BBC Trial of TV Show Download Service

Little Hamster writes "Five thousand households with broadband access has been selected for a trial of the BBC's new interactive Media Player. The trial will run from September to December, and users can 'time shift' and download selected BBC TV shows, radio programmes, regional programming and feature films. After seven days, the content will be automatically deleted from the user's computers. BBC will use this trial to iron out any outstanding rights issues and resolve teething difficulties with the technology ahead of a full launch next year." The BBC Press Office has a release about this as well.

Comments

The Office?

[FriedTurkey]

Hopefully they will allow downloads of the "The Office". It is a great series. Although as an American, I have to turn on the subtitles to understand what they are saying. Also I didn't understand any of the British pop culture references except the Benny Hill ones.

Maybe BBC should allow downloads of Benny Hill too?

Re:The Office?

[Anonymous Coward]

Benny Hill was on ITV (Thames IIRC)

Re:The Office?

[BenjyD]

I often read Americans saying they had to turn on subtitles to understand parts of The Office. As an English person I've always wanted to know which parts/characters Americans find hard to understand. Or is it just the slang terms used?

From an English person's point of view, the accents are fairly standard mid-England/London accents. But then, having driven round rural Georgia, I know we are two countries divided by a common language.

Re:The Office?

[gowen]

"The Benny Hill Show" started on the BBC in 1955, but transferred to ITV in 1969. The ones that are seen in the US are entirely from the ITV run, and with many of the ruder bits cut out.

Re:The Office?

[TwistedSquare]

I gather it's largely the slang and culture references. Things like muff, minge, pub (which I didn't realise would cause confusion), and others. There is a list on the BBC website somewhere I think. Some of the culture references are just totally lost, like us watching some Simpson's episodes. I doubt anyone not from these shores could appreciate the brilliance of David Brent saying he loved Ian Botham, references to the Corrs, Des'ree, the poem Slough ("dropping bombs is no way to solve town planning problems"), or in the final episodes the appearance of Howard from the Halifax adverts, and his manager's reference to having had the same problem with Bruno Brookes. All these slightly out-of-date and very British references cause problems I gather.

Re:The Office?

[Mark_in_Brazil]

I often read Americans saying they had to turn on subtitles to understand parts of The Office. As an English person I've always wanted to know which parts/characters Americans find hard to understand. Or is it just the slang terms used?

I'm from the USA, but I moved to Brazil 5 years ago. I had no trouble at all understanding any of the accents on The Office (I noticed some minor variations between different characters), and I watched both seasons and the Christmas wrap-up ep. I didn't even find the slang terms difficult, and I'm not up on the newest-latest slang in use in the USA, much less the latest terms from England.
I have also had no trouble understanding the accents in the new season of Doctor Who (friends have taped and sent me the first few eps... God bless my multi-format VHS machine), but I think it's worth noting that Rose's (possibly Billie Piper's, but she may be affecting an accent for the character) accent is more odd to me than anything I recall from The Office. She seems to have difficulty with both of the "th" sounds, replacing them with either "v" or "f".

From an English person's point of view, the accents are fairly standard mid-England/London accents. But then, having driven round rural Georgia, I know we are two countries divided by a common language.

Heh. I find it funny how most folks from the US are totally unable to imitate an English accent well, and how most folks from the UK and Ireland are unable to imitate any US accent well. Gwyneth Paltrow is one (rare) example of a USian who can do a decent English accent. Bob Hoskins is an example of an English person who can do a decent US accent. I remember thinking it was weird (and not a good sign) that an English actor had been cast in the role of the gumshoe detective in Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, but when I was watching the film, I forgot about it and didn't even notice he wasn't a United Statesian. Hoskins does a pretty good generic US accent.
But the true master of accents in the English language is Tracey Ullman. That woman is a genius. She is English, and can do various English accents, plus a decent Australian accent, and a whole bunch of American accents. She can do a Jewish New York accent and an Italian New York accent better than I could ever do (and I have Jewish family in the New York metro area!). The two are different, and both are pretty darn good. She can do a Southern accent and a Texas accent and nail both. If I try to do a Southern US accent and a Texas accent, I end up doing the same mixed Southeastern-Texas accent that misses important aspects of both. It doesn't sound right even to my own ear, much less to people from those regions. And I lived 31 years in the USA, have family in Texas and had a best friend from the South (plus my sister lives in South Carolina now). I am in awe of Tracey Ullman.
When I went to visit a friend in England in 1986, there was a moment when my friend's family and I were waiting to get a table at a popular (and fancy) restaurant. Another man waiting for a table heard my accent and struck up a conversation with me. It was really embarassing, because my friend had to "translate," even though we were both speaking English. This fellow, in addition to having an accent that made it difficult for me to recognize words I know, used terms I'd never heard before. For example, his joke that I might order a "chip buttie" at the fancy restaurant was totally lost on me. My friend had to explain that a "chip buttie" is basically a french fry sandwich. An explained joke is never as funny, but I did my best to show amusement, because on an intellectual level, it was humorous. Still, the embarassment of having to have the joke "translated," plus the fact of it coming to me as an explained joke and not a "fresh" one kinda killed the humor. "Divided by a common language," indeed.

Am I missing something?

[frankthechicken]

If the BBC essentially runs a public domain service anyway, why are the shows deleted after seven days?

This ceratinly doesn't need to happen on a video recording.

Re:Am I missing something?

[AKAImBatman]

If the BBC essentially runs a public domain service anyway, why are the shows deleted after seven days?

I don't think it's that simple. For one, I believe that BBC doesn't own all the shows they broadcast. (Although they do own quite a few.) As such, they are licensed to provide public distribution of the shows, but are not necessary able to just give them away. This would seem to be backed by the article's mention of Hollywood and independent studios.

In addition, it also mentions that the acting unions are "acting up"^H^H balking at the idea of Internet distribution. They don't give any details, but my guess is that actors are concerned that rampant piracy would result in lower wages and fewer acting jobs. It's probably pretty hard to convince them that if given a good for-pay alternative, the majority of people will use the convenient pay service. (The only reason why Napster ever appeared was that the music industry failed to respond to market pressures. What did they THINK was going to happen?)

Re:Am I missing something?

[erroneus]

If they didn't delete content, people's computers would crash. You seem to forget we're talking about the public here...

Re:Am I missing something?

[gowen]

actors are concerned that rampant piracy would result in lower wages and fewer acting jobs

It's more likely that they're balking at the fact that on-demand video won't supply them with the repeat fees that they get when shows are rebroadcast by traditional means.

Re:Am I missing something?

[Mwongozi]

Disclaimer: The following is a guess.

The system uses a P2P network to distribute the shows. By forcing the erasure of old shows, they ensure that only the latest shows are being shared, resulting in more efficient use of bandwidth, and faster downloads.

Having said that, it's probably just because they can.

Re:Am I missing something?

[wolflike]

The biggest issue is usually the music that accompanies the programs. Rights are given for a broadcast of music (theme tune, backing music, sound effect etc ) and this is very rarely owned by the BBC. eg Eastenders (bad bad bad soap) might have a cafe scene where a top40 song is on in the background. fat chance of the BBC being allowed to give this away...... BTW does anyone know when storage will be up to the job of recording everything broadcast, indexing it locally (at my flat) and letting me hold it all for as long as I want, (unselected shows can drop off after 1 week). Then I can read the reveiws and watch shows I know were good, rather than have to guess? sort of Tivo on steroids??

Well

[metlin]

If it is available digitally, it would certainly be possible to find a way of copying it without the whole deletion procedure.

Even if its a custom media player, how long is it going to take for someone to hack it up?

From the BBC Press release

[Alranor]

The BBC's interactive media player (iMP) is a new application in development which will allow users to download tv and radio programmes from bbc.co.uk to their PC or laptop and watch or listen to them for seven days after the transmission date.

Anyone wanna bet it'll be Windows only.

Guess i'll probably end up sticking to bittorrent.

Re:TiVo?

[maharg]

yes, you don't get a free TiVo with a UK tv license

Re:TiVo?

[taskforce]

Yes, you have access to the BBC's entire library Napster style, except it's *free* (As in TV Liscence, not beer.)

TiVo I believe you can only record shows that were on and watch them later, or am I missing something?

BBC and DRM

[tdvaughan]

I was disappointed at first to see that the BBC is implementing DRM but it's worth bearing in mind that not all the content broadcast by the BBC is owned by them. Much of it comes from independent studios who license it to the BBC. So I remain hopeful that the BBC will offer its own copyrighted material to UK license payers on more permissive terms.

Re:BBC and DRM

[taskforce]

Agreed, I thought the most interesting deveolopment was that they were allowing downloads of feature films (which presumably they've liscenced to show on the TV channels as well.) That's a step forward if anything.

Re:TiVo?

[/ASCII]

This is a test. Once this is mature, you will have all of these advantages:

Watch programs that are several years old, whenever you want, without having to record them. Watch three or more programs which all originally ran at the same time. Set up playlists of arbitrary programs, i.e. 'show me season two of Buffy'.

This is all assuming the BBC continues to try and develop it's offerings. I sure hope they do.

Re:broadcasters, telecom and hardware manufacturer

[JWW]

Writers, directors, actors, yes.

Audience, no.

Call me weird

[c0ldfusi0n]

But with that headline, i first thought it was refering to a lawsuit. Trial and Music in the same headline, and it's not a lawsuit?! Expect a letter from the RIAA soon, guys!

Re:TiVo?

[TheRaven64]

Although this does raise the question of why the content is deleted at all. Since the license payers have already paid for it to be produced, why can they not do whatever they want with the content?

Time-shifting

[RealProgrammer]

Dr. Who fans will note that their house now looks a lot smaller on the outside than it really is on the inside.

Quit Complaining - And Read My Journal ;)

[TheFlyingGoat]

I've had a decent idea for legal TV distribution online in my journal for a while now. Most of the posts I see so far about this BBC service are negative. Finally a media outlet is trying to embrace technology instead of calling their lawyers every 5 minutes, and all people can do is complain. Downloadable shows will probably never be free without the show including some form of DRM or advertising... get used to it. I'd much rather have DRM or ads than no downloadable shows at all.

If you don't want the DRM or ads, get a Tivo or TV capture card and skip the commercials or edit them out.

Re:TiVo?

[gowen]

From TFA

Unlike personal video recorders such as Sky Plus, viewers will not have to signal their chosen programmes in advance, allowing critically acclaimed shows to benefit retrospectively from a favourable review or word of mouth.

Wow. It's almost as if you didn't RTFA.

This is exactly what I want

[j-cloth]

I will pay subscription fees to whoever will take the money so that I can download Six Feet Under or Lost or whatever else within minutes of broadcast without having to go looking for a torrent. Even more important, I want to be able to get series that I missed (Firefly, Sopranos) .... The nature of most P2P services (esp bittorrent) is that this older stuff is harder to come by.

I don't really care if I can keep the episodes forever. I do now, but I never rewatch any of them an only keep them around so I have a big enough share to get into the good Direct Connect channels.

Hopefully the test goes well and it's introduced in other markets soon.

Automatically deleted?

[ChaosCube]

Automatically deleted from user's computers? That would make me a bit uncomfortable. Why would I want someone poking around MY computer deleting stuff, even if it is authorized? Computers, especially systems running Windows should not be open to others for manipulation (IMAO). Then, there's the issue of Linux. Will there be a special BBC account set up, or should users just hand over their root password?

I don't know. It's just too much control over private property by a governmental/corporate entity. That's trouble. However, the people of Britian are used to being watched constantly anyway. There's cameras everywhere on that island! King Arthur would be disgusted!

Well, that's just my initial reaction. I'm too lazy to read the article right now.

Re:Automatically deleted?

[Pakaran2]

The issue of Linux is that it simply won't be supported. Isn't that obvious?

FTFA:

[oneandoneis2]

Commercial rivals have already voiced fears that the BBC's substantial investment in iMP and the Creative Archive could damage their chances of making money from the concept.

[rant]Well, maybe they should have been worrying about that for the last bloody decade then, instead of spending all their time & money trying to legislate the whole bloody concept out of existance!![/rant]

*ahem*

Yay, BBC! It's times like this I don't object to paying my license fee!

Re:TiVo?

[andrewbaldwin]

Where have you been?

The UK TV licence fee is regularly moaned about on Slashdot!

For info:

In the UK you need to have a licence for each address which has a TV receiver (you can have dozens of sets in the same house and one licence if you want*)

FWIW I'm happy to pay it for TV free from adverts disrupting the shows and with greater freedom to express ideas without worrying about business withdrawing advertising revenue. And don't worry about the 'tax' aspects meaning state direction - the Beeb regularly clashes with the government of the day - as both main parties seem to complain about it, it must be reasonably neutral. (BTW I have no connection with the BBC)

Others may dislike the licence on philosophical / political / dogmatic grounds (esp if they like watching the commercial channels more) - I accept that I have to subsidise, through higher prices, the advertising 'industry' and through them the other channels.

* actually there are some restrictions (eg multiple independent occupancy of a house split into flats) but the principle holds for most cases

Re:TiVo?

[Richard_at_work]

Simple - they havent paid for it to be produced, theyve paid a TV license fee, which is entirely differnet. It just so happens that the BBC receives this money, but that does not automatically mean that the viewers have all rights to the productions.

Re:UK has a yearly TV "tax"

[NetNifty]

"the BBC is supported by advertising and (are you sitting down?) a yearly television tax."

Nope, just a yearly TV tax, no advertising.

More info about the TV License (tax)

[SuperBanana]

More information:

One guy who doesn't own a TV, but gets harassed by the TV Licensing Agency (which is actually a private company contracted by the BBC, to the tune of a quarter billion pounds a year): http://www.marmalade.net/lime/

Information about BBC revenue and expenditures, TVLA, etc: http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/international/bbc.htm l

It is MY computer

[rtkluttz]

They still don't get it. DRM will still be unnacceptable.

It is MY computer and it should only delete something when I tell it to. No one else. It should not police me. It should not tell me what to do, I should tell it what to do. If I break the law using my computer, then I should be held responsible, but I should NOT be limited if I choose to use the computer in a fashion that some short sited company didn't plan on.

Re:Quit Complaining - And Read My Journal ;)

[kingdon]

Well, my local NPR radio station here in California is offering the radio SHARK as a premium you get for donating money. (The radio SHARK is a tuner which receives radio programs and records them to a computer; as far as I can tell from their website, there is no DRM).

Don't know if the station had some heavy discussion about DRM, or even thought about it, but it would appear that not everyone in the content production and distribution business are as worried about pushing DRM as we assume.

Re:TiVo?

[Anonymous Coward]

for the same reason that you can't walk into a hospital and take home, say, the radiology department just because you pay taxes.

the production of the programs on bbc tv is written, produced, lit, filmed, acted directed etc etc. by professionals towards whom you pay your contribution, which allows you to view THEIR WORK without adverts clogging up the airtime and invading your head.

it's not like buying a book, or another physical product. the bbc provides information: without selling things to you; without propoganda ("we are not Britain, we are the BBC" -news editor during Falklands conflict, during which the BBC got right up Thatcher's nose); and (largely) without dumbed down celebrity claptrap reality tv (a couple of exceptions) and a license fee is a contribution towards "the most important cultural institution in Britain and, arguably, the World" (ref. Modern British History, M. Garnett and R. Weight ISBN 1-844-13104-1), it is NOT a product you own, and in this era of incessant Hollywood propoganda, commercial corporate power and tabloid newspapers it is not just a service in Britain, it is vital. £120 is cheap.

and no i don't work for them.

Re:UK has a yearly TV "tax"

[slim]

She said the scene would have made Orwell proud.

So what's wrong with detecting and prosecuting tax avoiders?

By only beef with the TV license situation is that alongside much excellent output, the BBC seems to spend an inordinate amount of time broadcasting either fluff or blatant promotional stuff for commercial pop music.

Re:TiVo?

[Anonymous Coward]

They moan about a fee of £100 for a year for a load of channels free of advertising. Sky costs about half that much for a month of advert-ridden shit. I know which is better value.

another incorrect use of "content"

[brre]

After seven days, the content will be automatically deleted from the user's computers.

No, after seven days the show will be deleted. Or the audio and/or video will be deleted. The content, if any, will not be deleted any more than the format, presentation, or volume.

Re:UK has a yearly TV "tax"

[smoker2]

I prefer to think of it as a subscription that gets you four TV channels, seven or eight top quality national radio stations, local radio stations, a stupendously good news media organization, and high-quality production values and no advertising.

Fine, if it was a voluntary subscription, which is isn't. Every program the BBC makes ends up on satellite, for which you pay a subscription.
Don't pretend that the BBC don't charge the satellite providers for the content either.

I think the BBC should be provided for like all the rest, i.e. they get their money from people who choose to subscribe. Using the government to force people to support a commercial service is too much.

Re:BBC iMP based on Kontiki Windoze software

[otherniceman]

Kontiki users who choose not install a client can receive content through standard client-free delivery (http://www.kontiki.com/products/deliverymanager/i ndex.html). I don't know if the BBC is taking that option.

Yes, according to the article they are using Geo-IP to ensure content is only avilable to UK residents. They will probably need some registration to restrict the content to license payers though.

Re:TiVo?

[gtkuhn]

An AC somewhere above posted...

[BBC is] "the most important cultural institution in Britain and, arguably, the World" (ref. Modern British History, M. Garnett and R. Weight ISBN 1-844-13104-1)

And you want season two of 'Buffy'? The world can be a sad place sometimes.

Okay, trial period? Get your debuggers ready...

[pla]

BBC will use this trial to iron out any outstanding rights issues

So remember, kids, even if you come up with a totally trivial means of defeating their DRM, don't release it until AFTER they have irreversably committed to this!

Already done in Norway?

[Echnin]

NRK, the Norwegian government-run TV already offer high-quality streams of every single show they produce, including newscasts, for free. It's an excellent service; if I miss a show, I'll just watch it online. How the BBC claims that this is revolutionary I cannot understand. http://www.nrk.no/

Re:TiVo?

[LardBrattish]

As a person who has emigrated from England to Australia - I have learned to appreciate the BBC even more.
Before I left I would have died in a ditch to protect the BBC's freedoms but having seen what continual government interference has done to the Australian equivalent (the ABC) I have really come to marvel at what a great job the BBC does with its limited resources.
Especially now they've brought back Dr Who...
I know that to our American readers the idea of a "television tax" being used to pay for adverisment free channels smells like "big government" in reality it means there is a genuine free press in England. Every commercially owned channel unfortunately is influenced by the owners (and why shouldn't it be really - Rupert Murdoch doesn't want to get reamed out by Sky News so he isn't).
The problem is that every owner has pretty much the same party affiliation in America so evry news channel is pro-Republican and certain "Anti-Republican" news is either not reported or not emphasised. If Clinto had lied to congress to start a war that caused the death of over 1000 American troops you can be darn sure it would not be ignored by the television news the way it has been over the last few years