US Viewers Using Proxies To Watch BBC Olympic Coverage 373
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."
Not just Cable... (Score:5, Informative)
I tried to log into the NBC app, and they bounced me. I have the basic cable package, that gives me the first 15 channels, plus TBS and GSN. Because I am not "subscribed" to MSNBC and CNBC they wouldn't let me in.
I'm very, VERY dissapointed in NBC and their olympic service delivery.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:5, Informative)
I'm happy for overseas people to pay to be able to get access. I see no reason why overseas subscription isn't an option. The BBC is wonderful and the content should be seen.
Re:Finally (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:5, Informative)
This is not true.
You can get out of paying it if you do not own a TV, not sure about computers.
I wish the USA had something like this, or if the BBC would let us sign up.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:4, Informative)
The licence is compulsary for any device capable of receiving broadcast media. That includes Internet, TV and radio.
If you can honestly declare that you don't use anything with those capabilities, then you do not have to pay.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:5, Informative)
I'm happy for overseas people to pay to be able to get access. I see no reason why overseas subscription isn't an option. The BBC is wonderful and the content should be seen.
Basically, the oversite board ruled that if the BBC sold "internet license" to non-UK residents, it would be canabilizing the overseas alternatives like BBC-America, BBC-Canada etc. and thus reducing there profits
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:5, Informative)
Nope. If all you watch is catchup services on a device that cant receive live TV then you don't need a TV license.
From here. [tvlicensing.co.uk]
Exception: If you only watch catch-up services online, then you don’t need a licence. For example, you don’t need one to use BBC iPlayer, or ITV player, to catch up on programmes after they have been shown on TV.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:5, Informative)
The licence is compulsary for any device capable of receiving broadcast media. That includes Internet, TV and radio.
No it is not. You do not need a TV license to access the internet or to listen to the radio. You technically need one to watch or record live streamed content which is also being simultaneously broadcast on TV, but content which is not on TV or which is not live streamed does not need one and this does not amount to needing a TV licence just because you have internet access which could theoretically be used for this. There is also an effective presumption that if you own a TV then you will use it to receive television but if you do not use it for that then you don't need a licence either.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:4, Informative)
This is false. You only need a licence to watch broadcast media as it is originally being broadcast. If you want to watch the BBC (or any broadcast media) on a TV as they broadcast or on their streaming feed on the Internet, you need a licence. If you only watch programmes on catch up services, you are OK.
Re:Expect networks to run to Congress (Score:3, Informative)