Tv licences

[wooders1978]

So last year I watched a grand total of 4 things on the good old beeb
People just do nothing (finished now)
This country (finished now?)
Masterchef the pros
Great British menu

Apparently it will now cost £134 quid a year - I've decided I'm not paying that for masterchef and gbm,despite my enjoyment of them, I think I'll live without them (dont they end up on the good channel anyway?)

Anyone else opting out?

[Paul Calf]

No. I'm not sure how you can be a comedy fan who decides that you're never going to watch anything on the BBC ever again.

[Dr Trouser]

I'm considering it - after the 6 nations have finished.

There's plenty of ways I can watch the few things I'm actually interested in.

[Paul Calf]

Watching things that other people have paid for is a strange way to seize the moral high ground.

[Dr Trouser]

Eh? Where did I say that?

[Johnny Yesno]

Apparently it will now cost £134 quid a year

It's actually £154.50.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Watching things that other people have paid for is a strange way to seize the moral high ground.

There's a connection between paying to access, and the funding of original programming. Doesn't really apply to live sporting events in the same way.

Most sporting events are happening regardless of how many people are tuning in. The additional money tends to go on the stuff that doesn't matter. The additional camera angles, the studio, the pundits, in the case of football the absurd salaries. But there is a bloke with a well positioned camera in every professional football or rugby match and the internet allows you ways of accessing that for free.

Instead of moral midgetry it may be worth asking why, given original programming and live sport is better financed and more popular than ever, the access of it for free is an issue? It quite clearly isn't an issue by virtue of the growth and success of TV and live sport.

The people who want to pay for it are. The ones who aren't are not impoverishing anyone, nor do the people paying seem to care.

[a duncandisorderly]

what pisses me off is the restricted access to the (BBC) stuff I've helped to fund by paying my £150 a year.

I'm in madrid 1/4 of the time, & have to pay additionally for a VPN (& yes, I know I could set up my own...) to get at iplayer. it should know it's me- I have to sign in these days, so why do I need a VPN to fool it into thinking I'm in the UK?

& then stuff I want to watch again has vanished. it's because it's bought-in from an independent production company or whatever, & the BBC has limited exploitation of it, but then there's no way of getting it at all- no DVD, no streaming, not on iplayer any more... fuck-sick of it, I am.

the £150 a year isn't the issue, it's the conditions of use.

[Crisps?]

They could and should fund the BBC via taxation, but since they choose to instead stick with the unnecessarily convoluted and unfair system of every address needing a licence to own a "television", nobody should pay the fee, even if they watch the BBC 24/7.

[Sebastian Cobb]

what pisses me off is the restricted access to the (BBC) stuff I've helped to fund by paying my £150 a year.

I'm in madrid 1/4 of the time, & have to pay additionally for a VPN (& yes, I know I could set up my own...) to get at iplayer. it should know it's me- I have to sign in these days, so why do I need a VPN to fool it into thinking I'm in the UK?

& then stuff I want to watch again has vanished. it's because it's bought-in from an independent production company or whatever, & the BBC has limited exploitation of it, but then there's no way of getting it at all- no DVD, no streaming, not on iplayer any more... fuck-sick of it, I am.

the £150 a year isn't the issue, it's the conditions of use.

It used to be so they could make money on stuff via BBC worldwide outside the UK. And without some sort of geoblocking any old herbert could pretend to be from the UK. However the EC are now allowing for 'roaming' in the EU so that if you live in France and go on holiday to Germany you should still be able to watch the same library you get in France. People who live in Germany will have their own libraries.

Geoblocking in the UK is pretty rubbish, it's basically impossible to tell any more than 'UK' due to the way isp's work, so you have to end up asking for postcodes if you had a reason to restrict things further.

I'm not all that bothered about needing a vpn. What I find the biggest shame is the fact that the tories forced the bbc to use production companies and let them retain the rights so it's basically very expensive for the bbc to put archive content on iplayer because it counts as a new medium outwith the contracts. Whereas ITV and the like, even when using production companies would set clauses meaning they owned the content.

[St_Eddie]

This thread is well timed because I have been wondering about my TV licence this past month.  I didn't have one for the last few years because I couldn't get a signal at my old flat but as soon as I moved into my new address, I paid for one.

