News BBC to launch music store

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/05/bbc-to-launch-music-store/1

BBC Worldwide is to launch a music download service offering free streaming and paid-for downloading of sessions recorded by the licence fee funded BBC.

 

Hmmm... I don't think it is a problem to charge for download-to-keep - they already do that with e.g. DVDs of BBC shows, and your licence fee doesn't entitle you to keep a permanent copy of broadcast content (you can use a VCR/PVR/DVDR etc. to "timeshift", but not for archival).

On the other hand, subjecting licence-payers to adverts in the streams is objectionable - the key strength of the BBC is that it is not ad-funded. Fair enough to insert ads into streams to non-UK IPs (much as they do with the BBC news website now, I understand, though being in the UK I haven't seen the ad supported version), but streams to UK IPs should be funded by the TV licence revenue, much like BBC radio.

To explain for non-UK people, we pay a licence fee in the UK to use TV receiving equipment. You don't need to pay a licence fee to receive radio, but the licence fee does fund BBC radio, which therefore has no ads. This is awesome, because radio ads are infinitely more irritating than TV ads.

 

Yeah I agree, the license fee covers broadcasting, which is what you get for free, always has been with everything the BBC does. If you want a permanent copy, you stump up for it. It's not like this was something we used to get for free, and now have to pay for. If you don't want to pay, nothing changes in your life. If you do, you get more. It's not like those anti-payment people are losing anything, they just aren't gaining anything.

 

I probably won't mind, as long as it's advertising stuff on the BBC.

 

It should be interesting since the beeb do have a huge back catalogue of bands who have played live with them. I bought a Jam at the BBC album, its excellent. I don't mind paying to keep stuff but having to sit through ads on the streaming service would get old, thus why i listen to Radio 2.

 

I've been using audacity to record radio for years, I actually thought you were allowed to.... woops. Anyway you're not really paying twice, the licence free covers running, broadcasting and making costs, you then pay for a permenant copy.

You wouldn't expect a free DVD every time you saw a film at the cinema would you? Despite the fact your money helps fund the film.

 

i wouldn't mind the led zeppelin sessions recordings for nothing

 

I dont think its that bad.
I assume this idea was thought of by the international arm of the BBC rather than the licence free funded part of the corportation. So i dont see a problem that they charge for this service, afterall it is going to cost them more if they have to create 2 seperate services for licence fee payers and the rest of the world. If there was to be a free service for UK licence payers, then it should be the licence funded arm of the BBC that sets up and pays for this service. But I guess they have chosen not to do this right now, maybe in the future.

 

I thought bit-tech were above BBC bashing. You do realise that the international wing actually lowers the license fee (I believe it's seven pound per person)? The profits made go directly back to the license fee (payer), which is, good value for money no matter how you look at it. Especially for technology enthusiasts such as ourselves.

They work with the content given and mean the BBC remains competitive with other commercial entities because popular shows get more attention and the staff benefit. Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear presenter, is a good example of how the system works in our advantage.

What a skewed and populist view ("Pay twice for your Beeb content.") you take, are you that desperate for traffic?

On a side note, while their website uses content produced from other sources within the organisation, it only accounts for £4.32 of your license fee a year. Obscene value for money.

 

The description and parts of the article are biased, somebody obviously has a complaint with the TV licence and it really shouldn’t be brought into an article where its relevance is limited.

I am willing to buy a series of Spooks from the BBC because I accept that it is a ‘hard copy’ of the program. It is my understanding the TV Licence supports the broadcast of shows and music, not to allow everybody the complete library of BBC productions on a ‘hard copy’.

Doesn’t look like I’m the only one with this opinion, so it would be good to get a response.

On a positive note, the idea does look really good. If it’s anything like as popular as the iPlayer it should be a success.

 

I don't think it is unreasonable to expect to pay for a permanent copy of any material distributed by the BBC, i'd extend it to being able to keep copies of programmes airing on iplayer too, but for less than that charged for a full blown DVD. I do think that BBC DVD releases could be priced more reasonably in the UK though, to take into account the contribution of license fee payers to making the production in the first place.