Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Television Media The Internet

British TV Station Offers Downloads 332

Richard W.M. Jones writes "Remember how the British just love to download TV? Well, British terestrial TV channel five has announced that it will become the first to offer TV programmes to download legally. Except that they don't quite seem to get it yet. They are offering here some videos from this car programme which apparently didn't quite make it to air, for the princely sum of £1.50 (about $3), in DRM'd WMV 10 format (mplayer plays them fine). Still, it's a start, and it looks like they're just testing the water. Hopefully they won't take the lack of response as 'proof' that there's no demand. There's more about this at the BBC's website."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

British TV Station Offers Downloads

Comments Filter:
  • Codecs (Score:5, Informative)

    by XanC ( 644172 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:39AM (#12009770)
    Maybe your mplayer plays them fine. My 64-bit mplayer's offerings are a bit more basic.

    Let's get some open codecs!

    • by r00t ( 33219 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:48AM (#12009801) Journal
      Linux runs on Macs too.

      Plus, being able to fix bugs is addicting. I know that I never need to seriously worry that my Open Source software will break if I change platforms, upgrade my OS, or whatever. I can always find or make a fix, because I have the source. Support doesn't end with an uncaring or bankrupt vendor.

      Say, is it even legal to use those Windows DLL files and such?

      • Say, is it even legal to use those Windows DLL files and such?

        It's not legal to use MPlayer in the first place, so what's the difference?

        MPlayer includes support for all manner of patent-protected audio/video codecs, and as such, is illegal.

        If you're in a country where there are no software patents, it's a very different story.

        Using the DLLs is a grey area, but I'm inclined to assume they would be legal if tested in a US court. They all come from freely downloadable programs (RealPlayer, Windows Media

  • by aussie_a ( 778472 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:41AM (#12009776) Journal
    Download company 7 Digital, which is providing the technology for the online shop, said TV companies were increasingly keen to earn money from the internet.

    Good to see they aren't trying to get money from the web via lawsuits. Then again, this is a british company, not an American one (before you mod me flame-bait, the American *AA's have always been the first to do it in their industry. If I'm wrong, feel free to post a link :)).
    • by Anonymous Coward
      The Canadian Recording Industry Association got a tariff imposed upon blank CD-Rs which goes to them.

      They did this long before the RIAA even sued Napster.
  • by Dancin_Santa ( 265275 ) <DancinSanta@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:43AM (#12009787) Journal
    They are trying to sell ice to Eskimos! Sand to scorpions! Dentistry to Britons!

    Well, that last one doesn't really fit the theme of what I was getting at. Which was: You can't sell something to someone who can get it for themselves for free.
    • by sp3tt ( 856121 ) <sp3tt@nospaM.sp3tt.se> on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:52AM (#12009813)
      That's not true.
      In fact, here in Sweden at least, many downloaders want to pay the author of the works they download. But they do not think the prices are reasonable, thus they download. And for a DVD which sold 200,000 copies, the director got 15,000SEK (less than 2,000 USD). Which is also a cause for downloading - not enough money goes to authors.

      Right now, there is actually a discussion between a director and "pirates" on Sweden's largest pro-"piracy" website. What they have reached is the points described above.
      The director has proposed to hold a seminar about the film industry's future and how it can use the internet. The seminar is currently being planned.
      • here in Sweden at least, many downloaders want to pay the author of the works they download

        Heh, that's just because the government pays for everything else.

      • . Which is also a cause for downloading - not enough money goes to authors.

        BULLSHIT.

        If the director is being screwed, then he shouldnt have signed his contract. Why oh why can't you idiots understand that there is a FREE MARKET at work here (even more so since the internet has allowed you to EASILY AND CHEAPLY distribute a movie in a variety of formats) and that the market has CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY said that the work done by middlemen, such as distribution companies, advertising and marketing firms,

        • Whoa! Talk about a *bold-faced* lie.

          (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
        • by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @08:18AM (#12010527)
          Why oh why can't you idiots understand that there is a FREE MARKET [...]

          Anything involving copyright isn't a free market, it's a government-granted monopoly. That's what copyright *is*.