That was three months ago and in that time I've basically watched absolutely bugger all on the box (BBC or otherwise) because there's fuck all that I want to see.  I generally only watch one programme every couple of weeks and even then, it's not something I'm particularly arsed about watching (for example, The Graham Norton Show).  Might not bother renewing it once it expires (I don't look forward to getting harassed with non-enforceable threatening letters non-stop, as I did at my last address though, but that's hardly a reason to keep forking over money for a service I don't use).

Glad I've got it for the upcoming Alan Partridge show though, I must admit.

[Small Man Big Horse]

I'm just trying to work out what I've watched over the last six months on the beeb, and I think it's only: Vic and Bob, A Year In The Life Of A Year, Doctor Who, Island Of Dreams, The Secret Story Of The Christmas Tapes, Stewart Lee Content Provider, the Not Going Out Live episode, Inside No.9, a few episodes of the increasingly bland Would I Lie To You? and Pls Like, but I might have forgotten a few things.Still, for Inside No.9, Who and Vic and Bob alone I don't mind paying, and it makes me feel less guilty about all of the tv I torrent.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I'm torn between wanting to make a stand against their horrific news output and wanting to support the vestages of something good that manifests itself in programmes on BBC Four, 6 music and Radio 4.

Also, can you imagine one of the other 'big 5' trying to put on something like the proms?

[a duncandisorderly]

I'm torn between wanting to make a stand against their horrific news output and wanting to support the vestages of something good that manifests itself in programmes on BBC Four, 6 music and Radio 4.

Also, can you imagine one of the other 'big 5' trying to put on something like the proms?

I worked on an OB for BSB once (remember them?) from the church in smith square; I reckon there are, or were, or could be again, production companies that could handle stuff like the proms.
after all, the production companies are just people, & they all move around & do different things anyway.

& you can rent the trucks from the BBC, or use the sanctuary mobile & any number of tv trucks from visions or telegenic.... we used to use a BBC truck & the sanctuary audio truck (formerly the manor mobile) for Mtv gigs.

financing it, justifying it in terms of audience figures & the attendant earning-power of the broadcast & subsequent exploitation rights is another matter though.
do they do CDs or DVDs of the proms? never seen one*. would love to be able to buy stuff like that. can't even get it on iplayer. I mean, wherever the rights end up residing, someone's dropped the ball in terms of having the production continue to earn after it's happened.

same with external productions for the beeb- the one that started me off thinking about this was something I think I mentioned on here before- 'the island of the ghost bear', a co-pro with some german studio, with joss ackland narrating the tale of an island off the canadian coast where there are white bears that aren't polar bears...

anyway, I loved this doc, & when I unearthed my manky VHS of it, I stuck it on youtube. it was there less than an hour, before "the copyright owner" had it took down.
"fair enough," I thought, "I'll buy the DVD then."

no. it's not available to buy in any form. well, why the fuck not? I wanted to give it to people for their birthdays & so forth. ('I bet you did, you dirty bollocks....')

for now, then, you can only watch it if you have your own recording of it or you stumble on it on vimeo where- until very recently- things were safe from the lawyers.

this is just plain fucking stupid.

[*edit- there's loads on amazon, in fact. who knew?]

[Sebastian Cobb]

financing it, justifying it in terms of audience figures & the attendant earning-power of the broadcast & subsequent exploitation rights is another matter though.

Well that's it isn't it. I wasn't saying it was a technical problem. It's doing it well and not trying to cut costs.

It's probably easier for the bbc to justify when they can share events programming through multiple tv and radio channels though.

There's an article here on why iPlayer can't have archive content:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/13/the-bbc-will-struggle-to-make-iplayer-as-good-as-netflix

[biggytitbo]

I haven't payed it for a few years - i'm not paying to be lied to by BBC news, but then I rarely watch anything else they produce anyway. Seems like the drama is ok these days, but the general quality of the rest of the output has fallen through the floor.


Any slim possibility I might get a licence fee for the meagre amount of stuff I do watch has been removed by the egregious behavior of the Tv licensing cunts, so fuck em.

