BBC Freesat
 

"Nigel Whitfield" wrote in message
s.com...
On 28 Feb, 10:40, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:
I already have freesat from sky, if it works on that then fine. I did
not
know before that systems would be interchangeable.

Yes; they're most unlikely to do anything else. If you take a bog
standard satellite box - ie, not a Sky one - you can still see many of
the channels that appear on 'Freesat from Sky' because they're not
even encrypted. For example, Movies4 Men, Men and Motors, Zone
Thriller, Bloomberg, CNN, Euronews, all the BBC regions, ITV regions.
These channels should be available on your Sky box even without a
viewing card, too.

What they lack on a non-Sky box - and one of the things the BBC will
bring to the party - is an EPG. They just show now/next. Sky charges
channels to be on their EPG - in a recent decision, Rapture TV lost a
complaint about their charge of just over 75,000 per year to appear in
the listing.

It will be very interesting to see if the BBC do charge for EPG
services; and if they don't - or if it's a substantially smaller sum -
at what stage some of the smaller channels feel that they will be
better off opting out of Sky's EPG and hoping just to pick up viewer
from the BBC Freesat system.

All the systems will be using the same core - DVB-S or perhaps DVB-S2;
the BBC already have streams on the satellites used for Sky's
platform, so many people will have dishes pointing there, and there
are lots of other english language channels. So it would be wasteful
to use a different satellite. Keeping as much in common as possible
gives the best chance of persuading channels to appear on the Freesat
platform as well as (or instead of) Sky's.

The key to both Sky and Freesat is the programme guide; the stream for
any channel is just a standard digital TV broadcast. All that's
different is the EPG/channel lineup, which effectively points the box
at the right stream when you select a channel. You can have two (or
more) EPGs pointing at the same stream - some boxes will use one,
others a different one.

Sky's EPG is closed, which is what enables them to charge for it; and
people only do that because it's the best way of getting your channel
in front of viewers. It also allows them to provide consistent channel
numbering, which is an advantage for advertisers and easier for many
consumers.

It will be interesting to see if the BBC want to use LCNs (fixed
channel numbers) on satellite, or allow people to store the channels
on any number.



A normal satellite, IE a Non-Sky one would be beyond Joe Public to use.
He would be completly lost with the 100's, mabe 1000's of channels through
out Europe he would recieve and them being in particular order.
Unless the BBC and Sky work together on this project I see it doomed before
it starts.

--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

BBC Freesat
 

David wrote:

A normal satellite, IE a Non-Sky one would be beyond Joe Public to
use.
He would be completly lost with the 100's, mabe 1000's of channels
through out Europe he would recieve and them being in particular
order.
Unless the BBC and Sky work together on this project I see it doomed
before it starts.

Don't judge the rest of the public by your stanards.

BBC Freesat
 

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:24:17 GMT, "David" wrote:


|!A normal satellite, IE a Non-Sky one would be beyond Joe Public to use.

Sky does not own any satellite.

|!He would be completly lost with the 100's, mabe 1000's of channels through
|!out Europe he would recieve and them being in particular order.
|!Unless the BBC and Sky work together on this project I see it doomed before
|!it starts.

The BEEBs Freesat would need an EPG *separate* from Sky, this could include
the many free to air channels we get from Sky.

Being a News addict, I will mention that AlJazeera English, which is FTA,
is making a particularly good job of International news

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Sat Ch4, Ch5, only GBP20
http://www.freesatfromsky.com - "what is freesat?" - "view T&C" -
What will I receive "?20 ... one Viewing Card". You will also need
$ky box and dish. List of Channels at http://www.wickonline.com/fta.htm
All BBC & ITV Channels are now FTA and do not need this card,
alternatively hey are receivable with a generic dish and STB.

BBC Freesat
 

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:24:17 GMT, "David" wrote:


|!A normal satellite, IE a Non-Sky one would be beyond Joe Public to use.

Sky does not own any satellite.

|!He would be completly lost with the 100's, mabe 1000's of channels
through
|!out Europe he would recieve and them being in particular order.
|!Unless the BBC and Sky work together on this project I see it doomed
before
|!it starts.

The BEEBs Freesat would need an EPG *separate* from Sky, this could
include
the many free to air channels we get from Sky.

BOXES Dave not satellites, yes the 2 satellites are Astra and Eurobird.