          [...] and that the market has CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY said that the work done by middlemen, such as distribution companies, advertising and marketing firms, etc IS VALUABLE

          Actually the "free market" is currently demonstrating that the role of those "middlemen" has become obselete. The fact that it's doing this *in the face of* blatant law-buying by those who are being obseleted, draconian laws and ridiculously excessive punishments just makes it all the more obvious.

          Why oh why can't you pro piracy liars [...]

          I'm not pro-piracy, I'm anti-"intellectual property".

          [...] finally just grasp the simple economic reality that it is neither a common nor easy nor cheap task to take my bathroom hummings and turn them into a product?

          Actually it is fairly cheap - and it's very quickly getting cheaper. That's why those "middlemen" have become obselete.

          • Anything involving copyright isn't a free market, it's a government-granted monopoly. That's what copyright *is*.

            Irrelevant. The issue here has no bearing on copyright. A contract was signed of which the director agreed to some terms. It would have been the same if no IP was involved and if it was a simple matter of two interests getting together to make physical items.

            Actually the "free market" is currently demonstrating that the role of those "middlemen" has become obselete. The fact that it's doing

        • by asliarun ( 636603 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @08:24AM (#12010549)
          I agree with you that the author's/director's cut is an economic deal, and should be treated as such.

          However, that doesn't change the fact that the whole creative business has been perverted to such an extent that the laws of economics no longer prevail. We currently live in such an artificial world that we've forgotten the real value of something. This is aided by the fact that a painting sells for tens of millions of dollars, a music album sells for over $20, and a 30 minute TV episode sometimes contains 15 minutes of commercials.

          The way things currently are, these creative works are priced as high as a customer can bear. Forget about economics or supply/demand for a second and answer this. How much is something really worth? For a manufactured product, the answer is fairly simple. Take the manufacturing cost (plus R&D cost), add a 10-50% margin, and you'll get a fair value for a product. Economics only kicks in when you want to figure out the exact margin, based on competition or lack of it.

          The price for a creative work can be determined similarly as well. The only difference is that the R&D cost in the above example is substituted with the royalty that the creator should get. I don't pretend to be an expert, but my rough calculation tells me that the current prices of books, audio CDs, movies, and paintings are a complete perversion of the above calculation. $20 for a audio CD cannot be justified by ANY real means, especially considering the fact that the same creative work was priced 1/4 a few years ago.

          This is my objection to the current system. Barring that, issues like the monopoly of distributors or authors getting a raw deal are just by-products of this screwed up system.
          • For a manufactured product, the answer is fairly simple. Take the manufacturing cost (plus R&D cost), add a 10-50% margin, and you'll get a fair value for a product.

            You really don't understand supply and demand at all, do you?

            a product is "worth" exactly how much somebody is willing to pay for it. not more, not less. unless you understand that simple concept, you do not understand not economics 101, but economics day 1, hour 1, minute 1, second 1.

            From your post, all I can say is this: "welcome

        • Free markets do not have potentially immortal corporate entities that have huge advantages over natural persons. At one time people would practically sell their souls over to these power-mongering entities just to get their foot in the door of a given media industry. The internet may change the need to do that. The internet is changing the face of all media - that is, unless it is halted by the moneyed interests described above.

          The gatekeepers are a dying breed. No one is interested in protecting their exc
          • At one time people would practically sell their souls over to these power-mongering entities just to get their foot in the door of a given media industry.

            there's no need for you to characterize them as "immoral or moral." I mean, you can think that, but it adds nothing to your argument.

            Look at it this way: the internet and other technologies now provide artists unprecedented ability to self-publish cheaply or freely. And yet great thousands of artists are still dying to sign on the bottom line to giv

    • by Troed ( 102527 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:53AM (#12009816) Homepage Journal
      You can't sell something to someone who can get it for themselves for free.

      Of course you can. I'd very much like to go to one central place for music, movie and tv-series downloads where I know the quality of the content and that I indeed support the ones producing it. I'll happily pay for such a service.

