BBC to Offer Video Downloads for Mac. Apple TV Considered.

[The Phazer]

YOu know, the thing that gets me is that they own, in general, so much of the content they're putting out,

They own, to all intents and purposes, 100% of *none* of their content (certainly less than a tenth of one percent).

Just for a start, nearly every BBC programme features some form of commercial music licenced from the majors. That doesn't belong to the BBC, it belongs to the majors, and is licenced for very specific territories and timeframes. That's why most DVD releases and US airings of BBC programmes have to have some of the music changed.

If there are any scriptwriters they retain copyright in their script. Any extracts belong to the company that made them. 25% of their content is made by independent production companies, and belongs to them. Any stills used belong to someone like Corbis. News footage often has a few shots from the Associated Press or Reuters. Any film clips are owned by the studio. Any actors performances are effectively owned by Equity in trust.

Phazer

 

[firestarter]

I hope they don't put BBC TV on the Apple TV

Or at least they have some sort of control over who gets it.

I got rid of my TV 18 months ago and haven't missed it. I also stopped paying my TV licence (naturally) as I wasn't receiving BBC TV. If there's a good TV series I want to see, I just add it to my Amazon DVD rental list (most decent documentaries come out on DVD within 2 months).

I'm worried that the BBC will force people who buy an TV or run iTunes to pay the licence fee - as they would have the CAPABILITY to receive BBC TV - much in the same way that they force SKY to include the BBC in their cable packages so that cable consumers also have to pay the fee.

 

[slot-a]

The non-streaming version isn't going anywhere - it's the only way you'll ever be able to sync content to portable devices, looks much better on a TV screen and will be the only plausible way to deliver HD content, all of which are being built.

The BBC would much people to use the download service, because it hasn't got the money or infrastructure to support the bandwidth required if the streaming service grows significantly - it doesn't bring in any extra revenue if it's successful, since there isn't any advertising.

Phazer

The streaming service doesn't use Siemens/BBC infrastructure for content delivery - all content is delivered by Akamai and bandwidth costs simply aren't an issue. The download service's usage is probably rather insignificant when compared to streaming, which is due to it being a piece of ****. An international version of the streaming iPlayer is allegedly coming, with a subscription/ad-supported model to further boost BBC Worldwide's soaring profits.

I'd expect to see portable device streaming will be coming at some point in the near future, targeted at the current "cool" devices. DRM issues will prevent a "downloadable" version for said portable device, but what is streaming if it is not downloading and saving to a file? I'd expect to some raised eyebrows with regard to the implementation if/when it comes out. If there isn't too many industry complaints then we could see an end to the current download crapware and a move to a solution that'd make everyone happy.

But this is all just conjecture, of course..

 

[Daveoc64]

Or at least they have some sort of control over who gets it.

I got rid of my TV 18 months ago and haven't missed it. I also stopped paying my TV licence (naturally) as I wasn't receiving BBC TV. If there's a good TV series I want to see, I just add it to my Amazon DVD rental list (most decent documentaries come out on DVD within 2 months).

I'm worried that the BBC will force people who buy an TV or run iTunes to pay the licence fee - as they would have the CAPABILITY to receive BBC TV - much in the same way that they force SKY to include the BBC in their cable packages so that cable consumers also have to pay the fee.

None of those scenarios are accurate or true.

You need a licence to operate TV equipment for the purposes of receiving "as live" broadcast TV. That includes TVs, Set Top Boxes, Tuner Cards and IPTV services no matter what platform they are using - Cable, Satellite, IPTV (over a broadband connection), or Terrestrial.

The BBC gets the money, but you have to pay the fee regardless of whether or not you can pick up a BBC signal of any sort. Some people in very remote areas can't get any TV channels - if they want to try, they need a licence even if it is just for ITV, Channel 4 or Five.

As such, the BBC iPlayer does not currently require a TV licence to use and that would not change if it did come to iTunes or the Apple TV as you wouldn't be watching a live broadcast.

As for Cable/Satellite, they are under no obligation to carry the BBC channels (in most cases). They are very popular channels however, so not carrying them is not a good thing for the platform.

 

[BlakTornado]

one of the best car shows ever

Correction: One of the best shows ever.

 

[The Phazer]

The streaming service doesn't use Siemens/BBC infrastructure for content delivery

Yes it does, in combination with RedBee (formally BBC broadcast). I've been inside the server room. Akamai just support it.

- all content is delivered by Akamai and bandwidth costs simply aren't an issue.

They are - Akamai charge by how much their servers are being used. Bandwidth is *the* issue with them.

The download service's usage is probably rather insignificant when compared to streaming, which is due to it being a piece of ****.

Which is due to it being P2P. Indeed, the P2P service was invented instead of just streaming in the first place like the radio player

An international version of the streaming iPlayer is allegedly coming, with a subscription/ad-supported model to further boost BBC Worldwide's soaring profits.

