TV Nation

www.bit-tech.net/column/43

 

Good read, it's about time that someone came up with something for those of us who want to watch television via the internet - I mean, there's Sky Plus which allows you to view what you want, when you want, so it's about time someone did this for those of us who use a computer.

I know that ATI's All In Wonder is good for this thanks to the MMC software, but you can't watch channels such as Fox (the one that 24 is on in the US) in the UK, so again, you get screwed by the system... where someone over the other side of the world gets to see something before us in the UK.

 

I think the whole "delayed release" thing should stop. Why should europe anod others get the thick end of the stick? It's partly because people cant get their fix asap that they turn to these other means. I'd pay for TV on demand over p2p if it meant i could get good quality stuff as soon as it "aired".

 

I'd rather pay £10 a month to be able to download shows, than to pay it each month for a TV license.

 

I love my SKY+ also, but when you know a show that you are waiting for is being aired in the states (say 24) earlier than here, well its hard not to search for it on the net.
This I dont see as doing anything wrong as I subscribe to SKY who will be airing the same programme anyway, but I'm sure others would disagree.

 

Argh, TV lisenses, yea i know what you mean. What also aggrovates me is that i dont watch TV and only use one for DVDs, but if i wanted to not pay a TV lisense id have to rip out the integrated reciever equipment inside to qualify.

If i could pay for TV i only watch, when i want to watch it: that would be superb.

 

i like the idea of paying for just what you watch on because it would just be

Topgear
OverHaulin'
American Chopper

basically discovery

but what pisses me off is that people suggest using peer to peer for the content distribution. why should i pay to download a legal show off someone elses internet account/bandwidth? i'd be giving money to sky so i can get overhaulin' yet i'm downloading it from someone else who pays for their internet. so sky don't pay for have to bandwidth and they just make profit. some how that doesn't seem fair that we pay for the product and the distribtion.
i mean you'd be pissed off if you had to pay for petrol and then pay for it to be tanked to your house.


*this rant may not make sense*

 

I understand what you mean, but by doing a content distribution network you could afford not to have adverts in the stuff you download perhaps?

Anyway, it's not like ANYONE would let you download anything to keep like it is now. Most likely they'd bundle their own software and it would be encrypted and deleted once you've watched it.

 

The reason I suggest P2P is that if you're serving 700MB movies to thousands of people at a time, the cost of Internet provision will be prohibitive. By using Bit Torrent or suchlike, the service itself would be a lot cheaper to subscribe to, but you'd still get fast downloads of popular content. As broadband gets faster, this kind of model will look more and more attractive. If you've got 1Mb upstream like some people in continental Europe, are you going to care if 256Kb is being used now and then by your TV downloads P2P service? People accept that already for illegal sites - why not for legal ones where quality is assured?

 

with this kind of model, capping of connections would have to be reduced by ISP's. They would more likley cap the slow upload most get now as well.
They don't seem to like large downloaders/uploaders at the moment, and even if you have no restrictions they may still send you out a letter under their fair usage policy.

Kristian

 

That's a fair point. But likely to be true of any kind of movie/TV download activity, even without P2P.

 

what in the hell... you brits need a license to have a TV?!

man, the cost of living over there that I'm acknowledging gets higher by the day.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't downloading TV shows that are available to watch for free (ie on public TV, not cable) perfectly legal? Or any TV that you'd be able to view through your cable (or whatever) subscription, as you could record it using a PCI TV tuner yourself anyways (just saving yourself the time and trouble)?

 

Its legal to watch the broadcast, but illegal to record (depends on the country and whether it's DRM'ed or not iirc) and distribute it.

We have to pay to "recieve TV signals" but as every TV comes with an integrated reciever these days (of course) if you own a TV = TV lisence.

 

Strictly speaking the TV licence is for "operating equipment installed for the purpose of receiving broadcast television signals". There is real case law to back up the fact that if you only own a TV for watching prerecorded DVDs or Videocassettes then you do not require a TV licence. There are many variations on the concept of detuning the channels and the like but the reality is that if you own a TV/video/etc and have no aerial connected and no channels tuned in Envision/TV licencing would be very unlikely to secure a prosecution against you if you didn't have a TV licence. This does not stop, however, TVL from sending repeated threatening letters that promise everything from large fines to deportment to Guantanamo Bay if you do not have a licence registered at your address.

As far as public broadcast content in the UK at least it would be a criminal offence to record and then redistribute any content without the permission of the copyright holder so no, downloading them isn't legal over here at least unless you are doing so with the permission of the copyright holder.

Interestingly, however, the BBC is planning to make a large part of its archive availible online over the coming years for anyone in the UK to download and, as I currently understand it, for no fee since the UK licence payer has already paid for the content. Last I heard on this was that they would probably block free downloads to overseas locations which would mean it would probably still be illegal to send the stuff outside of the UK.

J

 

We pay for 5 commercial-free (BBC) channels. That's worth the license fee. I've stopped watching the Simpsons now it's got ads.

 

Yea, but they argue it as if you have the equipment (ie receiver) then you have to pay for it because you have the potential to receive it. The operating equipment is the receiver hardware inside, but it's all integrated and you'd have to go to great lengths to selectively turn it off.

I know about the letters - they didnt believe one couple didnt have a TV in their house and ended up searching the house for a TV to prove that they didnt have one!

 

Hi,

I have a question though. I'm a big fan of tv-shows like top gear. Now I can watch them every week on bbc. But alot of the times I forget to look, or I forget to record it. So I miss it.

Now my question..
How illegal is it for me to download the latest top gear episode on my computer.

My arguements why it shouldn't be "that" illegal.
- I'm already paying for cable tv, so I paid to watch the show.
- I pay for my bandwidth, so downloading the large files, I pay for it aswell (about 0,15-0,20 euro)

(I get 10gb per month traffic, and If I need extra its 1euro per gb per month)

So how is downloading the episode, any different from asking a buddy to tape it and pass it on...

Sure its somewhat illegal.. but isn't it in the grey zone? I could have recorded it myself using my computer.. It has been on my TV-channels.

Thanks
L

 

For damn sure. A world without the BBC would be a sick, sick place. License fee whingers are foooools.

I think everyone downloading all their television would be a bit sad really. We already all spend too much time on the internet, television offers a respite (even if it is pretty much the same thing, it's at least a *little* bit more social).

Also, if everyone only watched what they wanted to watch, they'd never ever watch anything interesting or educational by accident... just 24/7 "Joey".

 

While a service like that would be nice I don't think many would end up using it. There are already DVD "rental" sites out there that let you download WMV compressed DVDs that you can watch for a day. The problem is that you end up paying about as much as you would in Blockbuster, plus the quality is not nearly as good.

The real future of this market can be found in on-demand style cabel systems, I think.

Personally, I have a PCI TV Tuner, I just set it to record the shows that I like to watch and they are ready and sitting on my HD for when ever.

 

This is what a lot of people think about music, too. But what you're failing to realise (as with most music sharers who say something similar) is that you don't own the content because you have bought (or have for free) a right to consume it in one format. Just because you have the right to watch a TV show does not give you the right to it on DVD, for instance. Similarly, owning an LP record does not give you a right to a song in MP3 format - unless you take the trouble to record it yourself.

Encoding involves work, and that's what you pay for. I know from one perspective it doesn't make sense. But bear in mind that the person who records a TV show in DivX or whatever only has the right to use it for personal use. They don't have distribution rights. So the files you download are illegally distributed. But, then, there is no legal distribution channel as yet (the point of my article).