[a duncandisorderly]

There's an article here on why iPlayer can't have archive content:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/13/the-bbc-will-struggle-to-make-iplayer-as-good-as-netflix

that seems to be more about keeping the infrastructure up-to-date & having enough cash to compete for acquisitions; it doesn't answer the question of archive material- in fact, the article says that the BBC's function as a production company in its own right gives it an edge over netflix & amazon when it comes to content, & thus implies that they could build a huge library of desirable material.
exactly the opposite is true. they either don't or can't keep stuff on iplayer in perpetuity, whereas amazon & co will do long-term deals to keep content on their platforms long after its sell-by date.

[Sebastian Cobb]

that seems to be more about keeping the infrastructure up-to-date & having enough cash to compete for acquisitions; it doesn't answer the question of archive material- in fact, the article says that the BBC's function as a production company in its own right gives it an edge over netflix & amazon when it comes to content, & thus implies that they could build a huge library of desirable material.
exactly the opposite is true. they either don't or can't keep stuff on iplayer in perpetuity, whereas amazon & co will do long-term deals to keep content on their platforms long after its sell-by date.

My mistake, I linked the article without reading enough of it to realise I had the wrong one:
https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/tv-radio/2019/01/there-are-very-good-reasons-why-bbc-can-t-just-load-iplayer-archive-content

[Crisps?]

I think everyone has a nostalgic fondness for the BBC, being brought up with its programming and supporting the idea of a non-commercial TV channel, but whatever good stuff the BBC is doing these days seems to be drastically outweighed by its increasingly unconcealed political biases.

I download everything I watch anyway, since it's far easier and more convenient¹, whether it's from the BBC or not (almost always not), but if I had a TVL I would definitely stop these days for political reasons.


^{1. Sometimes episodes of TV shows are ripped without removing the ads and, as with temporarily experiencing the internet with no ad-blocking, they're just unwatchable after so long viewing with no ads.}

[a duncandisorderly]

My mistake, I linked the article without reading enough of it to realise I had the wrong one:
https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/tv-radio/2019/01/there-are-very-good-reasons-why-bbc-can-t-just-load-iplayer-archive-content

that's the one. yes, I've seen that before. it's about royalties payments to writers & producers & composers, & repeat-fees for actors.

(the reason ricky tomlinson left 'brookside' rather abruptly was a disagreement with redmond over overseas sales of the show- australia, in fact, in a bizarre exchange scheme started by michael grade during his brief tenure at C4, & after his scheduling coup with 'neighbours').

this: "placing such a series on the iPlayer in perpetuity would require the corporation to stump up for any secondary rights payments itself, to the detriment of programme making and commissioning budgets. It would mean damaging current productions at the price of enabling access to old."

but it's not about the trifling sums that would be involved (have you ever seen a PRS statement for radio/tv playing of music?), it's about an enormously cumbersome mechanism for assessing these sums & distributing them equitably. I contacted spotify a few years ago to ask about some of our stuff that was on their platform, & was told we weren't 'big enough' for them to do the admin of paying us for the streams. so I pulled the content. this is much the same thing.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Isn't there an actors guild thing that's a bit like the PRS for theatre and tv that could handle that?

In the case of Spotify, I'm sure that must've changed now as I know people who have self-released to it. One of them shouldn't have because strictly speaking the rights belong to some old label that grifted them. I imagine they got their arse in gear once people like Bandcamp cropped up.

[a duncandisorderly]

Isn't there an actors guild thing that's a bit like the PRS for theatre and tv that could handle that?

equity... I don't know if they have the same set-up as the PRS people. they should.

In the case of Spotify, I'm sure that must've changed now as I know people who have self-released to it. One of them shouldn't have because strictly speaking the rights belong to some old label that grifted them. I imagine they got their arse in gear once people like Bandcamp cropped up.

& of course, streaming off of bandcamp is free, for the most part, which is why we only make one track, or a 'sample' track streamable.

I'll look into spotify again... it's not the service itself I dislike- in truth, I'm impressed & pleased that ek has managed to persuade so many people to pay for streaming, but he's achieved this by going to the majors & begging them for access to their catalogues, & of course they still want to make money from this, so either new deals have been struck with the publishers & composers & artists (bottom of the list) or else old clauses have been invoked to cover streaming.

backstage at the leadmill in 1987, ian brown, reni & john squire pored over an offering from capitol (iirc) that had a phrase in it, "any & all future means of distribution" which, when most of us were just beginning to contemplate CD players, seemed like science fiction. this is one of the main reasons why so little of spotify's stream revenue reaches the artists. ek himself, by some accounts, is barely breaking even.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I thought Spotify was still making losses tbh. I thought much like netflix their main model involved burning through VC money.

