Re: So what does this really mean

[John Crisp]

On 16/09/16 18:13, michael norman wrote:
>
>
> Oh dear, a can of worms.

Yes a can of worms of your own making by engaging in 'Farage' like,
sweeping, ill informed and abusive comments. As one poster said, the
reason why many left the UK was to avoid people like yourself. Write in
haste, repent at leisure.

> To make try and make clear what I said it was
> aimed at people who move their homes and everything else abroad, enjoy
> benefits of UK residence and don't expect to pay for it. I'm talking
> about expats who leave UK with fat pensions taking advantage of their UK
> status by buying cheap property and contribute nothing locally.
>

> Absolutely not people like yourself thats a whole different thing, how
> the BBC sorts this out I have no idea.  Is it the BBCs job to do so ?
> Can it do that ?
>

Somehow you manage to try and separate a certain 'stereotype' of
pensioners, of which you know seem to know nothing, from any other
person who has moved abroad ? You can't, just as broadcast rights do not
differentiate beyond in or out of the UK. You are therefore abusing
every person who has chosen for whatever reason to live outside of the
UK. Rich, poor, retired or not.

Lets be clear. It is technically very easy to watch BBC, or any other UK
channel from abroad. Getting yourself a Sky box for a lot Europe is the
easiest way. Online catch up from anywhere on the planet if you have VPN
to a UK IP address. The internet was built to get around blocks. The BBC
isn't going to beat it. The old days of restricted local markets became
redundant the moment people had sufficient bandwidth to download music,
and later video. Companies still try, but it will always be an uphill
struggle. The current system is a mess.

The comments were as to why the BBC could not or would not allow people
of any nation, be they expats or foreign nationals, to pay for that.

Your comment 'enjoying the benefits of UK residence' are ridiculous. Is
it really a right for the British only to enjoy? If it is then why are
you as a licence payer blocked from viewing your 'right' from abroad ?

TV is just another saleable commodity.

I'm sure that as a model Brit you are happy to sell British products,
but clearly only ones that suit you. Perhaps with Brexit, Britain should
just stop importing and exporting ? Mine is mine, and yours is yours as
well. Perhaps Hollywood should ban all film sales to the UK. Does that
appeal ?

You also seem to forget the amount of content the BBC sells abroad
already, presumably at a healthy profit, which helps keep YOUR licence
fee down. So jolly foreigner is already paying for and subsiding "YOUR" TV.

Why can you pay Netflix or iTunes or Amazon or other services on a
worldwide basis but not the BBC ? It seem that many would be happy to do
so, and why does the BBC not entertain this potential source of revenue
? I presume it is due to the issues with music rights etc that have been
previously covered on this list which would take some renegotiation, but
surely that would be a sensible avenue for them to pursue ?

Oh, and don't forget, you can charge all those rich ones MUCH more can't
you ? Perhaps you'll be happy then, though somehow I doubt it.


JC



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Mark Carroll]

On 16 Sep 2016, Roger Bell West wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:30:39PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>>(Why is this the only one out of hundreds of mailing lists I'm on where
>>people care so much about topic drift?)
>
> You've asked this before. I can only assume you mostly favour lists
> that encourage general chat as well as the subject they're about.

That's an interesting thought -

> Your experience is not mine.

Nor mine, though I tend to favour technical lists (as I thought this
was), maybe that's the difference? A quick look through the topics of
the lists I'm currently on yields nearly wholly software and operating
system stuff. For example, people who are asking general UNIX questions
don't last long on the OpenBSD lists. So, if I want more general chat I
go somewhere more clearly indicated for it (indeed, last night I was
chatting on a Slack channel that was actually named #chatter and earlier
that day one named #random).

I keep an eye on quite a few lists that centre on topics I care about.
There are only so many hours in the day, I have full-time work, a
family, etc., too - it would be a real loss if I had to wade through
everything from political advocacy to social commentary on each list
just to get to the articles that are actually worth my while to read. My
MUA has decent killfile capabilities but I do like to try to give people
a chance and it's not cut-and-dried because some people who contribute
plenty of noise also do offer some valuable signal too so perhaps my
fault is that I do try to killfile only lightly.

