Slashdot Mirror
BBC Lets Viewers Buy Shows and Episodes Permanently, But No 'Extras' (thestack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The BBC has opened a new online store which lets viewers purchase TV programs that do not expire in its iPlayer streaming outlet after thirty days, but which apparently remain stored for streaming in the same style as Amazon's video purchases. The BBC claims the extensive archive inventory is available only to UK-based viewers, though its VPN-blocking attempts do not currently seem to prevent purchases from outside the country. Additionally the BBC's high-quality disc extras do not seem to have made the jump from disc to digital, signifying possible further decline for 'value added' features such as commentaries and documentaries in the future.
How permanent is permanent? I lost north of 300 novels when Nook bought e-book retailer Fictionwise. I could have downloaded and archived them one at a time I guess. Except for the ones that expired a year after purchase due to draconian DRM. Anyway the point is I no longer trust ANY DRM'd material, especially streamed content. If it's not downloadable and DRM free, you never own it.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
If you make things too difficult to get, too pricey, or leave out too much content, I'm going to pirate it for free.
You'd think content providers would realize this, but apparently not.
While the BBC pays lip service to restricting VPN access, I don't think they are wanting to implement any bans. They don't lose much (apart from bandwidth) by overseas viewers streaming on BBC iPlayer, and will likely generate extra revenue when the same viewers buy DVDs of programmes they enjoy from their local Amazon.
So you mean just like in the old days when you could buy something on physical media and watch it whenever you wanted? Outstanding!
(assuming that "forever" really means "forever" and not "until we decide that 'forever' has expired" and that your internet connection is up and that it's in a format that you can still use and blah blah blah pish....)
I guess HBO has the rights to that series.
Real Permanently means you can download and copy to another format, so that hundreds of years from now, if England gets conquered by France/Germany/Iceland/Aliens/Atlantis, and the BBC is destroyed and current formats are no longer viewable, you could legally have downloaded it into new, currently undiscovered recording methods to be played back holographically.
Any thing else is NOT permanent.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
The BBC claims the extensive archive inventory is available only to UK-based viewers
As a Briton living in the states, this is an injustice. Ive furiously sipped the rest of my tea and intend to post a letter to the home office at once. I shant, cant, and wont tolerate a world where i cant loaf idly on a sunday with a sack of crisps and binge on last of the summer wine.
Good people go to bed earlier.
They don't lose much (apart from bandwidth) by overseas viewers streaming on BBC iPlayer
Other than that the BBC doesn't own the worldwide rights to all programmes available through iPlayer.
and will likely generate extra revenue when the same viewers buy DVDs of programmes they enjoy from their local Amazon.
Export of BBC-produced programmes is handled through its BBC Worldwide subsidiary. At the top of the Google Search results for bbc worldwide from a PC in the US was an ad for Hulu. (Other search engines are available.) Perhaps you could bug BBC Worldwide to set up a counterpart to iPlayer for use in countries where BBC Worldwide has not already licensed exclusive rights to a particular programme.
It's streaming only and DRM encumbered. Seeing as we've paid for it all already through the TV licence tax, they're somewhat taking the piss. The BBC claim they use external companies to make many shows, but the truth is these companies were internal departments spun-off into little Ltd to create this separation. They do not create content for other broadcasters, and they are staffed by ex-BBC employees. There is no competitive tendering, it's just like passing projects to internal depts.
Still won't simply sell you the files? I give many fewer fucks about the "extras" than I give about having the damn files and being able to play them however and whenever I want to. (And if you can't do that, then you haven't bought anything.)
It's amazing that the industry is still so anti-revenue in 2015. They bitch about piracy and yet still, to date, comedians are the only people who actually do anything about it.
I guess the BBC doesn't have stockholders so their management doesn't really have to worry about anyone finding out that they're not really trying to make revenue, so half-assing it is probably ok. I just hope that the American media companies doesn't see this kind of thing and take it seriously. OTOH, maybe it would be good if they did, and if the stockholders caught them doing it, and then they finally got fired and were forced by their boards to start selling products to paying customers.
No, it's just reactionary geeks being reactionary geeks. It's why Slashdot is so lame these days. Smart people used to congregate here, but now it's as bad as any RWNJ site.
Of course it is very advantageous if you're the seller, but all I can see are the extra risks, inconvenience and cost to consumers of buying stuff that you never get a local copy of, so you have to stream online each time you play it.
It completely boggles my mind why anyone would give good money for that, vs buying media that you can e.g. download DRM-free copies of, or media you can (legally thanks to fair use) rip local copies from.
