|
|
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
Band C (10950 to 11200 MHz) is empty at Sky's 28.2 orbital position, and
although it could provide dozens of HDTV channels, none of Sky's present 4 satellites can use it. Astra 2C could "move in" but it has a Europe wide beam and surely the BBC and ITV, 4 and 5 would much prefer another "spot-beam" like Astra 2D for future expansion of Free to Air services like ITV HD. Will they move Astra 2C regardless, thereby effectively blocking any further expansion of free to air services from BBC, ITV, 4 and 5, or is there a possibility of another UK spot beam and a small new satellite, "Astra 2E" perhaps? Also, if Astra 2C did move to 28.2 East, wouldn't half of it's transponders be made redundant because Astra 2D is already using those frequencies? Doesn't this mean that another low power, single band, spot beam satellite, like 2D but built for Band C instead of Band D, would be a better idea? (Perhaps they should rename Astra 2C to Astra 1L since that's the next available drive letter where it lives, and then we could have a nice tidy naming convention at 28.2 East, with Astra 2D on Band D and a new Astra 2C satellite with a UK spot beam on Band C.) |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
Stephen wrote:
Band C (10950 to 11200 MHz) is empty at Sky's 28.2 orbital position, and although it could provide [snip] Please don't perpetrate the notion that Sky 'own' 28.2E or any satellites, they don't. No wonder Joe Public imagine that in the UK [Satellite TV]=[Sky]. Any decisions about moving satellites around etc come from the satellite owners, Astra and EuroBird, although of course BSkyB have considerable 'clout' with those companies. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
although of course BSkyB have considerable 'clout' with those companies. Yes, shame about that ! Dave |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Mark Carver" wrote in message ... snip Any decisions about moving satellites around etc come from the satellite owners, Astra and EuroBird, although of course BSkyB have considerable 'clout' with those companies. Err, I would put it the other way around, Astral and EuroBird have considerable clout with BSkyB, although BSkyB will be a valued customer there are and always will be other customers who could fill BSkyB's shoes. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
Jerry wrote: "Mark Carver" wrote in message Any decisions about moving satellites around etc come from the satellite owners, Astra and EuroBird, although of course BSkyB have considerable 'clout' with those companies. Err, I would put it the other way around, Astral and EuroBird have considerable clout with BSkyB, although BSkyB will be a valued customer there are and always will be other customers who could fill BSkyB's shoes. But Sky have made 28.2 their 'de facto' orbital position. Apart from a few Czech channels on Eurobird, everything else is UK 'Sky Platform'. Indeed I rather suspect the continued delay by BBC/ITV to launch their Freesat' service is due to Sky's tight grip and control of the SI streams on Astra's birds. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In article , Stephen [email protected]
nkmail.sptv.demon.co.uk writes Band C (10950 to 11200 MHz) is empty at Sky's 28.2 orbital position, and although it could provide dozens of HDTV channels, none of Sky's present 4 satellites can use it. Astra 2C could "move in" but it has a Europe wide beam and surely the BBC and ITV, 4 and 5 would much prefer another "spot-beam" like Astra 2D for future expansion of Free to Air services like ITV HD. Will they move Astra 2C regardless, thereby effectively blocking any further expansion of free to air services from BBC, ITV, 4 and 5, or is there a possibility of another UK spot beam and a small new satellite, "Astra 2E" perhaps? Also, if Astra 2C did move to 28.2 East, wouldn't half of it's transponders be made redundant because Astra 2D is already using those frequencies? Doesn't this mean that another low power, single band, spot beam satellite, like 2D but built for Band C instead of Band D, would be a better idea? (Perhaps they should rename Astra 2C to Astra 1L since that's the next available drive letter where it lives, and then we could have a nice tidy naming convention at 28.2 East, with Astra 2D on Band D and a new Astra 2C satellite with a UK spot beam on Band C.) Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) -- Tony Sayer |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In article , Mark Carver
