Read more.Governing body may introduce licence fee for iPlayer users.
Read more.Governing body may introduce licence fee for iPlayer users.
Personally have no issue with this, as long as my license fee reflects the additional revenue they will be receiving due to the change...
0.2% of viewers use iPlayer? I thought it would be higher than that?
And how, exactly, do they plan on enforcing this? Will ISPs be forced to hand over the details of people accessing the services? Or does everyone with an internet connection get pestered whether they use iPlayer or not?
Another great boot in the gob for web neutrality then...
'However, the governing body is concerned that as catch-up TV becomes increasingly popular, and available across a wide range of platforms, users may decide to do all their TV watching online and therefore escape the licence fee completely.'
Don't you have to have a TV license if you own a TV, regardless if you only use it for playing games on consoles. Hence its called a TV licence, not a BBC licence.
No, the article is a little too truncated IMO. The source reads:
The BBC insists that no changes are needed, pointing to its own research showing that only 0.2% of households watch only catch-up television, with no live viewing, each week.
Noxvayl (31-10-2011)
Nope, it's only if you watch broadcast TV. Similarly, it applies if you use a laptop or mobile phone, yet it's still a "TV License". The on demand isn't live, so it doesn't count as "broadcast TV" which is the loophole described here.
You can own a TV and use it for playing games and not have to pay a license.
I'd post a link to the site that says this, but I can't just yet.You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.
Actually, that's a fairly large number of households assuming the % is across all UK households - current estimate is around 27 millions UK households, so about 54,000 don't have a TV license but still watch BBC catch-up content via iPlayer. That's close on £8million in license fees if they were all forced to pay up...
I'd be happy with an ad supported iPlayer (doen't that happen overseas if you access BBC services?) - but that just won't happen.
@scaryjim The point I was getting at was that the Hexus article says "only a small percentage (0.2 percent) of its viewers use the iPlayer." That's completely different to what the Guardian are saying; "only 0.2% of households watch only catch-up television, with no live viewing, each week." Those two quotes don't mean the same thing.
Nope, according to http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one:
A cut in license would be nice, but I suspect that the overhead involved in collecting the "extra" fees would completely wipe out the extra revenue gained. For example, all those internet TV's, Wii's, PS3's (?) etc will need a new version of the iPlayer software that allows the input of the license code information somehow.You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast.
Actually I don't really have much of an issue in itself with collecting the license on non-license paying iPlayer users - however, the fact that it'll completely cream-cracker the excellent "get_iplayer" utility that I use every week to grab a load of radio programmes, that I couldn't access "live", is a major disappointment. I can't really see the Beeb allowing whatever system is used to enforce the license requirement being available to the developers of such tools - because, of course, we're not supposed to be using them anyway.
No-one's commented on an interesting point - the Beeb seems content not to apply the license fee to iPlayer users, and it's the government that seems to be forcing the issue. I wonder why...
Hands up if the cynic in you has a strong feeling that said license law change will merely eliminate the 'TV tuner' requirement, thus forcing all computer owners to pay for the licence regardless of if they own a TV.
*raises*
Yeah, I got that - I was just pointing out that the 0.2% of households that *only* watch iPlayer is still actually quite a large number...
I didn't think the BBC was allowed to run advertising except for its own products. If they're going to go for general advertising then they can ditch the license fee full stop and become a proper commercial station. A better plan would be to sell the rights to catch-up TV to sites like seesaw (I believe they already do this with some shows), who can then slap whatever advertising they want on it to recoup the cost of the licensing.
EDIT: it turns out that seesaw is no more. Anyone know what happened to them?
EDIT2: apparently, this happened to it.
I have a problem with this myself and my partner are not married, we only need one TV licence for the house, it is in her name, however the TV licensing people seem unable to grasp this fact, and I get threatening letters every now and them which I have given up even responding to, (every time you buy a TV/reciever the shop has to send in your name). If we have to have one for Iplayer, they will probably insist it is for the licence holder only, not member of the household.
(\__/) All I wanted in the end was world domination and a whole lot of money to spend. - NMA
(='.*=)
(")_(*)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)