[Paul Calf]

There's a connection between paying to access, and the funding of original programming. Doesn't really apply to live sporting events in the same way.

Most sporting events are happening regardless of how many people are tuning in. The additional money tends to go on the stuff that doesn't matter. The additional camera angles, the studio, the pundits, in the case of football the absurd salaries. But there is a bloke with a well positioned camera in every professional football or rugby match and the internet allows you ways of accessing that for free.

Instead of moral midgetry it may be worth asking why, given original programming and live sport is better financed and more popular than ever, the access of it for free is an issue? It quite clearly isn't an issue by virtue of the growth and success of TV and live sport.

The people who want to pay for it are. The ones who aren't are not impoverishing anyone, nor do the people paying seem to care.

No, that's fine. If you want to pirate content, I don't give a fuck; I'll even point you towards some DRM-removal software that might help you. But presenting pirating as a morally superior act to paying for the TV licence that pays for the stuff you like is a bit of a dead end.

And please stop saying 'moral midgetry'? It's not clever and is quite unpleasant if you think about it.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Is it morally superior to pirate things that would otherwise require giving money to Sky/Murdoch?

[ToneLa]

Is it morally superior to pirate things that would otherwise require giving money to Sky/Murdoch?

Morally AND socially!

[gabrielconroy]

I don't have a TV aerial and basically never watch stuff on iPlayer anyway (maybe once in a very blue moon indeed). I notified them that I don't need a licence ages ago and they keep sending me letters with massive red letters telling me an investigation is underway and to expect blokes with sledgehammers to come round and smash up my TV.

If it was paid for through tax I wouldn't care but as it is this unpleasant behaviour is really quite uncalled for. If they really have come round at some point I haven't seen them since I'm at work in the day.

[Johnny Yesno]

& of course, streaming off of bandcamp is free, for the most part, which is why we only make one track, or a 'sample' track streamable.

To clarify, you can pay to access the streams of the rest of the tracks, if the artist sets it up that way. The artist can also limit the number of free plays. Tbh, though, there's very few artists I'll stump up the cash for without a decent opportunity to listen and decide whether I like their material. I'm very unlikely to buy your album on the basis of hearing one track.

[Malcy]

I don't have one and since last July i have been getting the increasingly annoying letters coming through the post which usually ends in 'an inspector is paying you a visit' letter. Last week there was a sorry i missed you type thing put through the door on what looked like expensive glossy paper with totally inelligible handwriting on it.

I've no intention of paying it. Im fucking broke at the moment. I know its not a huge amount but after being unemployed for over a year i want to spend that money on better things. Like food and comedy tickets. I did a months work at Xmas and got shafted in cancelled shifts and taxed when i shouldnt have been. £43 fucking quid im getting in my dole this month.

I dont get a TV signal in my house but that doesnt matter. Even if you have a smartphone you have to pay it. I'm just going to say i dont consume BBC content when in fact it's the majority of what i watch/listen to.

Maybe if they opened up the archive a bit more and put shows on that have never been repeated or arent available in vhs quality on torrent sites i'd be as bit more willing.

Anyone ever done this succesfully before?

[Johnny Yesno]

I don't have one and since last July i have been getting the increasingly annoying letters coming through the post which usually ends in 'an inspector is paying you a visit' letter. Last week there was a sorry i missed you type thing put through the door on what looked like expensive glossy paper with totally inelligible handwriting on it.

I've no intention of paying it. Im fucking broke at the moment. I know its not a huge amount but after being unemployed for over a year i want to spend that money on better things. Like food and comedy tickets. I did a months work at Xmas and got shafted in cancelled shifts and taxed when i shouldnt have been. £43 fucking quid im getting in my dole this month.

I dont get a TV signal in my house but that doesnt matter. Even if you have a smartphone you have to pay it. I'm just going to say i dont consume BBC content when in fact it's the majority of what i watch/listen to.

Asnyone ever done this succesfully before?

It's a lot of money if you're broke. I recommend you don't make any official declarations. Just continue to ignore the letters.