I have recently put a HTPC together mainly for music and as a backup server. I only call it a HTPC because it is under my TV! :-) However one of the big features of all the HTPC discussions seems to be downloaded Movies and TV shows. I am guessing most people do this illegally using torrents, however is there a legal way of downloading TV shows and movies in HD?

I know of iplayer and similar but nothing that offers the US shows. I know this would have to be something you pay for but I think the service just doesn't exist.

if your in the US you can download US shows.... or be naughty and use a US proxy to fool the sites into thinking your in the US... but again, this is illegal and blocked by most...

i'm afraid were stuck with iPlayer etc, or illegal :)

You know what is funny though? these companies involved in making the shows always have a good moan about people from outside the usa downloading theri shows. Thing of it is, I would not have herd of all of those good shows if I had not downloaded them. I now own them on DVD.

On such DVDs is that bs at the end "the pirates are out to get you yadda yadda" and the advert says piracy funds crime.... funny thing is that piracy funds those tv stations and companies that make these TV shows. Are they calling themselvs criminals or what?

Gotta love those idiots running fox, wb, etc.

You know what is funny though? these companies involved in making the shows always have a good moan about people from outside the usa downloading theri shows. Thing of it is, I would not have herd of all of those good shows if I had not downloaded them. I now own them on DVD.

On such DVDs is that bs at the end "the pirates are out to get you yadda yadda" and the advert says piracy funds crime.... funny thing is that piracy funds those tv stations and companies that make these TV shows. Are they calling themselvs criminals or what?

Gotta love those idiots running fox, wb, etc.

If everyone who ever watched a TV show and enjoyed it went out and bought the DVD, then what you say would be 100% correct. However, those who do are in a minority, and at the end of the day it is the advertising revenue that pays for TV shows to be made. If there are no 'viewers' when they air on Tv as everyone downloads it illegally, then advertisers will pull out, and the show generates no revenue - hence cancellation. Shows such as Dollhouse are very heavily downloaded (a check of torrent tracker sites will show how many people seem to enjoy the show each week), but after episode 13 of season 2 it is finished due to lacklustre TV figures.

So, whilst it must be comforting to showmakers that a few people will go and pick up the DVD, it still doesn't help the fact that the show is dead in the water. If you want to calculate how small a percentage actually go on to buy DVDs of shows they like, check the share statistics of a torrent, then wait for the DVD release, and see what kind of sales figures it has.

Networks need to find a solution to the issue, and stop the reliance of TV revenue. Web streaming (with short ads) is one solution, but how to make this relevant to a global audience is the problem. i-tunesr revenue is a good starting point, but with some shows airing months ahead in the US, the early availability illegally will always be too tempting for those who just want to be ahead of the game. They need to make the shows universally released at the same time, but then this will cause issues for local TV networks (if, say, Fox allowed legal web streaming of Simpsons from their site worldwide, or i-tunes, for a nominal fee, what would be the point of Sky One showing it?)

When it comes to BBC programmes, if you own a TV licence you've already paid for the programme to be made so you should be able to download whatever BBC content you want whenever you like rather than be stuck with the iPlayer, which only lets you watch shows from the last 7 days. It's a rip off!

When it comes to BBC programmes, if you own a TV licence you've already paid for the programme to be made so you should be able to download whatever BBC content you want whenever you like rather than be stuck with the iPlayer, which only lets you watch shows from the last 7 days. It's a rip off!

They make programmes available for 7 AFTER they were broadcast, and you moan because you want to be able to keep them forever?

Only 2 years there was no iplayer - now you want to keep everything they ever broadcast free of charge. Grow up.

They have to realise that that clinging on to that old business model just isn't working any more. Shows need to be available when people want them, otherwise they will take their 'business' elseware.

There is one simple solution for web downloaders. They could provide a centeral location to download shows for free. The system would detect what country you are from, and you would then download the file with a set of ads in apropiate to location. Simple!

Regarding the axing of dollhouse etc, a valid argument if the usa station it was on is broadcast world wide. Most downloaders are from outside the usa, and that is the ONLY place where the show ratings are important.

