Since it's funded by the licence fee and they aren't reliant on advertising revenue anyway is there any reason, other than the hassle of putting the shows up, that they don't?
― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Monday, 5 February 2007 15:50 (eighteen years ago)
― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Monday, 5 February 2007 15:51 (eighteen years ago)
^^ not exactly what you're looking for, but a start ^^
― onimo (onimo), Monday, 5 February 2007 15:55 (eighteen years ago)
― onimo (onimo), Monday, 5 February 2007 15:56 (eighteen years ago)
― Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 February 2007 16:04 (eighteen years ago)
― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Monday, 5 February 2007 16:09 (eighteen years ago)
― liz (lizg), Monday, 5 February 2007 16:50 (eighteen years ago)
Plus there's massive bandwidth to consider, if they don't do it via p2p.
But they are getting there, slowly. Just last week the BBC Trust approved the 7-day plans for catch-up of some shows that Liz mentions. DRM will allow them to be viewable for 30 days, rather than the 13 weeks the corporation asked for.
― Alba (Alba), Monday, 5 February 2007 18:29 (eighteen years ago)
As a result, everyone is being incredibly cautious about signing new deals, and the BBC has a new terms of trade which intends to capture more rights for effectively less money, and as you can imagine this doesn't go down too well with people like me. Though I do sympathise - to all intents and purposes, the BBC aren't willing to pay the artists more money for content that they have to give away for free.
― === temporary username === (Mark C), Monday, 5 February 2007 18:44 (eighteen years ago)
― Elsa Svitborg (tracerhand), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 17:41 (eighteen years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 17:52 (eighteen years ago)
― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 23:46 (eighteen years ago)
― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 00:22 (eighteen years ago)