The BBC looking for ways to generate income now the Licence Fee is on the way out? For those not in the UK, if you watch live tv (either BBC or other), you have to (by law) buy an annual TV licence (approx 140GBP a year) - from which a large chunk gets paid to the BBC as the national television programme provider, and provides a good amount of their income.
This model is clearly under threat with the need to watch live tv declining. I moved into a new house 6 years ago and decided to save money by stopping paying for a tv licence and just watching on catch-up via the BBC and other tv players for other stations, you don't need a licence for that (the crucial definition is you need one if you're watching a live transmission). I suspect there are many like me. Gone are the days 99% of the country would need a TV licence. With the numbers declining and the BBC's commanding position declining (gone are the 1970s when there were only 3 tv channels, and our government is in favour of breaking up or selling off government run services): I think the BBC is working out how it generates money in the future and trying out some different approaches.
[posted from 2057]
To be played back in a lame flatscreen within your holographic player, like old people used to watch. No thanks gramps!
You guys still have't figured out upscaling?
That's it I'm building the doomsday device. How do you like 2057 now.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
"What the hell is going on here, and why isn't this front-page news on Slashdot?"
It's news, so they'll wait for next year.
It seems that we hear the words 'permanently' when used to reference a digital service, everyone has had the wool pulled over their eyes. Permanently purchase Flappybird? i guarantee you you won't be able to play that in 10 years. Permanently view the video from BBC? lets say i 'buy' (license?) a copy today. Does anyone actually believe that in 2037 i'll be able to view that content, or have some sort of recourse to get either an updated version without extra money, or simply a refund since i'm no longer able to use. Its like you bought 'the product' but like Cinderella, it expired.
The BBC has opened a new online store which lets viewers purchase TV programs
Pretty sure that's "programmes."
~Loyal
I aim to misbehave.
So you are PAYING money to buy something you already PAID with your taxes.
Sounds like the worst of capitalism and socialism.
the BBC's high-quality disc extras do not seem to have made the jump from disc to digital
"Disc to digital"? Are you comparing it to the releases on analogue formats such as Laserdisc and CED?
Or is this just another example of the stupid and lazy misappropriation of "digital" to mean synonymous with "online" or "download" and contrast with non-online formats such as "Digital Versatile Disc" or "Compact Disc Digital-F******-Audio"? (Yes, the fact that CD was digital was one of its major selling points).
That's kind of understandable (not forgivable, but understandable) on crappy mainstream sites written by and for people who neither know nor care as much about technology as they'd like to think. (#) OTOH, I don't think it even counts as nitpicking to expect better from a site like Slashdot which is supposed to cater- at least it used to- for actual geeks and not just boys toys' gadget fetishists who think they're geeks because it's cool now and they buy a new smartphone every 18 months.
(#) I'd be willing to bet that despite the man-on-the-street's apparent increased familiarity and comfort with digital and electronic devices compared with 30 to 40 years ago, most people still don't understand as much about the underlying technology as this would suggest, and probably still wouldn't be able to explain what "digital" means.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
"Additionally the BBC's high-quality disc extras do not seem to have made the jump from disc to digital, signifying possible further decline for 'value added' features such as commentaries and documentaries in the future."
Between availability, audiovisual quality, lack of extras, and packaging I think that physical media will remain the premium choice for a long time to come. Add in the fact that there is little to no availability of 3D content on streaming services, or where there is, it's only through a handful of devices (not roku, chromecast, etc.) and you've got very good reasons for physical media to be an attractive option that enthusiasts will happily pay for.
But then again, my DVD and Blu-Ray movie collection has now exceeded 500 discs - all legitimately purchased, so maybe I'm biased. But, the ads proclaiming "own it on Blu-Ray or DVD today!" is attractive to me, rather than the fucktarded "you only license it" nature of streamed media. I bought these DVDs and Blu-Ray discs, and despite what revisionists claim, I OWN those copies... so if Netflix, Amazon Prime, or in this case, the BBC decides to not host the content any more, I still have possession of my non-revocable legally-owned copies.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Linus is never alone at any conference.
That's good advice, regardless. All they need is to accuse you and you're fucked. Even if you win in court, that won't bring back the time, job and so-called friends lost to the attack.
why isn't this front-page news on Slashdot?
For the same reason pro-Wu stories were on the front-page some time ago.
So, I can buy the entire back catalogue of Blackadder and Red Dwarf? Awesome.