None of us really know what the BBC's going to do to make get_iplayer's
life difficult in the future, we can just hope that workarounds are
again feasible. I pay for my television licence, I'd like an easy way to
find and watch the shows without having them bundled with the BBC's
provided UI. It certainly beats when I lived in the US and we had the
awful selection they chose to share via BBC America - I would have
gladly paid for a licence then too if that would have allowed me to
watch the content available in the UK. Though, I could see that the BBC
probably did sell to other US channels besides PBS: at least, on US
television I saw suspiciously many decent American-voiceover
documentaries with weirdly many of the interviewees being from UK
universities.

(That's the end of the metadiscussion / digression again for me though,
back to regular service I hope!)

-- Mark

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Alan Milewczyk]

On 16/09/16 22:30, David Cantrell wrote:

On 2016-09-16, 21:03, michael norman wrote:


Are we not OT with this ?


Hi, welcome to the internet. It's a place where people talk about 
things and there is topic drift. I'm afraid that if you don't learn to 
put up with it you're going to get very upset very quickly.


(Why is this the only one out of hundreds of mailing lists I'm on 
where people care so much about topic drift?)



Because some people are just too anal about some things? ;-)

It's a bit rich of the complainant as his comment encouraged some of the 
OT comment, although it's probably OK if it's from him! :-(


Happy weekend all.

A


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[RS]

From: David Cantrell



Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 20:44


Have you seen the quality of TV programming in Italian and German? THAT is 
why they want English content, and also why their own content is not worth 
protecting.


Yes, although only FTA.  I don't agree that it is all bad or even mainly 
bad, and in German the choice is wide.  However if there is such an EU-wide 
demand for English language television let's fund it on an EU-wide basis. 




___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Roger Bell_West]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:30:39PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>(Why is this the only one out of hundreds of mailing lists I'm on where
>people care so much about topic drift?)

You've asked this before. I can only assume you mostly favour lists
that encourage general chat as well as the subject they're about.

Your experience is not mine.

R

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[David Cantrell]

On 2016-09-16, 21:03, michael norman wrote:


Are we not OT with this ?


Hi, welcome to the internet. It's a place where people talk about things 
and there is topic drift. I'm afraid that if you don't learn to put up 
with it you're going to get very upset very quickly.


(Why is this the only one out of hundreds of mailing lists I'm on where 
people care so much about topic drift?)


--
David Cantrell | Pope | First Church of the Symmetrical Internet

People from my sort of background needed grammar schools to
compete with children from privileged homes like ... Tony Benn
 -- Margaret Thatcher

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[michael norman]

On 16/09/16 20:44, David Cantrell wrote:

On 2016-09-16, 19:16, RS wrote:


I am not convinced by the argument that European copyright licences
would be much more expensive because 38% of the EU population speak
English as an additional language.   People want to watch television in
their mother tongue.  13% of the EU population have English as their
mother tongue, the same as Italian.  For German the figure is 18%.
German broadcasters are very liberal at making their television channels
freely available.  The Italians make SD RA1, RAI2 and RAI3 available
unencrypted.


Have you seen the quality of TV programming in Italian and German? THAT
is why they want English content, and also why their own content is not
worth protecting.

At the risk of being told some people don't want to live in the country 
as me, exactly what does this have to do with GIP even tangentially ?  I 
thought we were discussing access to BBC content ?


Are we not OT with this ?

I just ask.

M

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[David Cantrell]

On 2016-09-16, 19:16, RS wrote:


I am not convinced by the argument that European copyright licences
would be much more expensive because 38% of the EU population speak
English as an additional language.   People want to watch television in
their mother tongue.  13% of the EU population have English as their
mother tongue, the same as Italian.  For German the figure is 18%.
German broadcasters are very liberal at making their television channels
freely available.  The Italians make SD RA1, RAI2 and RAI3 available
unencrypted.


Have you seen the quality of TV programming in Italian and German? THAT 
is why they want English content, and also why their own content is not 
worth protecting.


--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig

  NANOG makes me want to unplug everything and hide under the bed
-- brian d foy

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[RS]

   From: Jim web
   Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 18:03



One hope of remaining in the EU is that the EU has been moving towards a
'no boarders' approach to broadcasting.


Unfortunately the Television without Frontiers Directive does not go far 
enough.  Even so, as a national broadcaster funded by what is in effect 
although not in law a tax, the BBC ought to be upholding the law.  To agree 
national copyright licences is an unlawful partitioning of the Single 
Market.  Far from promoting the Single Market, the UK broadcasters have been 
going in the opposite direction by leasing satellite transponders with 
narrower and narrower beams.