      Not everyone here on Slashdot is 14 and thinks free downloads are cool.
      • by sp3tt ( 856121 )
        I think being able to download music for free is a great thing, but I'd love to pay the artists for it. But for a CD which costs $20, the artist gets maybe $1. If I could download music for a fee, if it was not protected with DRM, had good quality, and the money went straight to the artist (well, to the managers of the service and to the costs for the bandwidth too, but that is minor), and the price was reasonable, then I would do it.
        And btw, I am 13.
      • I'm wondering if I'd want to pay for all 12 million episodes of 'The Bill' or 'EastEnders'

        And if so, how much :-)
        I figure about a pound or so... (for all)
    • Yes you can, it's called the "Bottled Water" theory of marketing.

      People can get it for free, but you offer them it for a small fee with some kind of added value (such as not having to worry about breaking the law). Real or imagined added value makes little difference.

      I'd pay a subscription to have on-demand access to the british tv networks programming from my home in Italy (I'm English, but live in Italy with my Italian wife), and I'm sure many people would do the same even from their homes in England.
    • Bottle of water anyone?
    • You can't sell something to someone who can get it for themselves for free.

      Haven't you seen those fridges filled with bottled water, roughly what you get from a tap? Brand, convenience, and reliability are worth money. As I think iTunes Music store demonstrated.

    • Fox in America is trying this same thing already, they cancelled a reality show midseason, and as a consolation to fans they posted the final episodes online [fox.com]. Some TV you can't get for free because it just wasn't aired.
  • Buffering... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Arcady13 ( 656165 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:45AM (#12009792) Homepage
    The demo videos all play fine for about 20 seconds and then I get "buffering..."
  • NRL (Score:4, Informative)

    by POds ( 241854 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:50AM (#12009805) Homepage Journal
    The NRL is a premier sporting event in Australia, comparable to the AFL. We've beena ble to download the games once aired on national free to air and pay television. Recently telstra has taken away our right todownload them and are now only offering them to telstra customers. Certain a step backwards.

    We can still download [nrl.com] them, but only for a week or so.

    Damn, i've used 'download' in the above, but i really should have used stream. Thats how this site [netspace.net.au] came about.
  • Fifth Gear (Score:2, Interesting)

    Fifth Gear is a spinoff, of sorts, of the BBC's very popular Top Gear, and is the best car review programme out there, by far.

    It is on the air where I live, and there are torrents of this show online. However, it is a good start. Now only if we could get the rumored Season 5 of the BlackAdder series via downloads.
    • the rumored Season 5 of the BlackAdder series via downloads.

      blackadderhall.co.uk [blackadderhall.co.uk]:

      Will this story never die? The 60s band story was first mentioned some 16 years a go and always pops up whenever a cast member shows an interest in doing a fifth series. And that is exactly what I read from the story above. Tony has said both Rowan and himself would love to do another series and he has made no comment on the period in which the series would be set. The Sun "journalist" probably then found the earlier story

  • Hey (Score:4, Funny)

    by chiapetofborg ( 726868 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:52AM (#12009814) Homepage
    Where is Star Trek Enterprise, I can't find it anywhere on their site
  • Good quality (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jg_elliott ( 731553 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @04:59AM (#12009839)
    I downloaded one of the free clips (3 mins long) and it's a whopping 896K/sec up to 1539kbps/sec VBR at 768 x 432 with 96kbps WM audio. Even if the content isn't that great, the quality is damn good. Considering they could have passed us off with some crappy res, little real media file, this is a fantastic offering.
    Provided this isn't a total flop, hopefully it will lead the way for other networks to do the same which hopefully will lead to downloading whole programmes.
    I thought I read a while ago that the BBC (and possibly Channel 4) were going to open up their archives for watching clips/programmes online. Anyone know what happened to that?
    • Re:Good quality (Score:2, Interesting)

      by jg_elliott ( 731553 )
      Not exactly what I was talking about, but iMP (interactive media player) http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruce/articles/bbc .co.uk/imp_1.shtml [bbc.co.uk] by the BBC will let viewers download tv shows up to seven days after they have been aired and watch them as many times as they like within those seven days.
      Unfortunately "The BBC is still testing the application and a decision on whether to fully launch it is expected later in 2005." So we can only hope it will get launched.
      • To keep the cost of sending video files down, iMP works peer-to-peer, a bit like programs like Kazaa or Livewire.

        They have a great dhtml trick on the peer-to-peer strong text, pulls up 'jargon buster' div.