BBC Worldwide's international iPlayer (Kangaroo) will be primarily download, as it's intended *first and foremost* to sell permanent copies of programmes to the British public. It'll be geo-IP locked on launch. It will likely offer some streaming content and some international content within 2008.

I'd expect to see portable device streaming will be coming at some point in the near future, targeted at the current "cool" devices.

I doubt it if it isn't already possible. Adobe are already doing a *lot* of work on Flash to make it near impossible to download streaming files and the server work for the BBC, which will necessitate the latest version of Flash. The files will play on devices that support the current version of Flash, and won't stream to anything that doesn't.

DRM issues will prevent a "downloadable" version for said portable device

Nope. You'll be able to sync downloaded files to portable devices that support MS DRM very shortly (indeed, it's running behind schedule), and if the Apple/iTunes rental deal ever happens it'll allow downloads to go to iPods.

but what is streaming if it is not downloading and saving to a file?

It's a transitory medium that's watched once while connected to the original content provider, and once they've removed it can't be watched again.

Microsoft and Adobe are doing *lots* of work on making saving streamed files to all intents and purposes impossible, and I've little doubt Apple will do the same in an attempt to keep market share.

I'd expect to some raised eyebrows with regard to the implementation if/when it comes out.

It's already out.

If there isn't too many industry complaints then we could see an end to the current download crapware and a move to a solution that'd make everyone happy.

HD content delivery will only be possible in the UK given our broadband infrastructure by broadband for the next twenty years at the very least. That alone will lead to a big increase in the use of the download client.

But this is all just conjecture, of course..

Mine isn't.

Phazer

 

[pale9]

Or at least they have some sort of control over who gets it.

I'm worried that the BBC will force people who buy an TV or run iTunes to pay the licence fee - as they would have the CAPABILITY to receive BBC TV - much in the same way that they force SKY to include the BBC in their cable packages so that cable consumers also have to pay the fee.

dont want to get tooo political here, but that is real euro-socialism at work!
they are shoving stuff down your throat for your own good, or so they think. and you have the honor of paying for it! here is the usa tv is the crappiest it has ever been, one brain dead 'reality show' after the next. good movies? those are rare now (no wonder they cost alot more to broadcast). but, and this is the big but, nobody is forcing you to pay to watch this stuff.

 

[MikeTheC]

[excerpted from original post]

1. The BBC is a license fee-funded public service broadcaster.
2. The BBC isn't allowed to "sell" anything, nor put ads on their broadcasts, domestically or overseas.
3. The broadcast is free, but you have to pay to support it.
4. BBC Worldwide is the BBC's commercial division, which can sell content domestically and overseas.
5. The BBC iPlayer is offered by the BBC, not BBC Worldwide, so cannot offer content outside of Britain.

1 & 3. I am aware of that. And you're right -- the ethics (or lack thereof) are beyond the purview of this board.

2 & 5. I am also generally aware of that, though I'll admit I was unaware of the particulars. After all, I'm not a Briton.

4. That's fine. Again, I wasn't aware of the specifics of their export business organization.

I'm not trying to argue any of those points. All I'm trying to say is that their rights restrictions do impact my ability to enjoy their content. And it's sad, too, in a way, because I actually wouldn't mind popping say £2 - £3 per episode of Dr. Who, as I quite enjoy it and would like to be able to show my support for it.

And separately, let me say that while I'm quite aware the BBC (obviously BBC Worldwide) sells Dr. Who overseas to us in the U.S., the price they're charging is more like price gouging. But that's neither here nor there for the purposes of this thread or this section of MacRumors.com.

[in essence]The BBC hardly owns anything they show.

Really? I mean, I'm aware if there's externally-produced content they want to use, it has to be licensed, and I would never gainsay that point.

I guess this is just very revealing how very complex (and in my opinion really screwed up) things are in the world of entertainment.

------


All of this kind of thing (I'm not just leveling this against the BBC, don't misunderstand) is a part of what is forcing me further and further away from the Entertainment Injusticetry. I'm just not interested in supporting (or being a party to) any of this.

I am not in the least bit interested in having to be bothered with recognizing intellectual property rights or any of the other legal brouhaha when all I am trying to do is be entertained for an hour. But the fact that our societies are trying to force all of this regulatory and licensing legality down our throats makes whatever end product that's produced not worth the effort (on my part) to obtain.

 

[heterochro]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7233252.stm

This is good news!! Can't believe its been so long!!

You can also watch bbc videos on the iphone. http://vtap.com. Quality is not great though :-( for bbc content. The other sites are fine though.

 

[calinlofin]

Downloading BBC programs would be an excellent move, especially as the Beeb produce some quality documentaries.

 

[applemax]

Downloading BBC programs would be an excellent move, especially as the Beeb produce some quality documentaries.

... and comedy, and entertainment, and movies, and sport, and music.