the credibility of a news organization when they have to begin and end each broadcast with an advertisement from their underwriters in agribusiness, defense contracting, and charitable trusts managed by the heirs of deceased robber barons.
Double payment?? (Score:2, Insightful)
"now they've sold it to be shown on a different channel which we have to pay to receive. Bastards."
ok, so you got to see it a few times for free (subject to licence fee) and now the BBC is trying to sell it to the rest of the world and commercial networks so they can bring in more cash to fund programming.
Would you rather they left it in a basement and just charged more for the licence fee?
Re:Count your blessings (Score:2, Insightful)