        Nice site. Where is the imp, and can I test it?
    • >>I thought I read a while ago that the BBC (and possibly Channel 4) were going to open up their archives for watching clips/programmes online. Anyone know what happened to that?

      Yes, Channel 4 has a boradband service:

      http://www.channel4.com/broadband/

      Problem is it's not available outside the UK, which is a shame as its mainly brits living outside the UK that would benifit from a broadband service.

      It's been said before, but I'll say it again.

      "They just don't get it."
    • Re:Good quality (Score:4, Informative)

      by PhillC ( 84728 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:47AM (#12010028) Homepage Journal
      There's BBC Motion Gallery [bbcmotiongallery.com]. Here you can view and download watermarked preview files of BBC archive content. This site is primarily aimed at commercial stock footage buyers.

      There's also the BBC's Creative Archive [bbc.co.uk], which is not yet launched.

      iMP [pcw.co.uk] is just entering the second round of closed Beta testing I believe. It's not available for public Beta testing at this time.

      I'd also recommend checking out some of the excellent historical footage on the British Pathe [britishpathe.com] site. This archive is now represented by ITN.

    • by evilandi ( 2800 ) <andrew@aoakley.com> on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @07:03AM (#12010311) Homepage
      jg_elliott: I read a while ago that the BBC... were going to open up their archives

      I was in the audience for this parliamentary seminar in February [apig.org.uk] where Paula Le Dieu of the BBC Creative Archives Project spoke.

      Apparently the biggest problem for the BBC is figuring out how to deal with the copyright problems of background music. Almost all BBC TV programmes have background music, and almost all of that music has been licenced for TV use only, not for download over the Internet.

      Until that problem is resolved, there are very few programmes that can be released via the BBC Creative Archive.

      • That the BBC has a will to do this amazes me. That some petty bickery music industry legal issue stops it happenning does not.

        Surely a blanket agreement can be found. And use the best BBC funding idea I've heard to pay for it. Start a new 'overseas licence fee' to enable overseas individuals to watch the archive under a legal framework. I'd imagine they could raise BILLIONS that way. $100 a year for everything the BBC has ever produced! Deal!
    • Even if the content isn't that great...

      A bit off-topic but in car programs nothing beats TopGear [bbc.co.uk]. I've seen Fifth Gear and I don't like it.

      The BBC is probably the only broadcaster I would pay money to (say EUR200 / year ) to watch their programs (note to USA readers: I deliberately didn't use the word shows.) Unfortunately they broadcast free-to-air which means I get the programs for free.
  • Erm.. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:03AM (#12009855) Journal
    Thiswould be nice if it was a decent channel, but it's just Channel 5, it's all Nazi documentries and soaps no other channel wants.. it might be a start but it's not going to do much good..
    • Yes, a car program that didn't make it to air on Channel 5 is really going to be worth watching...
    • Ew, channel 5. BBC2 is probably the best channel. BBC1 is like BBC2 without the good bits. ITV is like BBC1 without the good bits. Channel 4 is like ITV without the good bits. Channel 5 is like Channel 4 without the good bits. (I've heard this has changed in recent years, but I don't pay the BBC Tax, so I can't watch any of it.)

      Last time I tuned into Channel 5 I nearly threw up - it was a nude gameshow, and they weren't using models. The host was KEITH CHEGWIN! Ewwww.... That was not a pretty sigh
  • First? (Score:4, Informative)

    by pshuke ( 845050 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:03AM (#12009856)
    >>>TV channel Five has said it will be the first UK broadcaster to offer parts of its shows for sale as legal downloads.

    A norwegian channel, http://www.nrk.no/ [www.nrk.no] (click on NRK NETT-TV, between the ads) , already does what this article advertizes, I belive.
    - It allows for downloads of already-aired shows to the public, and for no cost too.
    It should be noted, however, that NRK is a government ``owned" channel, and that one could say that this service is already paid for by our tax-money.
    Still - it can hardly belive that this is the only TV-channel to do such a thing.
    Is this really such a new thing?
  • SVT open archive [svt.se]