I am not convinced by the argument that European copyright licences would be 
much more expensive because 38% of the EU population speak English as an 
additional language.   People want to watch television in their mother 
tongue.  13% of the EU population have English as their mother tongue, the 
same as Italian.  For German the figure is 18%.  German broadcasters are 
very liberal at making their television channels freely available.  The 
Italians make SD RA1, RAI2 and RAI3 available unencrypted.






___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Jim web]

In article <20160916160554.ga26...@bytemark.barnyard.co.uk>, David
Cantrell  wrote:


> If a tiny number of geeks can circumvent the restrictions by using VPNs,
> or hiring a server in the UK, or using VLC to watch a DVD, that really
> doesn't matter. What matters is blocking the masses.

Yes. And blocking mass copying of any material. Although that can be
detected by other means. But everyong involved knows perfectly well that
some 'leakage' will occur. It simply isn't practical or cost effective to
try to block *all* unlicensed access. Just to keep the levels down to what
is low enough to avoid it causing the BBC problems.

FWIW the people I know who live outwith the UK would be happy to pay the
fee for full access to the BBC as within the UK. And people I know inside
the BBC would be pleased if this could be arranged. Might significantly
increase their income. But at present the BBC aren't *allowed* to do this. 

One hope of remaining in the EU is that the EU has been moving towards a
'no boarders' approach to broadcasting. This is the stop companies like
Sky, etc, from charging people different amounts in different locations.
The change would probably have allowed the BBC to choose to offer access to
people across Europe in exchange for paying the fee. However this
presumably can't happen because the BBC will be excluded.

All still OT, though. 8-]

Jim

-- 
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[David Cantrell]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 04:39:53PM +0200, Dave Widgery wrote:

> I realise that there is are rites issues and it is not just the BBC or tv, 
> they tried region coding dvds it doesn't work, with gobal movement of people 
> the whole rites thing needs a rethink.

Actually it does work. It doesn't need to be 100% effective, it just
needs to be *sufficiently* effective.

Many years ago, for example, I worked for the BBC on some very early
Olympic online streaming. The International Olympic Committee were happy
if our geographic blocking had an error rate of 10%. That is, if someone
from outside the area we had rights for tried to access it they were
happy with a 90% change of them being blocked.

If a tiny number of geeks can circumvent the restrictions by using VPNs,
or hiring a server in the UK, or using VLC to watch a DVD, that really
doesn't matter. What matters is blocking the masses.

-- 
David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing

There is no one true indentation style,
But if there were K would be Its Prophets.
Peace be upon Their Holy Beards.

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Paul Thornett]

"I find your idea of all these expats who would pay for the BBC or
anything else quite risible.  These are the same people who have left
UK to avoid paying irritating things like taxes and BBC licence fees."
Actually, many of us married people from overseas; then it becomes a
difficult decision as to which country to live in. I find the
assertion contained in Michael Norman's statement above totally
offensive.
Mind you, a country filled with people of his ilk is not one I would
wish to live in.

Regards,

Paul Thornett


On 17 September 2016 at 01:21, michael norman  wrote:
> Rites ? What ? Rights surely.
>
> Strikes me all the BBC is trying to do is make sure, on trust, that those
> who access its content pay for it.
>
> The BBC pays for rights to its programming same as any other broadcaster
> does one way or another, that has to be paid for.  Worldwide rights are not
> available in any universe I can think of.
>
> I find your idea of all these expats who would pay for the BBC or anything
> else quite risible.  These are the same people who have left UK to avoid
> paying irritating things like taxes and BBC licence fees.
>
> M
>
> On 16/09/16 15:39, Dave Widgery wrote:
>>
>> I realise that there is are rites issues and it is not just the BBC or tv,
>> they tried region coding dvds it doesn't work, with gobal movement of people
>> the whole rites thing needs a rethink.
>>
>> But none the less I am sure some accommodation could be included in the
>> rites to allow nationals of the country that have been granted the rites to
>> have access to the programming even if they currently aren't in the
>> territory of the county in question at the time.
>>
>> On 16 September 2016 16:11:12 CEST, Dave Liquorice 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:51:00 +0200, Dave Widgery wrote:
>>>
 Whatever blocks the bbc and other broadcasters put there will always
>>>
>>> be a

