BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

[somanyholes]

go the beeb    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/

[Rik]

I noticed that. I wonder if they'll take the same attitude with paying for transmitters and satellites?

[madasahatter]

the beeb actually speaks sense!!

Wow!

[Rik]

Also under discussion from a different angle here.

[somanyholes]

nice linkage 

[Rik]

All my links are freshly oiled.

[D-Dan]

I have to say - I don't care. If the beeb play hardball - my allegiance is to my ISP, who allow me to access worldwide content. If the BBC get restricted - then I will go elsewhere for my news (which is about all I use them for anyway).

So, IMO, the BBC will have to back down. They may have the best coverage in the world - but if they restrict it - they will lose market share (and my license fee).

[madasahatter]

Tbh, I don't think the BBC have any need to back down. Remember, the BBC aren't the only ones doing this - theres 4OD, Sky by broadband etc etc - all pretty much using the same (p2p) technology.

I don't think the ISPs can force the Beeb to do anything, and imagine the problems they would face from their customers if they suddenly blocked iPlayer - don't think any of them is brave enough.  8)

[Inactive]

So, IMO, the BBC will have to back down. They may have the best coverage in the world - but if they restrict it - they will lose market share (and my license fee).

I am not 100% sure on this, but I believe that any BBC content is restricted to UK ISP's.

[Captain K]

Another example of how IDNet's business model makes so much sense both for IDNet and its customers! 

[Rik]

Very true, Bruce. It will happily support use of the iPlayer.

[madasahatter]

Another example of how IDNet's business model makes so much sense both for IDNet and its customers! 

Indeed - proves my point that if an ISP charges the right amount, it can invest in infrastructure that is capable of actually providing the service that it offers - it's all good 

[Rik]

The big problem may, of course, come from BT not investing enough in their infrastructure.

[madasahatter]

You could well be right there - if the basic backbone isn't up to the job, then all ISPs are going to have a major problem, but if some ISPs can provide a good service with the same BT infrastructure, then that tends to point the finger at the ISPs that can't for not investing enough.

[Rik]

Indeed it will. My concern is that BT won't have the capacity on the backhaul at exchanges.

[madasahatter]

If there is a problem with backhaul capacity, it is up to the ISPs to sort that out with BT - they provide a service to the ISPs just as much as the ISP provides a service to us, and whatever the cause, if we pay for a service, we are entitled to receive it.

[Rik]

Bear in mind, though, that BT don't have that much of an SLA when it comes to broadband. If your connection slows to 400k (from memory) that's all BT are contracted to supply.

[madasahatter]

I think your memory serves you well Rik.

That kind of figure was probably OK 10 years ago, but is just not good enough now. It's time that something was done about that.

[Rik]

Ofcom seems unable to think that clearly though. 

[madasahatter]

Ofcom seems unable to think that clearly though. 

Ofcom seems unable to even think 

[Rik]

This, sadly, is true. But they do get paid awfully well not to do anything useful. 

[madasahatter]

I'm in the wrong game Rik 

[Rik]

Aren't we all. The CEO (or whatever) of Ofcom gets, I believe, £270K, and is worried about his legacy. Must be a relative of Bliar! 

[madasahatter]

If he wants to leave a legacy, wouldn't it be a good idea for Ofcom to do something really big and positive?

[Rik]

... and right!