--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

BBC Freesat
 

Sky's EPG is closed, which is what enables them to charge for it; and
people only do that because it's the best way of getting your channel
in front of viewers. It also allows them to provide consistent channel
numbering, which is an advantage for advertisers and easier for many
consumers.

It does sound as if SKY thinks the BBC (and others) need the EPG in order
for people to easily use their channels via a SKY box. You could equally
argue it's a service SKY needs to satisfy it's customers, and that it should
pay the BBC! This could be the view the BBC takes once it is supplying EPG
data to Freesat box's.

BBC Freesat
 

On 28 Feb, 13:48, "John Russell" wrote:

It does sound as if SKY thinks the BBC (and others) need the EPG in order
for people to easily use their channels via Â*a SKY box. You could equally
argue it's a service SKY needs to satisfy it's customers, and that it should
pay the BBC! This could be the view the BBC takes once it is supplying EPG
data to Freesat box's.

The EPG is certainly a key part of Sky's marketing; without that, and
the fixed channel numbers, it would be a lot harder for people to
promote their channels to less technical viewers.

The other part, of course, is the encryption. I wouldn't be surprised
to hear that Sky tout the encryption as a handy, simple way for
channels that only have UK rights to material to ensure that they
aren't inadvertently broadcasting to people elsewhere.

It's probably quite an attractive package (aside from the cost) - "pay
us the money, and you get on the EPG with a fixed channel number you
can use so people can find you, and you don't have to worry about
continental overspill either."

Once Freesat is up and running, the BBC will be in a better position
to strike a bargain with Sky over the EPG, for sure, in my view. But I
don't think they'd go as far as to demand to be paid. That would be an
interesting spat - if the BBC opted to go down that route, the Murdoch
press would be full of "Arrogant BBC threatening to pull the plug on
millions of Sky viewers," regardless of the finer technical points of
the truth.

There's certainly the potential for another spat, just like the
current hissy fit between Virgin and Sky, over satellite EPGs once the
BBC's Freesat is up and running.

Of course, the other very interesting thing is whether or not some
channels will decide to simulcrypt, so that people with a CI-based
receiver for Freesat could slot in a CAM and just subscribe to, eg,
Discovery or Disney individually, instead of via Sky's bundles - in
Germany, for example, you can get the Discovery Solo option for €3 a
month.

Nigel.

BBC Freesat
 

Once Freesat is up and running, the BBC will be in a better position
to strike a bargain with Sky over the EPG, for sure, in my view. But I
don't think they'd go as far as to demand to be paid. That would be an
interesting spat - if the BBC opted to go down that route, the Murdoch
press would be full of "Arrogant BBC threatening to pull the plug on
millions of Sky viewers," regardless of the finer technical points of
the truth.

SKY could argue all they like but I would blame SKY. It's SKY's EPG and I
need programs in there to use SKY+ features. The EPG should be no different
from a Listing Mag. Do they have to pay the BBC? There are so many now you
couldn't expect the BBC to pay each of them individually. They should tell
SKY the data is available for free if they want it. I for one would be
telling SKY I do want it, and feel the money I'm already paying includes the
EPG service.

BBC Freesat
 

On 28 Feb, 14:28, "John Russell" wrote:
SKY could argue all they like but I would blame SKY. It's SKY's EPG and I
need programs in there to use SKY+ features. The EPG should be no different
from a Listing Mag. Do they have to pay the BBC? There are so many now you
couldn't expect the BBC to pay each of them individually. They should tell
SKY the data is available for free if they want it. I for one would be
telling SKY I do want it, and feel the money I'm already paying includes the
EPG service.

Listings magazines are required to pay money based on the number of
subscribers (and the same is true of web sites that need listings).

Under one of the Broadcasting Acts, there is a copyright fee which has
to be paid to provide listings that are more than Time and Title
(T&T), for the main channels, ie the BBC, ITV and Channel 4. Channel 4
presently waive their right to collect a fee, but the other
broadcasters do charge.

The fee for last year worked at at a minimum of 200 per quarter; I
can't lay my hands right now on the document with the formulas in it,
but I did work out that if I wanted to source data (which is a
separate cost) to provide a Freeview EPG on the Toppy site, so people
could set timers from it, I'd be looking at over 4,000 a year for
copyright clearance and data.

Other channels aren't covered by the Broadcasting Act - I think the
issue is a legacy from the old TV mag duopoly - so you can publish
their data if you can get it from them.

