Read more.Quote:
Move is expected to kick off a game of IP whack-a-mole with VPN service providers.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Move is expected to kick off a game of IP whack-a-mole with VPN service providers.
Would have made a lot more sense blocking VPN services before they closed this down.Quote:
Earlier this year the BBC closed down an international version of iPlayer which allowed overseas users to view content for a small fee.
this is the bbc... they don't know how to manage anything because they've never had to worry over money due to the tv license.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimano
Common sense would have been to do a 'worldwide' subscription service with a regional lockdown like you say... they could have made it so it was region unlocked to those who pay a UK tv license and live primarily in the UK (you might want to watch Eastenders while on holiday) by adding a code to the tv license or something similar. To be fair though I'm actually struggling to think of anything I watch that's on the bbc these days....
Mind you I hate region locks and other geographical restrictions such as delays in other countries with a passion, they're just an antiquated system that media companies are still hanging on to while constantly complaining about piracy which is 'largely' due to these restrictions and 'communities' no longer being regionally restricted....
What a d*** move
They're playing Hopscotch but they're several turns behind. The winners will be specialised VPN services that won't be so easy to trace.
Also, it appears that you're no longer British if you're on holiday or working overseas (but still paying license fees).
Here in the UK we pay a licence fee - i.e. we PAID for the content whether we liked it or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by outwar6010
Foreign users did not pay the licence fee so the BBC allowing them to view iPlayer content for free is rather like Sky letting anyone use Sky Player for free. It's not a "d*** move" at all, it's simply insisting people contribute their fair share to the costs of producing entertainment they enjoy, sadly in today's world there are plenty of people who make the "d*** move" of thinking they are entitled to have whatever they want to watch for free. Unfortunately because of those people the BBC are trying to close a loophole which may have the collateral effect of limiting a very small number of legitimate UK licence payers but fact is 99.9% of legitimate users are not using a VPN to watch iPlayer.
Yea it's not like they regularly have to justify what they spend our money on...Ohh wait...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by LSG501
As much as you either like or dislike the BBC i can't think of any other media service that compares in terms of price vs content.
and the last time they actually had anything done other than a verbal telling off over 'high wages' was.... and don't forget their latest request for more cash under the premise of 'digital programs' etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Corky34
To be fair a high percentage of the bbc broadcasting these days is repeats so you could easily compare them to itv or channel 5, they may not make all the content (to be fair the bbc outsources a lot too) but they show as much if not more 'original' content as the bbc. It's also not so much about how much they make but what they show on tv because it's not exactly great these days, same rubbish in things like eastenders (even down to old cast returning) while new things like Dr Who has turned into a joke (and I love sci fi stuff) and Poldark (one of their latest 'hits') seems to be aimed at bored housewives. Even my nan in her 80's doesn't seem to watch the bbc anymore....Quote:
As much as you either like or dislike the BBC i can't think of any other media service that compares in terms of price vs content.
A BBC spokesman:
“These figures simply aren’t plausible. All our evidence shows the vast majority of BBC iPlayer usage is in the UK. BBC iPlayer and the content on it is paid for by UK licence fee payers in the UK and we take appropriate steps to protect access to this content.”
Also all the sport has left the bbc cricket, golf etc so there really isn't all that much left on there they are rapidly becoming irrelevant. Yes they make the odd good documentary and wildlife programmes but not much else.
Well it seems a bit silly to fine them like we do with the train companies, the money only comes from one place after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSG501
Personally i would either restrict the wages or directly fine the execs for wrong doings, but that's a whole other kettle of fish. :)
Fair enough, obviously how people view (no pun intended) the BBC is very subjective, personally i watch/listen/read a lot of BBC content so personally think the £10 odd a month is well worth the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSG501
As someone who lives in the uk I feel it is a d*** move. The content was paid for by us and it shouldn't really be a big deal if people want to stream it from abroad. Hell even content we download is unusable after a month or so. So what's the point?Quote:
Originally Posted by kingpotnoodleHere in the UK we pay a licence fee - i.e. we PAID for the content whether we liked it or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by outwar6010
Foreign users did not pay the licence fee so the BBC allowing them to view iPlayer content for free is rather like Sky letting anyone use Sky Player for free. It's not a "d*** move" at all, it's simply insisting people contribute their fair share to the costs of producing entertainment they enjoy, sadly in today's world there are plenty of people who make the "d*** move" of thinking they are entitled to have whatever they want to watch for free. Unfortunately because of those people the BBC are trying to close a loophole which may have the collateral effect of limiting a very small number of legitimate UK licence payers but fact is 99.9% of legitimate users are not using a VPN to watch iPlayer.
Well this all started a year or so back when they realized they had a good service.