writes Stephen wrote: Band C (10950 to 11200 MHz) is empty at Sky's 28.2 orbital position, and although it could provide [snip] Please don't perpetrate the notion that Sky 'own' 28.2E or any satellites, they don't. No wonder Joe Public imagine that in the UK [Satellite TV]=[Sky]. Any decisions about moving satellites around etc come from the satellite owners, Astra and EuroBird, although of course BSkyB have considerable 'clout' with those companies. Reckon that could be the other way round Mark!... -- Tony Sayer |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Mark Carver" wrote in message oups.com... .. But Sky have made 28.2 their 'de facto' orbital position. Apart from a few Czech channels on Eurobird, everything else is UK 'Sky Platform'. Not sure about that. The other day whilst channel and satellite hopping I noticed Sky News on at least one other satellite and lots of other Sky stations to another Europeon country. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) -- Tony Sayer There is. The BBC and some other broadcasters already provide free to air digital transmissions. However, a Sky (or Sky+) receiver is the only type of equipment with a decoder that is able to decode: a) subscription channels transmitted via the Sky platform b) Free-to-view channels (as opposed to Free to Air) via the Sky platform (primarily Ch4 and five, which are encrypted, non-subscription channels) BBC and some other broadcasters already transmit Free to Air programmes from the Astra 2A/2B/2D and Eurobird 1 satellites at 28.2E (i.e. the same location as Sky transmissions to the UK) Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"tony sayer" wrote in message ... snip Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) Indeed, and if Ofcom was doing it's job correctly - rather than interfering in maters that really should not concern them (how come Ofcom can now control the content of adverts, I thought that was the ASA's area of dictact?)... BSkyB should lose control of the up-link, down-link, EPG and subscription management (encryption / decryption) - in line with the up and coming EU's "Television without Frontiers" directive there should really be a common encryption method or at least no platform specific encryption such as BSkyB use IYSWIM. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Bob Lucas" wrote in message ... snip Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). I think you are missing the point, at least from were I'm standing (!), if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery channels I should not be required to a/. have a BskyB neuted box and b/. have a minimum service from Sky before I can subscribe. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Bob Lucas" wrote in message ... BBC and some other broadcasters already transmit Free to Air programmes from the Astra 2A/2B/2D and Eurobird 1 satellites at 28.2E (i.e. the same location as Sky transmissions to the UK) Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). I do have a normal free to air satellite reciever but I'm afraid Joe Public would find it hard to use. The Sky is easy with its EPG system and stations in a set order, and programme info. etc. With my fta box it would be hard work for Joe P to find the station he was after. Also with some station the w/s switching is not automatic and you have to manually alter the TV's ratio. What really is needed is a 'Sky' type box being made for use on fta and sold in shops, all makers being able to produce it. But as the Government the will to loosen Skys grip on the control of specs and makers. But I do like Skys boxes and Remote controls all working alike not like the shambles of Freeview boxes some doing this and others doing different features of the broadcasts. -- Regards, David Please reply to News Group |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery channels I should not be required to a/. have a BskyB neuted box and b/. have a minimum service from Sky before I can subscribe. You do not have to have any Sky service subscription to have Sky install and supply thier box for you to watch the FTV stations. -- Regards, David Please reply to News Group |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"David" wrote in message ... "Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery channels I should not be required to a/. have a BskyB neuted box and b/. have a minimum service from Sky before I can subscribe. You do not have to have any Sky service subscription to have Sky install and supply thier box for you to watch the FTV stations. What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In article , Bob Lucas
writes Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) -- Tony Sayer There is. The BBC and some other broadcasters already provide free to air digital transmissions. However, a Sky (or Sky+) receiver is the only type of equipment with a decoder that is able to decode: a) subscription channels transmitted via the Sky platform b) Free-to-view channels (as opposed to Free to Air) via the Sky platform (primarily Ch4 and five, which are encrypted, non-subscription channels) BBC and some other broadcasters already transmit Free to Air programmes from the Astra 2A/2B/2D and Eurobird 1 satellites at 28.2E (i.e. the same location as Sky transmissions to the UK) Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). Yes I think thats generally known, but try telling people that they still have to have a Sky box and card for channel 4 and 5 and that puts them off the idea.. Its not very good "joined up" digital thinking.. -- Tony Sayer |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... You do not have to have any Sky service subscription to have Sky install and supply thier box for you to watch the FTV stations. What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. Yes I understand, but you are not reading what I said! Sky will install / supply you with a SKY box just to watch the FTA and FTV stations for a one off fee. NO subscription is to be paid. £150 http://www.freesatfromsky.co.uk/ -- Regards, David Please reply to News Group |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:43:04 -0000, "Jerry"