 way past the system,  so why not accept this and look at ways to
>>>
>>> increase

 revenue from the millions of British people who would quite happily
 contribute but forced to find ways around the system if they want
>>>
>>> quality

 tv.
>>>
>>>
>>> One word "rights".
>>>
>>> I wonder how much the BBC would have to spend to get worldwide rights
>>> on all
>>> their content? Assuming the worldwide rights are available in the first
>>>
>>> place.
>>>
>>> I wonder how much the BBC would have to pay in rights violations if
>>> they
>>> didn't get worldwide rights?
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> get_iplayer mailing list
> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[michael norman]

Rites ? What ? Rights surely.

Strikes me all the BBC is trying to do is make sure, on trust, that 
those who access its content pay for it.


The BBC pays for rights to its programming same as any other broadcaster 
does one way or another, that has to be paid for.  Worldwide rights are 
not available in any universe I can think of.


I find your idea of all these expats who would pay for the BBC or 
anything else quite risible.  These are the same people who have left UK 
to avoid paying irritating things like taxes and BBC licence fees.


M

On 16/09/16 15:39, Dave Widgery wrote:

I realise that there is are rites issues and it is not just the BBC or tv, they 
tried region coding dvds it doesn't work, with gobal movement of people the 
whole rites thing needs a rethink.

But none the less I am sure some accommodation could be included in the rites 
to allow nationals of the country that have been granted the rites to have 
access to the programming even if they currently aren't in the territory of the 
county in question at the time.

On 16 September 2016 16:11:12 CEST, Dave Liquorice  wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:51:00 +0200, Dave Widgery wrote:


Whatever blocks the bbc and other broadcasters put there will always

be a

way past the system,  so why not accept this and look at ways to

increase

revenue from the millions of British people who would quite happily
contribute but forced to find ways around the system if they want

quality

tv.


One word "rights".

I wonder how much the BBC would have to spend to get worldwide rights
on all
their content? Assuming the worldwide rights are available in the first

place.

I wonder how much the BBC would have to pay in rights violations if
they
didn't get worldwide rights?





___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: So what does this really mean

[Dave Widgery]

I realise that there is are rites issues and it is not just the BBC or tv, they 
tried region coding dvds it doesn't work, with gobal movement of people the 
whole rites thing needs a rethink.

But none the less I am sure some accommodation could be included in the rites 
to allow nationals of the country that have been granted the rites to have 
access to the programming even if they currently aren't in the territory of the 
county in question at the time.

On 16 September 2016 16:11:12 CEST, Dave Liquorice  wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:51:00 +0200, Dave Widgery wrote:
>
>> Whatever blocks the bbc and other broadcasters put there will always
>be a 
>> way past the system,  so why not accept this and look at ways to
>increase 
>> revenue from the millions of British people who would quite happily 
>> contribute but forced to find ways around the system if they want
>quality 
>> tv.
>
>One word "rights". 
>
>I wonder how much the BBC would have to spend to get worldwide rights
>on all 
>their content? Assuming the worldwide rights are available in the first
>
>place.
>
>I wonder how much the BBC would have to pay in rights violations if
>they 
>didn't get worldwide rights?

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: So what does this really mean

[Dave Liquorice]

On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:51:00 +0200, Dave Widgery wrote:

> Whatever blocks the bbc and other broadcasters put there will always be a 
> way past the system,  so why not accept this and look at ways to increase 
> revenue from the millions of British people who would quite happily 
> contribute but forced to find ways around the system if they want quality 
> tv.

One word "rights". 

I wonder how much the BBC would have to spend to get worldwide rights on all 
their content? Assuming the worldwide rights are available in the first 
place.

I wonder how much the BBC would have to pay in rights violations if they 
didn't get worldwide rights?

-- 
Cheers
Dave.



___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Jim web]

In article <975c5a4d-a8e2-46cc-83f2-d33f9024e...@gmail.com>, Dave
Widgery
 wrote:
> I just wish the bbc would stop wasting money trying to stop the
> unstoppable

They know full well that they can't ensure total compliance, and that real
life is complex. Their aim is to ensure people have been told, and to
minimise the levels of dodging to the point where it has little impact.

