BBC moves to file-sharing sites

Hundreds of episodes of BBC programmes will be made available on a file-sharing network for the first time, the corporation has announced.

The move follows a deal between the commercial arm of the organisation, BBC Worldwide, and technology firm Azureus.

The agreement means that users of Azureus' Zudeo software in the US can download titles such as Little Britain.

Until now, most BBC programmes found on peer-to-peer file-sharing networks have been illegal copies.

Beth Clearfield, vice president of program management and digital media at BBC Worldwide, said that the agreement was part of a drive to reach the largest audience possible.

"We are very excited to partner with Azureus and make our content available through this revolutionary distribution model," she said.

View: BBC News

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

GOM Player 2.1.0.3383 Beta

Next Story

Sony BMG settles suit over CDs

20 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

This makes me laugh, but this is how a television broadcasting company should act like, they get enough money to run it from tax payers in England (the TV license) so why not make it available for free on the internet worldwide? It's not going to cost anything as it's not being hosted anywhere expensive (that is to assume that Azureus is still the normal torrent software).

Companies out there are trying to stop people from file-sharing and now look what the BBC do rofl.

I hope the service is available in England, there are loads of shows that I'd like stored on my hard-drive. Never Mind The Buzzcocks, for instance.

No he means 'to', not '2'. And last time I checked on the Zudeo website I could download the .torrent files and open them in uTorrent.

"have to use azureus 2 use"?!?
should be "have 2 use azureus 2 use"?

Yeah, Zudeo works any torrent clients.
Its just partner between them Zudeo/Azureus, i guess. I hate Azureus - only because it eating 150+ MB RAM!

So I take it these downloads are free? Why should everyone else be able to watch BBC shows for free when us peeps in the UK have to pay a TV licence to watch BBC Network.

Quote - thefunkymunky said @ #4
So I take it these downloads are free? Why should everyone else be able to watch BBC shows for free when us peeps in the UK have to pay a TV licence to watch BBC Network.

No we don't - the TV license is required to watch any TV broadcasts, not just the BBC's.

Quote - Cy Bones said @ #4.1

No we don't - the TV license is required to watch any TV broadcasts, not just the BBC's.

Actually you're incorrect. They charge the licence fee because they want to. Other stations gain revenue via advertisments. This is the reason why the BBC charges, as they have no other income.

Quote - Samurai-HQ said @ #4.2

Actually you're incorrect. They charge the licence fee because they want to. Other stations gain revenue via advertisments. This is the reason why the BBC charges, as they have no other income.

Actually, you're the one who is incorrect. A TV license is required if a household has any television receiving equipment installed (this also includes computer TV adapters, etc.). If that equipment is able to receive transmissions in colour, then the cost of the license is higher. What channels you watch is of no relevance. "But... Mr. TV License Inspector, I only ever watch ITV, Channel 4, and Five!"

I'd glad to pay my fee as it means I don't have to sit through ad breaks or watch biased programming swayed by commercialism. Example: ITV News doing a news story on their sponsor Iceland.

The advantage to us is that the BBC have to focus on quality programming rather than generating revenue by rerunning phone-in talent and quiz shows every year, like most other channels.

Quote - Lt-DavidW said @ #4.3

Actually, you're the one who is incorrect. A TV license is required if a household has any television receiving equipment installed (this also includes computer TV adapters, etc.). If that equipment is able to receive transmissions in colour, then the cost of the license is higher. What channels you watch is of no relevance. "But... Mr. TV License Inspector, I only ever watch ITV, Channel 4, and Five!"

I'd glad to pay my fee as it means I don't have to sit through ad breaks or watch biased programming swayed by commercialism. Example: ITV News doing a news story on their sponsor Iceland.

The advantage to us is that the BBC have to focus on quality programming rather than generating revenue by rerunning phone-in talent and quiz shows every year, like most other channels.

Errm. The TV licence is for a household that has any equipment that receives a TV broadcast - correct. But. The cost of the TV licence pays for the BBC, none of the revenue from a TV licence goes to any other network. Hence, my original question.

Quote - Lt-DavidW said @ #4.3

Actually, you're the one who is incorrect. A TV license is required if a household has any television receiving equipment installed (this also includes computer TV adapters, etc.). If that equipment is able to receive transmissions in colour, then the cost of the license is higher. What channels you watch is of no relevance. "But... Mr. TV License Inspector, I only ever watch ITV, Channel 4, and Five!"

I'd glad to pay my fee as it means I don't have to sit through ad breaks or watch biased programming swayed by commercialism. Example: ITV News doing a news story on their sponsor Iceland.

The advantage to us is that the BBC have to focus on quality programming rather than generating revenue by rerunning phone-in talent and quiz shows every year, like most other channels.


You forgot to mention that if the device is battery powered you don't pay the fee.

Quote - thefunkymunky said @ #4.4

Errm. The TV licence is for a household that has any equipment that receives a TV broadcast - correct. But. The cost of the TV licence pays for the BBC, none of the revenue from a TV licence goes to any other network. Hence, my original question.

I never disputed what the TV License money is used for, I merely corrected Samurai-HQ's incorrect statement.
I imagine the downloads will be free to view for UK license holders (determined by IP address), and if the downloads will be made available internationally, then there should really be a small fee (which is fair enough).

I seriously doubt it, but I really hope this is not the outcome of the BBC's Integrated Media Player and Dirac projects.

Quote - Jaxkesa said @ #4.7

Reallyyyy...?? So I can run my TV off my UPS?.....And I know the UPS battery is actually charged by the mains...but so are rechargeable batteries which I might use in my battery powered TV I wonder what the actual law is on this one...

You do not need a license for a internally powered TV if your main home is already licensed. For instance, at University my parents license would cover a battery powered TV in my flat (if I had one).

The license is also VERY clear that it must be internal batteries. Your UPS would not count I'm afraid.

its a good idea... they aren't going to be losing any money by distributing over file-sharing networks either... thats one good thing about TV licenses, they get money no matter how bad the ratings are.

It's not free, well in the US it isn't anyway. They were developing a service in the UK with there own software and codex, not sure if that's still going on.

Quote - ClintEastman said @ #1.2
It's not free, well in the US it isn't anyway. They were developing a service in the UK with there own software and codex, not sure if that's still going on.
Yeah it still going on, slowly. I believe it'll be relesed in the new year, called either iMP, iPlayer, myBBCPlayer or something similar. I think they're very much in bed with Microsoft over it, they showed off a flashy GUI some time back, that heavily relied on Vista...