wrote: What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. You mean, like being forced to pay for the BBC (through the licence fee) in order to watch other channels? Rod. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In article , David
writes "Bob Lucas" wrote in message ... BBC and some other broadcasters already transmit Free to Air programmes from the Astra 2A/2B/2D and Eurobird 1 satellites at 28.2E (i.e. the same location as Sky transmissions to the UK) Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). I do have a normal free to air satellite reciever but I'm afraid Joe Public would find it hard to use. The Sky is easy with its EPG system and stations in a set order, and programme info. etc. With my fta box it would be hard work for Joe P to find the station he was after. Also with some station the w/s switching is not automatic and you have to manually alter the TV's ratio. What really is needed is a 'Sky' type box being made for use on fta and sold in shops, all makers being able to produce it. But as the Government the will to loosen Skys grip on the control of specs and makers. Precisely!.... But I do like Skys boxes and Remote controls all working alike not like the shambles of Freeview boxes some doing this and others doing different features of the broadcasts. -- Tony Sayer |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote...
tony sayer writes Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) How wicked of the BSkyB to be successful! Even Hitler was successful for a while, Jimbo. Matti |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In message , Bob Lucas
writes Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). BSkyB's soft encryption meets the requirments of copyright owners when granting territorial rights. -- James Follett. Novelist (Callsign G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk and http://www.marjacq.com |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
In message ews.net,
Jerry writes "tony sayer" wrote in message ... snip Its about time there was a free to air service to the UK that could carry TV without the dictates of the Sky box;) Indeed, and if Ofcom was doing it's job correctly - rather than interfering in maters that really should not concern them (how come Ofcom can now control the content of adverts, I thought that was the ASA's area of dictact?)... ASA has nothing to do with advertising control. It can only moan after an advert has appeared in the mags and newspapers etc if an ad has upset its silly sensibilities. ASA bleats provide valuable publicity. They're not just mostly harmless, they are harmless. The IBA/ITC responsibility for ITV advertising copy clearance is vested in Ofcom, the successors of the ITC. BSkyB should lose control of the up-link, down-link, EPG and subscription management (encryption / decryption) - in line with the up and coming EU's "Television without Frontiers" directive there should really be a common encryption method or at least no platform specific encryption such as BSkyB use IYSWIM. Typical Blairite thinking: "Hey fellers! It's not broken so let's break it! Uplinks are probably in the hands of BT who hold licences to transmit uplinks. Down links are controlled by the satellites' owners. Encryption management is in the hands of a specialist companies, subscription management is also in the hands of a specialist company. The so-called 'Television without Frontiers' was dreamed up by a bunch of limp-wristed, pink and fluffy, mincing wankstains who were strong on the idea of hanging a bell around pussy's neck but couldn't be bothered to take time off from buggering each other to think up a way of doing it. The Berne Convention is the result of agreement between most countries of the world. The opinions of a group of piddling little corrupt countries in Europe are of no consequence in the great scheme of thing. -- James Follett. Novelist (Callsign G1LXP) |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
David wrote:
"Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... You do not have to have any Sky service subscription to have Sky install and supply thier box for you to watch the FTV stations. What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. Yes I understand, but you are not reading what I said! Sky will install / supply you with a SKY box just to watch the FTA and FTV stations for a one off fee. NO subscription is to be paid. £150 http://www.freesatfromsky.co.uk/ I don't know why you bother trying, David, Jerry is a wll known troll who's in many peoples killfiles. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