For online use, incidentally, while ITV jumped up and down on some
sites, the BBC seem fairly relaxed, and actually make lots of data
freely available and encourage people to re-use it as part of the
Backstage project.

So, the BBC certainly don't pay to appear in the printed guides - the
reverse is true - and yes, following the logic of the printer market,
Sky should be paying the BBC for the listings. In fact, they may well
be paying the copyright fees laid down by the Act, but charging more
than that for the presence of the EPG.

I would imagine, since EPG access is regulated by Ofcom and supposed
to be 'fair and non discriminatory' that if they charge some channels,
eg Rapture, which we know from the Ofcom investigation has to pay,
then they can't not charge others, such as the BBC, or offer them a
special deal.

Nigel.

BBC Freesat
 

Following up my own post, with additional info, after a thorough
trawling through the hard drive:

For 2006, the minimum quarterly licence fee under the Broadcasting Act
1990 for TV listings was 185.95 plus VAT; the fee basis was 10.73
pence per thousand copies, per day.

So, using the examples from the T&Cs doc I have, for a circulation of
25,000 in a quarter with 91 days, the fee is 25 x 10.73 x 91.

The fees cover all media, including electronic programme guides,
printed material, and mobile phones. So, with Sky's figure at 8.441
million subscribers, let's round that up to 8.5 million to take
account of Freesat from Sky users who also see the EPG.

For a similar quarter, they'd have to pay royalties to ITV & BBC of
8,500 x 10.73 x 91, which is just under 83,000 per quarter. Sounds a
lot - but if the 75,000 they charge for Rapture on a "fair and non
discriminatory basis" is typical of what they charge per EPG slot,
given the number of slots that both ITV and the BBC have, they're
still quids in.

Arguably, of course, all the channels should be providing their data
free of the licensing restrictions; you'll still have to pay fees to
the bureaux who aggregate the data from all the channels, and provide
things like the detailed series info or mini reviews, if you want
that.

Nigel.

BBC Freesat
 

On 28 Feb 2007 07:28:08 -0800, "Nigel Whitfield"
wrote:

|!On 28 Feb, 14:28, "John Russell" wrote:
|! SKY could argue all they like but I would blame SKY. It's SKY's EPG and I
|! need programs in there to use SKY+ features. The EPG should be no different
|! from a Listing Mag. Do they have to pay the BBC? There are so many now you
|! couldn't expect the BBC to pay each of them individually. They should tell
|! SKY the data is available for free if they want it. I for one would be
|! telling SKY I do want it, and feel the money I'm already paying includes the
|! EPG service.
|!
|!Listings magazines are required to pay money based on the number of
|!subscribers (and the same is true of web sites that need listings).

I have Digiguide http://www.digiguide.com/ at GBP8.95 per year it beats the
paper ones hollow. You can print out as much as you like. I has the
next fortnights programs, and often the next months, plus all the bells and
whistles you expect of a computer program.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Compare and contrast
Sharia Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
European Convention on Human Rights http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html
Then sign this petition http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Ban-Sharia

BBC Freesat
 

Arguably, of course, all the channels should be providing their data
free of the licensing restrictions; you'll still have to pay fees to
the bureaux who aggregate the data from all the channels, and provide
things like the detailed series info or mini reviews, if you want
that.

Nigel.


The EPG should be seen as part of the overheads in supplying the service
that users are paying for. Department Stores don't charge you for walking on
the carpets or using the lifts. What next? Currys charging suppliers for
advertising their products, products that Curries need to sell to make
money themselves?

BBC Freesat
 

On 28 Feb, 16:31, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:
I have Digiguidehttp://www.digiguide.com/at GBP8.95 per year it beats the
paper ones hollow. You can print out as much as you like. I has the
next fortnights programs, and often the next months, plus all the bells and
whistles you expect of a computer program.

Yep; I agree, it's a useful tool (I just have the web version); but
like any EPG publisher, DigiGuide too are subject to the fees under
the Broadcasting Act. They can do it cheaply because a) they have lots
of subscribers to recover the costs and b) they also sell their
service on to other people, such as the branded guide on five's site.

I think the licensing fees for programme information are becoming an
anachronism and while the BBC and ITV (and C4, though they waive their
rights at the moment) are treated as special cases like this, it
probably makes it easier for firms like Sky to argue that there's a
cost involved in appearing on an EPG platform - and a pretty high one
at that.

Nigel.

