I am sure that BDS do pay the BBC.
The difference here is that the BBC, as Backstage, made the content
available for use...
and as such, has a clear responsibility to BDS, and any other
commercial user, as well as
the members of Backstage, to make sure that everyone works within the
BBC's terms as the
data supplier.
Can the BBC have their cake and eat it? I think not.
On 23 Jun 2006, at 13:04, Peter Bowyer wrote:
On 23/06/06, Simon Huggins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The one part of this I *really* don't get is that accurate TV listing
data is only going to generate more viewers. So why on earth
would you
want to restrict it?
Because 'generating more viewers' is only one part of the value
commercial value of listings data to the broadcaster. And a
diminishing one, at that - it's easy to argue that there are already
more than enough places that an interested viewer can find out what's
on BBC1 tonight at 9pm, and the existence of another adds nothing to
the audience figures.
If an aggregator wants to add value to listings data to serve their
own commercial ends, why shouldn't they pay royalties to the data
provider?
Peter
(Devil's Advocate-in-Chief)
--
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
archive.com/[email protected]/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