JF wrote: Uplinks [for Astra 28.2E] are probably in the hands of BT who hold licences to transmit uplinks. Wrong. The BBC uplink themselves from TV Centre (take a ride on the Hammersmith and City line and you#ll see the dishes), ITV , C4, Discovery Networks by Arqiva at Winchester (and other sites), and Sky's channels from Chilworth, BSky'B's own site that they inherited from BSB in 1991. ISTR Viacom (MTV etc) arrange their own uplink too. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Mark Carver"
Indeed I rather suspect the continued delay by BBC/ITV to launch their Freesat' service is due to Sky's tight grip and control of the SI streams on Astra's birds. So do I. The proprietary OpenTV system used for EPG and Interactive on Sky-provided satellite should have its protection removed and a migration route to standard DVB Event Information Tables and MHEG created. Giving OpenTV legal protection is not in the public interest. -- MJR/slef http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"David"
I do have a normal free to air satellite reciever but I'm afraid Joe Public would find it hard to use. The Sky is easy with its EPG system and stations in a set order, and programme info. etc. The EPG problems are perpetuated by Sky's hold over Service Information. Point a good FTA receiver at a 19 east and watch the Germans do it properly (in most cases). Sat.1 and junky friends on services 40-80, RTL on 120xx, ZDFvision on services 280xx, ARD Digital on 281xx-284xx, most with days of EPG. That said, we seem to be getting fewer SID changes in the last year or so. BBC has been on services 6xxx and 103xx for a while. ITV are still strange: itv1s all over the show, itv2 is 10070 and itv4 is 10072, but itv3 is 10260 :-/ [...] Also with some station the w/s switching is not automatic and you have to manually alter the TV's ratio. That's known as a cock-up, AIUI, and can happen with Sky too. But I do like Skys boxes and Remote controls all working alike not like the shambles of Freeview boxes some doing this and others doing different features of the broadcasts. I'm going to build a PVR: what's the current best user interface practice? Regards, -- MJR/slef |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"David"
"Jerry" wrote: What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. Yes I understand, but you are not reading what I said! You seem to be not reading what is being asked. How does: Sky will install / supply you with a SKY box just to watch the FTA and FTV stations for a one off fee. NO subscription is to be paid. help Jerry to get Discovery without buying other Sky channels? The Sky Packages look a lot like monopolist bundling to me. -- MJR/slef |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
JF wrote:
BSkyB's soft encryption meets the requirments of copyright owners when granting territorial rights. which should have been banned for encrypted channels by Television without Frontiers. Pay per potential viewer, not pay by area. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"tony sayer" wrote in message ... How wicked of the BSkyB to be successful! Yes very wicked of him.. but a private monopoly is a bit worse than a state one dontcha tink?.. -- Tony Sayer it's only a monopoly in that nobody else has chosen to compete - you cant force NTL to switch to satellite. -- Gareth. A french man who wanted a castle threw his cat into a pond. http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/dsbmusic/ |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... "Bob Lucas" wrote in message ... snip Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). I think you are missing the point, at least from were I'm standing (!), if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery channels I should not be required to a/. have a BskyB neuted box and b/. have a minimum service from Sky before I can subscribe. that's discovery's business - if they wish they can make their service available via other means. -- Gareth. A french man who wanted a castle threw his cat into a pond. http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/dsbmusic/ |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"David" wrote in message ... "Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... You do not have to have any Sky service subscription to have Sky install and supply thier box for you to watch the FTV stations. What don't you understand about "if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery...."? I know that I can use a non BSkyB box to receive FTV stations, that is not what I was talking about, no one should be forced to pay for one channel so that they can then either watch FTA channels (that come 'free' with the base subscription) or pay to access other channels. Yes I understand, but you are not reading what I said! Sky will install / supply you with a SKY box just to watch the FTA and FTV stations for a one off fee. NO subscription is to be paid. How does that help me if I want to watch, for example, one or more of the Discovery channels?... |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"the dog from that film you saw" wrote in message ... "Jerry" wrote in message reenews.net... "Bob Lucas" wrote in message ... snip Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). I think you are missing the point, at least from were I'm standing (!), if I want to pay to watch for example the encrypted Discovery channels I should not be required to a/. have a BskyB neuted box and b/. have a minimum service from Sky before I can subscribe. that's discovery's business - if they wish they can make their service available via other means. No they can't (easily), not unless the EPG and delivery etc. is removed from BSkyB's control, even the BBC has to pay to have their FTA channels listed on the EPG. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote in message ... In message , Bob Lucas writes Consequently, there is nothing to prevent a viewer in the UK from using a different type of digital receiver (i.e. non-Sky equipment) to view any channel that is genuinely Free to Air (i.e. not encrypted). BSkyB's soft encryption meets the requirments of copyright owners when granting territorial rights. No, it meets BSkyB's requirements, both the BBC and ITV have got around the problems. BSkyB could have used one of the other encryption methods and meet the requirements of copyright owners. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote in message ... Copyright residual distribution rights have always been sold on language/territory. "Have always" is no reason for "Should always" Bill |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote in message ... snip The so-called 'Television without Frontiers' was dreamed up by a bunch of limp-wristed, pink and fluffy, mincing wankstains who were strong on the idea of hanging a bell around pussy's neck but couldn't be bothered to take time off from buggering each other to think up a way of doing it. The Berne Convention is the result of agreement between most countries of the world. The opinions of a group of piddling little corrupt countries in Europe are of no consequence in the great scheme of thing. I think that little rant says all there is to be said about the worth of your contributions and knowledge. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote in message ... snip Please read what I actually wrote rather than what you thought I wrote. That is rich coming from you... |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
JF wrote:
Actually I didn't mention the Beeb. I said that the licences were probably in the hands of BT. It was not a categoric statement therefore there was nothing 'wrong' about it. BT are not a regulatory body. Radio transmission licences in the UK are in the domain of Ofcom and the DTI AIUI. Oh dear. I didn't say that BT were a regulatory body! I was talking about holders of licenses, not the muppets who write the regs. Please read what I actually wrote rather than what you thought I wrote. Yes, and I explained to you that BT don't appear to uplink any major (if any ?) channels directly to the Astra or EuroBrid satellites at 28.2E. In fact I could be really pedantic and point out that a couple of weeks ago Arqiva bought BT's broadcast satellite business, but I'm sure such a well read chap such as you knew that already ? http://www.arqiva.com/server.php?show=ConWebDoc.883 -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:19:26 +0000, JF wrote:
It's absolutely true. Yes, I admit to being a great big, nasty man who's saying unpalatable truths that pink and fluffies can't stomach. The main trouble (even though I agree with the point that you'd been making) is that you're a snide egocentric blowhard. I suspect that you're trying to project light humour but it comes across as truly repellent narcissism. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
"JF" wrote in message ... snip The Berne will be around long after everyone on this planet is dust. We might as well get used to. It might well be around, that doesn't mean that it will never need modifying. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
On 28 Nov 2006 23:25:47 GMT, Paul Martin wrote:
What's the Berne Convention got to do with the permission given by the copyright holder to broadcast a work? Under copyright, no broadcast is possible without the permission of the copyright holder. Territorial licencing of material is already becoming archaic when the broadcasts don't respect national borders. Copyright itself is a compromise between private profit and public good. We might have to change our understanding of the meaning of "copyright", since technology has effectively changed the meaning of "copy". I don't expect it will change quickly because nothing legal ever does - a few decades probably. Copyright means some people being paid over and over again for the same work, while others are only paid once. It's never going to please everybody. Rod. |
Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?
Mark Carver wrote: But Sky have made 28.2 their 'de facto' orbital position. Apart from a few Czech channels on Eurobird, everything else is UK 'Sky Platform'. I would be interested in czeh channels. But I cannot find a single one on 28.2 east? -- Tor Pedo |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:36 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com