Frankly, if someone wants to watch the BBC TV output they should pay if
they can. I am a keen supporter of the 'free' software, etc, movement. But
the point there is that the authors, etc, *intend* the output to be free.
Whereas the BBC relies on the Fee to pay for it's operations and generation
of the content.

However this is really OT, and old ground being reploughed...

Jim

-- 
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: So what does this really mean

[Dave Widgery]

I just wish the bbc would stop wasting money trying to stop the unstoppable, ex 
pats who are not allowed to pay for a licence and I think the majority would, 
and the people who pay for a licence but spend many months of the year abroad 
who are denied access to tv that they pay for.

Whatever blocks the bbc and other broadcasters put there will always be a way 
past the system,  so why not accept this and look at ways to increase revenue 
from the millions of British people who would quite happily contribute but 
forced to find ways around the system if they want quality tv.

Dave

On 16 September 2016 09:03:57 CEST, Simon Morgan <s.mor...@skm.org.uk> wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On
>> Behalf Of The Kernel
>> Sent: 16 September 2016 05:45
>> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: So what does this really mean
>> 
>> On 15/09/16 15:23, Simon Morgan wrote:
>> > However it isn't a requirement to have a licence for on-demand
>> > ITVPlayer programmes or other sources such as Netflix.
>> 
>> My point exactly
>> And that really the detail is unclear
>> And quite frankly, enforcement will be near impossible in some cases
>> 
>
>Well the detail is clear enough for me - I need (and have) a licence.
>Enforcement is altogether a different matter. While there are veiled
>talks
>about techniques being developed, in reality it relies on honesty which
>may
>be a commodity in short supply.
>
>If there was to be some form of logon required for online access then
>one
>would hope that the developers of get_iplayer could accommodate this.
>
>Rgds
>Simon Morgan
>
>
>___
>get_iplayer mailing list
>get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
>http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: So what does this really mean

[Simon Morgan]

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On
> Behalf Of The Kernel
> Sent: 16 September 2016 05:45
> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: So what does this really mean
> 
> On 15/09/16 15:23, Simon Morgan wrote:
> > However it isn't a requirement to have a licence for on-demand
> > ITVPlayer programmes or other sources such as Netflix.
> 
> My point exactly
> And that really the detail is unclear
> And quite frankly, enforcement will be near impossible in some cases
> 

Well the detail is clear enough for me - I need (and have) a licence.
Enforcement is altogether a different matter. While there are veiled talks
about techniques being developed, in reality it relies on honesty which may
be a commodity in short supply.

If there was to be some form of logon required for online access then one
would hope that the developers of get_iplayer could accommodate this.

Rgds
Simon Morgan


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[The Kernel]

On 15/09/16 15:23, Simon Morgan wrote:

However it isn't a requirement to have a licence for on-demand ITVPlayer
programmes or other sources such as Netflix.


My point exactly
And that really the detail is unclear
And quite frankly, enforcement will be near impossible in some cases

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: So what does this really mean

[Simon Morgan]

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On
> Behalf Of RS
> Sent: 15 September 2016 13:47
> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: So what does this really mean
> 
> > From: RS Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 12:31
> 
> > What about programme web sites?
> 
> Do I now need a television licence to watch www.bbc.co.uk/news?
> For example, is today's item on the centenary of the tank a programme
> the form and content of which are comparable to the form and content of
> programmes normally included in television programme services?
> Does that make it an on-demand service provided by the BBC?
> 
> At one time I had a boss who didn't go out for lunch, but he used to
> listen to the lunchtime news at his desk.  Suppose instead he had
> watched www.bbc.co.uk/news on his desktop computer, and he was still
> doing it now.
> Is the employer required to buy a television licence?
> 
> 
You need a licence to watch any BBC TV programmes on iPLayer, live or on
demand.
 See..
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/bbc-iplayer-and-th
e-tv-licence

However it isn't a requirement to have a licence for on-demand ITVPlayer
programmes or other sources such as Netflix.

Also you don't need a licence to listen to BBC radio programmes either live
or on demand. See...
http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/radio/other/tvs/radio_tv_licence

I think the intention was always pretty clear following the Government's
statement earlier in the year.

Rgds
Simon Morgan


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[RS]

From: RS Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 12:31



What about programme web sites?


