When things start coming down cables, be it internet or otherwise, I can see a massive push from the public in having adaptive TV, both from the BBC and the commercial companies.
I don't see why a license payer should fork out for the management of a website or website content that they may never use. I don't see why I should pay for Simply or Eastenders or other expensive shows. I've never listened to the BBC Radio 3, 4 or the Asian Network, so why should I pay for them? I'm sure it's a similar story for every one of you.
Short of encrypting channels and using cards to decode them, then clearly we're not at that stage, but I can see it being the case in a decade, where the public is pushing for adaptive licences - at some stage it will probably replace the adverts of commercial channels (adverts are becoming increasingly defunct... who actually watches them? Those with PVRs of some description are usually in position to fast forward and anyone else will just change channel or go and make a cuppa). Sky are doing it a similar way, but it's horrible inefficient (for everyone other than Sky).
The only negative for me is that it would stifle truly unique ideas from coming through, though maybe you could tax the charges to go to a big pot for creative programming.
Either that or cut the BBC right down to the core (news, factual programming, education, perhaps kids, etc) and then offshoot a commercial side to provide the sports and entertainment.
The whole TV system needs a massive shake-up in my opinion. It's become too expansive and full of absolute crap. Stop wasting bandwidth on QVC and the likes while you're at it.