    They are still working on some IP-issues; hence no sound on most of the clips. SVT has some 200 000 hours in their archive, dating back to 1896, of which some 10 percent is digitized.
  • Fifth Gear /did/ make it to air. It's rubbish, but it made it.
  • by donely ( 570579 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:07AM (#12009873) Homepage
    Danish television station, TV2, has been doing this for the past year or so. For rougly $80 a year, you can watch everything that TV2 has produced themselves. Works without a hitch. Requires a 2Mbit connection for full-screen watching. Tjek it out at http://sputnik.dk (in Danish, but you should be able to get the idea even though you don't speak Danish)
  • Except that they don't quite seem to get it yet. They are offering here [7digital.com] some videos from this car programme [www.five.tv] which apparently didn't quite make it to air,

    In fact, the race between the Porsche Boxster and the BMW Z4 aired in the UK last night at 20:30 [radiotimes.com]. Hence I think the segments available for download relate to things in the current series of Fifth Gear. I don't know if the downloadable video includes footage beyond the amount that aired though. I can't think of any other reason to pay £1.50

  • Didn't air !? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Chris Kamel ( 813292 )
    Who said this programme never aired? It's my 2nd favorite car programme (After top gear) I've collected all seasons so far, and I know of many people (me included) who are willing to pay to download it legally. I don't think there will be any lack of demand... if only it were not DRMed wmv....
  • by EzInKy ( 115248 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:16AM (#12009906)
    ...but what I really want to know is whatever happened to the BBC open sourcing its archives [newsforge.com]?
  • Oh yes it did. I watched it last night (GMT) and alot of this stuff is to 'complement' the current series.

    Anyway looks a little /.-ed 12.5kbps download ;-(
  • Submission Bias (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Afty0r ( 263037 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @05:54AM (#12010051) Homepage
    Except that they don't quite seem to get it yet. They are offering here some videos from this car programme which apparently didn't quite make it to air, for the princely sum of £1.50 (about $3), in DRM'd WMV 10 format (mplayer plays them fine).

    Why does their choice of platform mean they "don't quite seem to get it"? This is fanatical raving - choosing a closed codec is a perfectly valid thing to do, and ensures at least casual copiers will not be able to pirate this material.
    Hopefully they won't take the lack of response as 'proof' that there's no demand. There's more about this at the BBC's website."
    What lack of response? Do we have any stats on how many people took up this offer versus their expectations, or is the submitters comment mired in biased speculation?
  • I don't quite get what they're saying. Fifth Gear is a very real, very on air motor show, with the half of the Top Gear crew who left when it all changed. Looking at the list of clips I've even seen half of them on TV.
  • Channel 5 History (Score:5, Informative)

    by t_allardyce ( 48447 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @06:01AM (#12010073) Journal
    To people outside the UK, channel 5 is basically a terrestrial channel in the format of a tacky trash newspaper, they made their debut in the late 90's however they were plagued with problems, in order to get a frequency all VCRs in the country had to be retuned by a technician (no idea don't ask), their signal was much weaker than other stations and was known for crap reception and they were the only terrestrial channel to stick a logo in the corner of their screen, they've improved a little since then but they're still 'that' channel in most peoples minds. If they had waited for a couple of years for digital terrestrial tv they could probably have saved a whole load of money but they would be watched even less than that crappy shopping channel. Oh and the program in question - Fifth Gear is a blaitent rip-off of the BBC program Top Gear without Jeromy Clarkson.
    • Channel 5 also isn't carried by every transmitter, due to co-channel interference issues. Even some of the major transmitters only propogate it in certain directions.
    • Re:Channel 5 History (Score:5, Informative)

      by TobascoKid ( 82629 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @06:49AM (#12010245) Homepage
      Oh and the program in question - Fifth Gear is a blaitent rip-off of the BBC program Top Gear without Jeromy Clarkson.

      It's not a blatent rip off, it is Top Gear. When the BBC cancelled Top Gear five got most of the cast and crew of Top Gear involved in Fifth Gear. When the BBC realized thier mistake they they got Jeremy Clarkson back for a completely new show but with the Top Gear title.
    • too true , Channel 5 is one of the worst terrestrial channels ,They are offering shows too bad for even them , in a DRM crippled MS proprietry format and for a fee that is three times that to which i would be willing to pay for a good show.
      All this seems like such a rush job , just so they can say "we were here first", Honestly i would not mind waiting a while longer for someone to do this properly
    • ...and they still aren't available in some areas (as some transmitters don't broadcast them).

