MSE News: Warning: TV licence loophole could close this autumn

Goldiegirl

GingerBob wrote: »

Good. The more massive hits these parasites suffer the better.

So it's not just the banks:rotfl:

HappyMJ

[Deleted User] wrote:

£2.81 per week (inc a 0.5% inflation rise) is worth it just for the bi-annual series of 'Sherlock' & 'Doctor Who' for me plus with the excellent 'Thirteen' that was on not long ago.

A big shame the BBC has got rid of the it's excellent Formula 1 coverage but sport is an easy target.

BBC news broadcasts are still excellent however and it is nice to have quality shows available without having to pay for SKY or Virgin Media.

It isn't perfect as there are far too many 'lifestyle show' repeats but hey ho, can't have it all.

And...in my opinion Amazon Prime at £79 per year is excellent value. I personally pay £39/year as a student.

Sherlock and Doctor Who are on both Amazon and Netflix so I'll still be able to catch up with that without having to acquire a TV licence.

Thirteen is available for purchase from Amazon for £6.49 for the entire season of 5 episodes.

So for £39 plus £6.49 being £45.49 you can watch those shows legally and save yourself £100.

mardycow

Why oh why hasn't this monopoly been abolished, we pay enough for tv services and the BBC doesn't in my opinion provide anything different to deserve this payment

danielthomark

Until the law is actually changed its unclear how this will affect people. It's all speculation whether its just iplayer or all on demand services until you can see it in writing.

Also interesting to see how this fits in with the even vaguer http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36265301/the-governments-launched-a-crackdown-on-illegal-downloading

Again, until you see if this means downloading (and not actually uploading) it's all speculative.

Most wise folks will start using VPNs with no logging and other tools, until the govt tries to crack down on them.

redux

HappyMJ wrote: »

Not sure about "liking" the BBC Corporation itself. I personally think that is a very inefficient organization and could do with cutting back and making more efficient.

Well, one thing that happened is it demerged its sports provision, then on a later renewal or re-tendering of contracts none were awarded to one significant former supplier.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/bbc-sport-ob.html

Without us debating the merits of any of the companies involved, or getting involved in political comment about the relative merits or public or private sector, surely that is exactly the kind of market-led efficiency drive that some would like to see, and others would not argue against?

It's already happening.

Cornucopia

danielthomark wrote: »

Until the law is actually changed its unclear how this will affect people. It's all speculation whether its just iplayer or all on demand services until you can see it in writing.

It's been stated numerous times now that it is just BBC iPlayer.

The interesting thing for me will be to see how the legislation ends up being worded. For example, will BBC 3 content be included, given that it is not technically "catch-up"?

edinburgher

That seems fair enough, sensible move on the part of the BBC. I was getting a little tired of people bragging about not needing a TV licence and then reeling off the selection of BBC shows they watched on iPlayer in the next breath!

[Deleted User]

HappyMJ wrote: »

And...in my opinion Amazon Prime at £79 per year is excellent value. I personally pay £39/year as a student.

Sherlock and Doctor Who are on both Amazon and Netflix so I'll still be able to catch up with that without having to acquire a TV licence.

Thirteen is available for purchase from Amazon for £6.49 for the entire season of 5 episodes.

So for £39 plus £6.49 being £45.49 you can watch those shows legally and save yourself £100.

LLF and totally agree.

Currently we have a nowtv deal at £3.49pm [for a very long time ]so we all just work our way through the interesting content which once exhausted move onto prime, netfilx, youtube etc. Rinse and repeat.

ITV player offers "I'm a celebrity Get me out of here" and "Take me out", channel five offers "Big Brother" etc I could give dozens of examples that keeps us entertained but the BBC is not one of them...

It's so rare that the BBC produce anything we like to watch, say one or two programs a year, iplayer will not be missed.

Sad state of affairs so god knows how the licence fee continues!?

donnac2558

Sniggers, Mr.Murdock will be so disappointed.

Bet all the BBC haters happily pay for other services, Sky etc.

Hundreds of thousands signed petitions to stop the Tories and their mate Murdock destroying the BBC. Seems they won. So compared to a few whiners (hundreds) kill the BBC, you lost:T

itstheone

Zapito wrote: »

I wouldn't have thought it difficult. Just as with the commercial catchup services they'd make it so you'd need to register in order to use iPlayer, and that would require your licence details.

I have no idea what my license details are as they don't send them out now, you'll have to enter your name and address i guess but then i could enter my neighbours name/address if i wanted.

Maybe they'll go and re-knock all those people who said i only watch iPlayer