So naturally they have to balls it up as much as they can ;)
Also forgot to mention that any comment about UK folks paying a license and so only they get access is total crap. You DO NOT need a TV license to access the iPlayer. At least not the non-live shows on it.
However that is set to change in the next few years. currently a license is only required for view of live streams. It's getting changed to cover non live streaming of digital content however.
i don't about everyone else but stopped watching tv many years ago and i don't pay tv license. that's not to say i don't watch serials like game of thrones etc but there is nothing that interests me on bbc . like mentioned earlier all the decent sport has gone and you can normally purchase streaming subscriptions for btsport and the others.
oh and bbc news is the most bias crap i have ever seen
I don't understand why they haven't implemented fixed logins for iPlayer, in the same way that Sky have for Sky Go. Surely that would go a long way to ensure that only people with valid TV licences (i.e. living in the UK) have access to the content?
But for expats and internationals wanting access, it seems stupid not to make a paid subscription available.
That becasue sky is an advertising company who occasionally show content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumanji
The BBC is s content provider who occasionally advertises.
But aren't some of them already paying the licence fee, which is a subscription of sorts? I don't see why, as someone said above, you couldn't add in an element where you 'sign in' with your licence fee number. All ITV wanted from me to watch the rugby online was an email address, which they'd had for ages. It can't be that hard for the boffins at the beeb to put a similar system in place. I'm sure they will do, when they finally lock down iPlayer to only those who have payed a licence fee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumanji
I really hope that the TV License comes to an end forcing the beeb to adopt the current subscription model. At present there is so little programming tailored for me on these channels that I would almost certainly not subscribe. They would need to significantly up their game to compete with the early adopters.
Didn't think that GoT was on the Beeb :p. And I don't think they can be blamed for the greed of the FA etc, and there's always the golf and tennis etc that IS covered. News is "biased" - to left wing/socialist side, but for foaming at the mouth while being useless you can't beat Sky News or its US equivalent, Fox. The fact that Sky, and especially Fox, call themselves "news" I find offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbtree
Back to the iPlayer thing, the Beeb has always handled this badly. I find it so unusable that for anything other than EastEnders I use get_iplayer instead. Anything more exciting than EE means more stutter than a rap artist, even on my TiVo that has a dedicated 10mb connection.
Got to agree with others that some simple way to accommodate ex-pats or holiday users should surely be possible, and I've little faith that the blocks put in place will not be quickly bypassed.
Yes there are many UK VPN service that have servers in UK and other countries and have great protocols that help to encrypt data so its not easy for BBC to block all VPNs and their UK Servers. http://www.bestvpnprovider.com/purevpn-review/ PureVPN is the best option and hope still not blocked by BBC iPlayer.
Yet research shows it actually has a slight right wing bias, i guess no matter what they do they're going be accused of bias from both sides, :)Quote:
Originally Posted by crossy
Surely that's a sign that they're not biased at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky34
I refuse to believe any organisation as large and ungainly as the Beeb has the ability, never mind the intention, to be deliberately biased.
I personally have no issue with this but as others have pointed out they need to add some kind of authentication to work around it or replace it.
But, I would just prefer an end to the TV license. It's so out of date, most people do not watch live TV any more and the Beeb have lost so much exclusive content and I left wondering what the hell we are actually paying for now.....and the answer is dancing shows, terrible sitcoms and eastenders.
Why don't they set up a VPN service (or just open up to non UK residents as a paid for service) which undercuts the current providers and the money contributes to the same pot the TV Licence does. In an ideal world it could only improve the BBC....
And a 24 hour news TV channel, a dedicated Parliament TV channel, 2 dedicated childrens TV channels, a TV channel dedicated to the type of documentaries & Arts programming that is too niche to garner mainstream audiences, A Welsh language TV station, 3 national popular music radio stations, 1 national classical music radio station, 1 national news radio station, 1 national sport radio station, 2 national spoken word radio stations, 1 national Asian radio station, 40 local radio stations, the 85th most popular website in the world, the iPlayer and the World Service.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
£12 a month goes quite a long way.
I would say it's more a sign of how our perceptions can differ from reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by spacein_vader
All of which most license payers don't care about.Quote:
Originally Posted by spacein_vader
I suspect that the BBC has little or no content that over 50% of licence payers access, with the possible exception of the website. I also doubt that many don't use any of it. That said, Radio 2, 4 & 1 are the most popular radio stations in the country & BBC Local stations cumulative figures would make it the 5th.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
[Sandbox]In my opinion the BBC should be retained but I do agree the current licencing model should be replaced. That said, I don't think it should become a subscription model so that some people are locked out, maybe some tax on the purchase of a TV?