BBC Freesat
 

I think the licensing fees for programme information are becoming an
anachronism and while the BBC and ITV (and C4, though they waive their
rights at the moment) are treated as special cases like this, it
probably makes it easier for firms like Sky to argue that there's a
cost involved in appearing on an EPG platform - and a pretty high one
at that.

Nigel.

Supermarkets offer "loss Leaders" on the basics in order to get you through
the door in the hope you buy more expensive goods. Well for SKY that should
mean BBC1 etc.Sure SKY are no longer involved with uploading BBC channels,
but no one would get consider SKY if they couldn't get the basic channels
from the BBC via a SKY box.

BBC Freesat
 

"Nigel Whitfield" wrote in message
ps.com
On 28 Feb, 16:31, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:
I have Digiguidehttp://www.digiguide.com/at GBP8.95 per year it
beats the paper ones hollow. You can print out as much as you
like. I has the next fortnights programs, and often the next
months, plus all the bells and whistles you expect of a computer
program.

Yep; I agree, it's a useful tool (I just have the web version); but
like any EPG publisher, DigiGuide too are subject to the fees under
the Broadcasting Act. They can do it cheaply because a) they have lots
of subscribers to recover the costs and b) they also sell their
service on to other people, such as the branded guide on five's site.

I think the licensing fees for programme information are becoming an
anachronism and while the BBC and ITV (and C4, though they waive their
rights at the moment) are treated as special cases like this, it
probably makes it easier for firms like Sky to argue that there's a
cost involved in appearing on an EPG platform - and a pretty high one
at that.

Since EPG data is an *advertisement* for the programmes I would have thought
that the broadcasters should pay to be included, not the other way round.
Don't they *want* people to watch their flippin' programmes?

--
Max Demian

BBC Freesat
 

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
"Nigel Whitfield" wrote in message
ps.com
On 28 Feb, 16:31, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:
I have Digiguidehttp://www.digiguide.com/at GBP8.95 per year it
beats the paper ones hollow. You can print out as much as you
like. I has the next fortnights programs, and often the next
months, plus all the bells and whistles you expect of a computer
program.

Yep; I agree, it's a useful tool (I just have the web version); but
like any EPG publisher, DigiGuide too are subject to the fees under
the Broadcasting Act. They can do it cheaply because a) they have lots
of subscribers to recover the costs and b) they also sell their
service on to other people, such as the branded guide on five's site.

I think the licensing fees for programme information are becoming an
anachronism and while the BBC and ITV (and C4, though they waive their
rights at the moment) are treated as special cases like this, it
probably makes it easier for firms like Sky to argue that there's a
cost involved in appearing on an EPG platform - and a pretty high one
at that.

Since EPG data is an *advertisement* for the programmes I would have
thought that the broadcasters should pay to be included, not the other way
round. Don't they *want* people to watch their flippin' programmes?

--
Max Demian


Don't SKY users want to watch them? Shouldn't SKY be obliged to supply the
basic channels in the EPG central to the function of SKY+ functions that so
many pay for? The SKY EPG is now an integral part of the SKY service that
subscribers are paying for already!

BBC Freesat
 

"David" wrote:
A normal satellite, IE a Non-Sky one would be beyond Joe Public to use.
He would be completly lost with the 100's, mabe 1000's of channels through
out Europe he would recieve and them being in particular order.

Yeah, they're so dense these British users. They can't cope like the rest
of Europe does. Being able to sort/code the channel list any one of a dozen
ways is sooooo hard.

BTW, why don't more boxes default to allowing the SID if you enter an
unknown channel number? Then 52005 would be mktv for everyone at 28east.

And are SIDs unique? Unique per orbital position? Unique per satellite co?

Unless the BBC and Sky work together on this project I see it doomed before
it starts.

ITYM *if* the BBC and Sky work together...

--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, trainer, koha dev,
online shop maker, GNU/Linux, debian, gobo, gnustep, mailing lists.
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

BBC Freesat
 

Beck wrote:
BBC are starting a consultation on a new digital satellite service
freesat they are planning.

If you are interested in airing your views about the proposed service,
check out

Read something about a 'One off' charge. Not sure if that includes or
refers to purchasing the equipment.

Geoff Lane

BBC Freesat
 

On 1 Mar, 20:37, Geoff Lane wrote:
Read something about a 'One off' charge. Not sure if that includes or
refers to purchasing the equipment.

Almost certainly the equipment cost - they use the same phrase to talk
about Freeview, don't they?

Nigel