Do I now need a television licence to watch www.bbc.co.uk/news?
For example, is today's item on the centenary of the tank a
programme the form and content of which are comparable to the form and
content of programmes normally included in television programme services? 
Does that make it an on-demand service provided by the BBC?


At one time I had a boss who didn't go out for lunch, but he used to listen 
to the lunchtime news at his desk.  Suppose instead he had watched 
www.bbc.co.uk/news on his desktop computer, and he was still doing it now. 
Is the employer required to buy a television licence?






___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[RS]

From: Jonathan H
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 07:52



On the iPlayer site it says (my emphasis)



"To watch or record live TV programmes on any channel, *or* to watch
or download BBC programmes on iPlayer when you're in the UK, the
Channel Islands or the Isle of Man".


Have you or anyone else asked OFCOM what it means?

This article says it does not apply to radio programmes or S4C.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/75983/tv-licence-fee-changes-what-you-need-to-know
Is that right?  Where in the legislation does it say that?  As far as I can 
see a licence is now needed to listen to or download BBC radio programmes 
using iPlayer (and probably podcasts as well) , but I can't be sure because 
it is so badly drafted.


There is an amendment s368(3) of the Communications Act 2003.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/704/regulation/9/made
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/368
The difficulty is that there have been a huge number of amendments to s368 
which have not yet been incorporated in legislation.gov.uk.  They may be in 
Halsbury's Statutes.  I haven't yet checked.  They relate to all sorts of 
things including children's programmes and electronic cigarettes.  The 
amendments relating to Guernsey and Jersey do not help clarity.


Without a fully annotated copy of the section including all the amendments 
which are in force, it is impossible to construe it.


I have not heard any suggestion that the change was intended to cover radio 
programmes.  Perhaps we should all write to our MPs to ask what they 
intended the change to mean.


Since writing this I have come across this.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2009/2979/regulation/2/made
I have also seen amendments to it.  It may be that a radio programme is 
outside the definition, "its principal purpose is the provision of 
programmes the form and content of which are comparable to the form and 
content of programmes normally included in television programme services". 
What about programme web sites?






___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Jim web]

In article <976c65ba-82a3-d20a-fe66-c35f07f6d...@su2root.ukfsn.org>, The
Kernel  wrote:

> Catchup is not  either of those, at least not as I read it. And services
> such as Ch4/5 don't have any info that I see about a TV Licence

I assume they feel it isn't their job to do so, or check.

The BBC don't routinely tell you that you're paying for the ad-based
commercial channels every time you go shopping, either. :-)

Jim

-- 
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[Jonathan H]

On the iPlayer site it says (my emphasis)

"To watch or record live TV programmes on any channel, *or* to watch
or download BBC programmes on iPlayer when you're in the UK, the
Channel Islands or the Isle of Man".

On 15 September 2016 at 05:14, The Kernel  wrote:
> On 14/09/16 07:44, SquarePenguin wrote:
>>
>> On 14/09/2016 07:04, The Kernel wrote:
>>>
>>> Don’t forget, you still need a TV Licence to watch or record programmes
>>> on any channel as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV
>>> service
>>>
>>> ? On any channel - really? Do they mean any BBC or ANY...
>>
>>
>> They mean any. That's been the law for decades.
>>
>> http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> get_iplayer mailing list
>> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer
>>
>
> I read it to mean
> 'As they are being shown' or 'Live'
>
> Catchup is not  either of those, at least not as I read it.
> And services such as Ch4/5 don't have any info that I see about a TV Licence
>
>
> ___
> get_iplayer mailing list
> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[The Kernel]

On 14/09/16 07:44, SquarePenguin wrote:

On 14/09/2016 07:04, The Kernel wrote:

Don’t forget, you still need a TV Licence to watch or record programmes
on any channel as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV
service

? On any channel - really? Do they mean any BBC or ANY...


They mean any. That's been the law for decades.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one



___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer



I read it to mean
'As they are being shown' or 'Live'

Catchup is not  either of those, at least not as I read it.
And services such as Ch4/5 don't have any info that I see about a TV Licence

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: So what does this really mean

[SquarePenguin]

On 14/09/2016 07:04, The Kernel wrote:
> Don’t forget, you still need a TV Licence to watch or record programmes
> on any channel as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV
> service
> 
> ? On any channel - really? Do they mean any BBC or ANY...

They mean any. That's been the law for decades.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer