US Viewers Using Proxies To Watch BBC Olympic Coverage

DavidGilbert99 writes "NBC is the sole broadcaster of the London 2012 Olympics in the U.S., having paid $1.1bn for the privilege. While NBC is providing live streaming through its website, you need to have a valid cable subscription in order to view the events. This has seen many tech savvy U.S. viewers turning to proxy servers to view the BBC's Olympic coverage, which doesn't need any sign-in to view — once your IP address looks like it is coming from the UK. One provider of VPN services has seen a ten-fold increase in new customers signing up for their services since last Friday."

Comments

Expect networks to run to Congress

[crazyjj]

Great. Here comes another amendment to the DMCA. The "Protect Our Networks, Mom, and Apple Pie--And I Support The Colorado Shooting Victims Act of 2013" which will make it illegal to circumvent the licensing agreements of your local network affiliates and outlaw all VPN's that refuse to turn over all server and user data to the FBI and NSA. And it will sail through Congress, and be signed immediately by President Obama--who will say to liberal supporters that he really doesn't WANT to sign it, but is doing so anyway.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[Dunbal]

Once again, yet another idiot that requires education: Oligopolies are NOT "free markets". When you have the power to sign an exclusive contract and shut out absolutely everyone else, there's nothing "free" about it at all.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[cpu6502]

The only reason SOPA was stopped was because corporations were opposed. But now the corporations (all of them) (except mozilla) are in favor of CISPA so it will pass eventually. Might be another name but it was pass. When the corporations and the Congress are in collusion, what we the People desire has no relevance. Witness the debacle of the TARP2 which passed even with 80% of people calling representatives and saying no. And Obamacare which had almost 70% of people calling and demanding "no". TARP2 was shoved through because it had pressure from the banking corporations, and Obamacare because it had pressure from the insurance corporations (who gained ~50 million new customers via the mandate). We the People have no voice when It the Corporations decide to pass a law.

P.S.

And just in case someone says, "The Heritage Foundation originated the mandate idea"..... I don't give a shit. I am not allied with the Pat Robertson-created Heritage kooks. They also would round-up gays and force them to attend church reeducation camps, if they thought they could get away with it. Their bigoted opinion has zero weight in my book.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[h4rr4r]

I wish we could pay.

You give me Sherlock, Dr Who and sporting events live and available for a month after showing and I would gladly pay right fucking now.

INSERT TAKE MY MONEY PLEASE SIGN HERE.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm also a license payer. I don't mind our overseas friends getting it for free: I was happy to pay for it anyway. I consider it a small gift to the world.

I do wish they'd all stop trying to remake the shows and sucking so hard at it, though. I'm looking at you, Top Gear USA.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[cpu6502]

Just a random thought: NBC video should be free. They were given a license to broadcast over the airwaves (which belong to the People) and should be sharing the NBC-Broadcast video for free over the air and the net. Else they should have their license revoked.

In my case it's actually a monopoly over the internet (Verizon FiOS or Comcast). No real choice there and why I think these companies should be government-regulated the same way the electric, natural gas, and water companies are regulated. They can't raise their prices without permission of the State PUC, and it should be the same with Verizon and Comcast.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[Lemming Mark]

Unless they've changed the rules quite recently then you don't need a license unless you're using the device to view TV simultaneously with its broadcast. If you watch as catch-up (e.g. iPlayer) then a license is not needed - and if you just don't receive TV on the device at all you still don't need a license, even if it's a television or somesuch.

The licensing people are sometimes quite good at harassing people until they fork out for licenses that aren't needed; they come on relatively strong with the implied legal threats, so you need to be fairly sure of yourself if you're not buying a license. Nevertheless, in my experience, the actual written rules are more lenient than the impression the licensing people project.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[h4rr4r]

Let foreigners pay a license fee as well?

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[iserlohn]

You only need to pay if you have a laptop AND access the live stream on the BBC website, or use a DVB card/dongle to receive live broadcasts.

If you only use the iplayer catchup service, you don't have to pay, but I can see that changing soon...

I pay because I have a TV and FreeSat - so no escape for me.

However, the BBC is really a very good broadcaster. The amount of good stuff on the telly that comes from the BBC - Planet Earth/Human Planet, Life on Mars/Ashes to Ashes, Merlin, Doctor Who, Panorama, Proms, News, F1, Olympics, and the list goes on and one - is more than worth the small fee I have to pay. Best of all - no commercials and no pandering to advertisers!

I dread going back to the world of 500 cable channels with nothing on apart from sitcoms and re-runs of "World's Toughest Trucker".

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[Anonymous Coward]

So if 70-80% of people who call their representatives about a certain issue are opposed to it, it should not pass, and similarly if 70-80% are in favor of it it should pass? That isn't democracy, it's handing control of every issue over to special interest groups. This kind of mentality is why a prime time "wardrobe malfunction" ends up getting the network huge fines, because some interest group bombards the FCC with tons of complaints while the other 99+% of the country rolls their eyes.

Re:Expect networks to run to Congress

[RaceProUK]

state run (nominally) broadcaster

Not so much state run, more chartered by the state to fulfill a public service role. Outside the chartered requirements, the BBC can put on what they want, regardless of what the government may say.

UK coverage can't be worse that the US one.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I watched the Olympics a bit last night when I visited my father, I was pretty heavily annoyed with the coverage.
With constant focus on pouty teens and their families, i was half convinced I was watching some new drama show.
If I want to know more about the athletes themselves, I'd watch the news. Please just stay focused on the performances. |:

NBC deserves it.

[gblues]

In my opinion, NBC hasn't gotten nearly enough shit over their treatment of the opening ceremony. Constant chattering, inane commentary, and the absolutely insulting audacity to cut to commercial during the 7/7 London Bombing memorial.

The coverage of the games themselves hasn't been too great, either. I'm not going to bitch about a tape delay because that's just a fact of life when the games are 7 hours ahead of local time. But when results are spoiled by fucking promotional commercials just minutes ahead of the event in question, that's just incompetence.

So, screw NBC. I hope someday the BBC allows foreigners to pay for access to its content without having to do VPN hacks. I know I'd subscribe in a heartbeat (hello, Doctor Who Series 7).

balkanization turning web into TV 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

With the balkanization of #London2012 and other worldwide events, the web is being turned into TV 2.0 by the content cartels. Originally one of the beautiful things about the web was that content was open to all. Someone from Mozambique had access to all the same data and resources as someone from USA or France. But increasingly, everything is becoming locked down and controlled for the benefit of the big media companies. Only through illegal means most don't even know about can this be circumvented, so a few tech savy people manage, but the vast majority do not.

Who is to blame for this? Well, sure, those media companies, but all of the web users are to blame. As long as we support this balkanization, it will continue to happen. As long as we are tuning into their content en mass, they will never stop this. The end game is TV 2.0, rather than the open and free internet we COULD have had. If we let this happen, it's our own fault.

Re:Finally

[DarenN]

No, stop being so wrong.

You are paying your ISP to provide internet, regardless of the content. It does not imply any rights to have content available, so tough cookie if it isn't. Net neutrality, wot.

Re:NBCs coverage has been appallingly bad

[KermodeBear]

NBC's coverage has ALWAYS been bad. The worst part is that they smother everything with "human interest" stories to the point where you're not sure if you're watching the Olympics or some daytime talk show. Also, they commentary has been ridiculous - and sometimes outright offensive (particularly during the opening ceremonies).

I am incredibly annoyed that the Olympic Committee has started this broadcast monopoly business. It's terrible. NBC paid cash, so they can be as terrible as they want with impunity.

Which is why I have a new VPN account so that I can watch the BBC's coverage.

I would be happy to pay $20 or so for an Official Olympics Streaming Account or somesuch.

Re:Not just Cable...

[hey!]

Plus it would be nice to have coverage that wasn't oriented toward idiots.

It started before the opening ceremonies, with the NBC presenters delivering what sounded like drug-addled, free association platitudes over a montage of US athletes. It went on through the parade of nations when one of NBC's presenters gave us a fat dose of his personal political opinions. It was not so much that the leadership of those countries he targeted wasn't contemptible, as that I don't need a sports announcer to tell me what to think. It goes on through interview after interview where the idiot interviewers ask "how does it feel to win" and try to pump as much emotion out of the athletes as possible. Discuss how the event went, or cut to a sport you're not covering, for Pete's sake.

Re:Finally

[gl4ss]

No, stop being so wrong.

You are paying your ISP to provide internet, regardless of the content. It does not imply any rights to have content available, so tough cookie if it isn't. Net neutrality, wot.

well, maybe not.

but the olympics being funded out of worldwide collected taxes, the olympics haven been given special exemptions and special rights with specially tailored laws sort of would imply it. not to mention the whole thing about olympic spirit..

it's a fucking travesty. maybe we'll have some Red Bull Realympics in 4 years as competing event where athletes can mention whatever the fuck they want on social media, wear whatever sporting goods they want and which will be streamed live to everyone who wants to watch.