    • Just to add to the background info, Channel 5 is owned by Radio Luxembourg (RTL) [www.rtl.lu] who have been broadcasting to the UK since 1933; they were the first company to provide English-language commercial radio listenable in the UK, the famous "Radio Luxembourg 208" [google.co.uk] which ran on mediumwave from 1933 until 1992, including a stint in WWII when the station was taken over against their will by Nazis. RTL also own several German, Dutch and French TV and radio stations.
  • Say What? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @06:05AM (#12010092)
    in DRM'd WMV 10 format (mplayer plays them fine)

    Could anyone elaborate on this?
    Last I heard, mplayer could not do DRM'd WM9 files.
    Will it play high-def WM9 files with DRM [wmvhd.com] too?
    How about the ones with "phone-home" DRM?
    How about the ones on a DVD-ROM like this WMV-HD Italian Job [amazon.de]?
    • Re:Say What? (Score:3, Informative)

      by evilviper ( 135110 )
      in DRM'd WMV 10 format (mplayer plays them fine)

      Could anyone elaborate on this?
      Last I heard, mplayer could not do DRM'd WM9 files.

      MPlayer still doesn't handle any kind of DRM (except pechaps for CSS on DVDs).

      The poster most likely is confused.
  • by superskippy ( 772852 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @06:24AM (#12010158)
    ...at least to UK citizens. Remebember the BBC is already paid for by the license fee (a tax by any other name), so all of the programs made by the BBC _already belong to us_. It makes me a bit sad that the shops are full of DVDs of BBC shows retailing for £20 a go, when license payers have already paid for this show's creation.
  • by hugsa ( 842630 ) <omarkj@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @06:52AM (#12010259) Homepage
    We've actually been able to download shows and news for a few years here in Iceland, both from RUV (state owned), Stod 2 and Skjar 1, both not owned by the goverment.

    And here are the proofs:
    RUV online:
    RUV [servefir.ruv.is]

    Stod 2 online:
    Stod 2 [visir.is] (their web is really really bad..brace yourself)

    Skjar 1 online:
    Skjar 1 [skjar1.is]
  • If they've got DRM and mplayer plays them fine, doesn't that mean their DRM isn't working?

    What stops me then transferring the files to a friend's computer with mplayer so that he can play them?

  • my 2c (Score:3, Interesting)

    by flatcat ( 464267 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @08:05AM (#12010489)
    It should be offered as a download, not streaming. No one wants buffering issues when too many are trying to watch the video, I guess it could be used as a break to get something to eat/drink. And who wants to watch on a computer monitor when you have an AV room?

    "Come on family, lets crowd around dad's desk to watch some telly on the 19" flat screen, we'll give the 60" HDTV and 7.1 a rest for the night."

    Heck offer it as a commercial free download to Tivo or Replay, but don't time restrict it. Most already skip commercials anyway.

    And lower the price, ~$3 for a 43 min show ( thats about all that is left after commercials are removed from an hr show ) is a little steep.
  • The novelty is perhaps that they sell stuff that was never aired. Why not just put all things online that were already broadcast. Look at uitzendinggemist.nl [uitzendinggemist.nl] Oh and in the right you will see a show called "neuken doe je zo" roughly translated like: "Fucking is done like this"
  • by Fr33z0r ( 621949 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @08:42AM (#12010621)
    Since Fox binned My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss, they've been putting the unaired episodes up on their site [fox.com] every Friday.

    The quality isn't the best, but it's a hilarious show, and it's always nice to see companies embracing technology.
  • Top Gear (Score:3, Informative)

    by jrwillis ( 306262 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @10:08AM (#12011153) Homepage
    Meh, the only thing on TV from that side of the pond that I'd REALLY like to see is Top Gear. Best damned auto show ever. Long live The Stig!
  • by Polo ( 30659 ) * on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @01:12PM (#12013137) Homepage
    But that show is great!

    It is on the air in the USA on the speed channel, and I watch it pretty religously.

    It's pretty darned funny sometimes as the Brits don't pull any punches when describing cars.

    American car programs and magazines seem a little bland when reviewing ... you get all the facts and figures, but have to read between the lines to figure out the real story.

The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much.

Working...