Beeb tech boss seeks to expand TV licence online
iPlayer? Cough up
The BBC's technology chief has called for the licence fee to be extended so that people who only watch iPlayer will also have to pay.
Erik Huggers made the call as he discussed recent comments by the BBC Trust, the national broadcaster's oversight body, that the internet means TV licensing law will need to be changed.
"My view is that if you are using the iPlayer you have to be a television licence fee payer. I don't believe in a free ride. If you are consuming BBC services then you have to be a licence holder," he told the Broadcasting Press Guild on Wednesday.
A spokesman for the BBC today said that Huggers comments represented his personal opinion and were not the corporation's official position.
The BBC blocks overseas access to iPlayer on grounds it will accrue bandwidth and other costs, to serve people who do not contribute to its funding.
"I do know we are seriously looking at what is the impact on new digital technology on something we currently call the TV licensing," Huggers, a former Microsoft executive, said.
At present, a £139.50 annual TV licence is only required to view programmes as they are broadcast. While BBC does offer simultaneous streaming of its channels, the popular iPlayer is a catch-up service, with shows available for seven days after broadcast.
In April, the BBC Trust said internet viewing was not significantly affecting TV ownership, but warned that habits were changing.
The Department for Culture Media and Sport said it had no plans to change the law. ®
The BBC can go to ....
The TV Licence is for 'receiving television programmes as they are broadcast'. The licence is NOT for owning a TV.
I do not watch TV, my set is detuned back to factory condition, the aerial is unplugged, and I have removed the aerial socket from the wall. I do not use the BBC's online 'services' at all. My TV is used purely for watching DVDs and for a games console.
I notified TV Licencing of this last December. Since then I have received a stream of threatening letters in demand that I buy a TV Licence, they have phoned my elderly parents who live at a totally different address. As far as I am concerned the BBC, and their Stasi attack dogs TV Licencing, can go to hell.
I will absolutely refuse to buy a TV Licence (or BBC tax as it should be called) just because I have a computer and web connection.
"It would be the same as me refusing to pay a chunk of my council tax, because I don't have children and therefore don't need to pay the chunk that correlates to LEA contributions."
I'm all for that! There's far too much bias toward parents with kids when it comes to taxes and benefits. It just encourages over population! ;-)
Screw them I say. They wanted kids, they can pay for them, not me (insert raspberry)
"If you want to drive on the road, you must pay road tax."
However I can use the road to walk or cycle without paying road tax. I can't use a TV to not watch broadcast telly or only watch TV that isn't in some way funded by the licence, without having to pay the licence fee.
But I still say, kick Wossy out and the savings will pay for iPlayer ;). Seriously though, for a public funded service there should be an independent evaluation on what the money is spent on. Big stars should go to commercial channels if they want big salaries and the BBC should concentrate on quality content at a reasonable price.
I mean really. In terms of wastes of public money, after MPs expenses, the BBC's expenditure should be next on the target.
Wedge, meet Thin End.....
As others have alluded that this is not about some argument as to having to pay for what you don't need or don't watch..... oh, OK, for some it is. However that is, more or less, the status quo.
This is about tedious bunch of dirtbags squirming about in the mud slathering about how they can't provide their service for free. Therefore, ignoring the simple answer that if you can't afford it then you don't do it, someone has to pay for it and since they can't, or pretend they can't, police it then everyone should pay.
Police it DirtBags! We Can't. Yes you can, make it subscription. Ooooh but that would be hard. No it isn't, do it like this........... Oooh but the freetards would hack our systems. What percentage of users would that be? Oooooh we don't know but they are Pirate Freetards Evil Pirate People Pirates and probably Hackers as well and Pirates, did we mention there are Pirates out there as well as Freetards and the Pirates. Not a lot then. Make it subscription! No-one would pay for it. Pardon? No-one would pay for it. So you haven't got a saleable product? Well that didn't make a difference in the past. Make it like the old licence make everyone pay us some money. We only want 6% for free. What? Elsewhere it's only 3%! Yes, seeeeee, it does work, but we need another 3% to send everyone a threatening letter each month. Slime Slime Slime Slime.
Actually I think this IS the way to go. Good Old Auntie Beeb. Luv A Duck, where would we be wivout her? I also think that we should make sure that we don't lose Google services. After all there might be a chance that their UK advertising revenue drops so they must need a percentage too, as a retainer, maybe 6% as well. Looks like Twitter isn't making any money at the moment.... blimey.... have a heart let's sign them up for 6% as well. I've just set up an on line kool aid delivery service and it's not doing much business. Everyone gets the chance to buy some. Crumbs they can even come to look at the web site..... I'll settle for 10%. Shit!!!!!! Phucking Phorm looks like it's going to go under because all these freetards are telling them to Phuck Orf. That's not very stiff upper lip. I mean, come on now. There is this free service that could be freely available if only someone paid for it. Give them 12%.......
That will be an interesting one.... Oh, as an aside.... How much money is the BBC, I mean the licence payer, I mean every UK citizen, paying this Erik Huggers to try and leach more money out of them? The other one being.... when he gets booted out of the Beeb womb what are the chances of him turning up as a Phorm advisor?