I do think the Beeb could be pruned quite heavily though. In my view it exists to bring to audiences content that is not commercially viable or where there is little competition. For example I'd keep BBC 4, BBC Alba, CBBC, Cbeebies, BBC Parliament, BBC News 24, Radio 3, Radio 4 (+ 4 Extra,) Radio 5 (+ 5 Extra,) 6 Music, World Service, Asian Network & Local stations as they all fit this model IMO. Sell Radio 1 & 2, and most of what is broadcast on BBC 1, 2 & 3, condensing what remains into BBC 1.
Do this, block VPNs and make an overseas sub available for iPlayer and we're getting somewhere. [/Sandbox]
I lived in the UK for years and know about the TV license debacle.
Even had issues with receiving threatening letters and intimidating fellows knocking at the door, at a stage when I did not even have a TV.
As for the law, you only have to pay if you are watching or recording live TV, so if you are watching via a catch up service, no license is required. Therefore they should not be preventing anyone from watching it (as long as it is not live TV). What they need to do is to set up 2 separate sections, 1/ where you can watch live TV only if you log in (as a paid subscriber) and 2/ solely for catch up.
I suppose that the problem for the BBC bosses would be that they would presume everyone would just watch catch up.
One big problem I had with the license was that it is for the BBC (being that it is not a private business, but a a public business due to about 75% of it's funds come from a government controlled TAX), so why do you need one if you watch everything else except the BBC.
I now live in Australia and I find it has just as bad programming (I suppose that would depend on you perception of BAD) but with no license cost, and rarely watch live TV (usually record shows like MotoGP or F1 but also sometimes live). I record everything I watch for 2 reasons. the first is because they have sooo many adds and the second is that they have unsettled times for the programming like the 6 o'clock news will start at 5.50PM and finish at 6.50PM (meaning that programs time slots are not run to the hour or half hour, plus they love to have shows, particularly those "reality shows", overrunning their time slot - all in a attempt to prevent you from changing channels). Plus all the different stations put the good shows on in the same time slot. So I use a HTPC with 2x dual tuners, a dual tuner PVR and my TV has dual tuners and a PVR system and another 2x TV's also have a PVR function, just so I can record all the shows.for viewing at my leisure, at times when they are only showing rubbish. To top it off, I still watch and enjoy British ITV via a VPN (comes though clear with no jarring, et ecetera as we have high speed cable), particularly for certain shows (example BTCC racing is not easily available here) and all these shows I watch are through their catch up service.
In the end, I find most shows are unwatchable rubbish (example - I cannot understand how a show watching other people watching TV ("Gogglebox") could be considered good entertainment - how low is the barrel being scraped to come up with this), but that is only my opinion.
No, but some people care about some of it some of the time. It is (or set up to be) an inclusive service that has something for everyone some of the time. And at £10 month (how much is a cinema ticket these days?) even if you only watch an hour a week, it's still good value, plus all the free radio services that are provided. Free as in free from commercial advertising that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
This is a shame as despite living it the UK, I use a UK VPN for privacy, so it sounds like despite being a license fee payer, I'm still going to get blocked out anyway
Wow! but I am sure that Nord, Express, Cyberghost will contrive a way to get around it.
I second your opinion, PureVPN is a good choice but there are other quality VPNs like NordVPN or ExpressVPN that are better choices in terms of unblocking ability and online security & privacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by emmalopez
err actually you do. That changed legally, like the law got changed and you do now need a licence to watch iplayer. Have done for a couple of years now. It's not 2010 anymore!Quote:
Originally Posted by Plasmastorm
edit: oh FFS it's a thread necro by a new joker trying to get their post-count up.
ok folks I just got sucked in here - when it's a thread peterb posted in just 5 posts back the alarm bells started ringing. This is from 2015. It's a massive necro-resurrection. Davidbeel not content with trying to resurrect it once in April tries again a month later responding to his own post? WTF? Can you muppets please stop dredging up out of date threads and find something sensible to comment on? Seriously how far back did you even have to hunt to find this thread? Nothing in the 10 reams of other threads since caught your fancy? Really, nothing at all? Why oh why can Hexus not lock threads more than 3 years old????
https://www.nicepng.com/png/detail/3...vor-nelson.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by ik9000
Irritating, isn't it?
I really hope the TV license ends up forcing to adopt the current subscription model. There are so few programs suitable for me on these channels that I would hardly subscribe. They would need to significantly improve their game to compete with early adopters.
/me waits for ik9000's inevitable triggering...
<Michael Jackson popcorn meme>
They can. I did a few times, back when I could. But it needs spotting to begin with, and then just because a thread is old doesn't necessarily mean an update isn't appropriate. That can be a judgement call. Or at least, that was my logic back when I had to worry about it. Also, if there was an "auto lock if last post is > three years old", I never saw it, and that leaves a lot of posts for part-time volunteer mods to lock.Quote:
Originally Posted by ik9000