Also alot of shows are on sky rather quick, but that is another problem. Alot are willing to pay for hours of adverts and most not.

They make programmes available for 7 AFTER they were broadcast, and you moan because you want to be able to keep them forever?

Only 2 years there was no iplayer - now you want to keep everything they ever broadcast free of charge. Grow up.

No need to be so aggressive! The point I'm making is that it isn't free of charge - I pay £134 a year to the BBC, so I think that gives me the right to watch any BBC show I want whenever I want.

Why don't you grow up and accept other people may have different opinions to yourself?

No need to be so aggressive! The point I'm making is that it isn't free of charge - I pay £134 a year to the BBC, so I think that gives me the right to watch any BBC show I want whenever I want.

Why don't you grow up and accept other people may have different opinions to yourself?

I apologise, sorry if it was aggressive.

Paying the license, DOESN'T give you the right to infinite access to the entire BBC back catalogue - if it did you would be paying much more than £12 a month.

Harry Bustard has put it much better a few posts down.

Incidentally it extremely easy to download and keep shows from the iplayer if you have a mac - just google 'Beeb Downloader'.

This, from the Wikipedia article on iPlayer, shows that seven days is not always the limit...

On 23 August 2008, a new feature, Series Stacking, was announced. This feature started being rolled out on 13 September 2008, and allows viewers to watch previous programmes from selected series until the series has ended, with a limit of up to thirteen weeks after first broadcast. Not all programmes will form part of the stack, however. The BBC Trust has permitted 15% of content to be offered as part of the stacking service; soaps, news bulletins and review-based programmes will not be stacked, as well as programmes containing material of a legal nature, such as Crimewatch.

...and it should be noted that even with the seven day limit one has a further thirty days to watch it - and some programmes such as HARDtalk are available for a whole year.

I'd also like to have access to the entire BBC archive online but if their revenue stream from DVD et cetera were cut I'm sure the Licence Fee would go up - something most people would not be happy with.

Regarding the axing of dollhouse etc, a valid argument if the usa station it was on is broadcast world wide. Most downloaders are from outside the usa, and that is the ONLY place where the show ratings are important.

Exactly what I was going to say. Dollhouse is broadcast on a non-subscription channel (Fox) so anyone in the US can watch it. Torrent downloads (and all other forms of download) should have a minimal effect on their ratings at best. Perhaps some people miss the show and decide to download it a few days later but I doubt there will be that many. It's failure probably has more to do with poor scheduling than anything else.

And anyway it's Fox, they're the idiots who cancelled Firefly after a dozen episodes.

You know what is funny though? these companies involved in making the shows always have a good moan about people from outside the usa downloading theri shows. Thing of it is, I would not have herd of all of those good shows if I had not downloaded them. I now own them on DVD.

You're the exception to the rule though. A recent iPhone game included ways of tracking who had a pirate copy. They wanted to know what percentage of people who ripped the app would buy it, the percent of people who did that was Zero.

Lots of people say they buy stuff they've already "sampled" by downloading it, in reality very few actually do.

On such DVDs is that bs at the end "the pirates are out to get you yadda yadda" and the advert says piracy funds crime.... funny thing is that piracy funds those tv stations and companies that make these TV shows.

How, these companies make money from the advertising, not from the show.

If there's no adds, how do they make money?


Are they calling themselvs criminals or what?

Gotta love those idiots running fox, wb, etc.

Erm.. OK.

This, from the Wikipedia article on iPlayer, shows that seven days is not always the limit...

On 23 August 2008, a new feature, Series Stacking, was announced. This feature started being rolled out on 13 September 2008, and allows viewers to watch previous programmes from selected series until the series has ended, with a limit of up to thirteen weeks after first broadcast. Not all programmes will form part of the stack, however. The BBC Trust has permitted 15% of content to be offered as part of the stacking service; soaps, news bulletins and review-based programmes will not be stacked, as well as programmes containing material of a legal nature, such as Crimewatch.

...and it should be noted that even with the seven day limit one has a further thirty days to watch it - and some programmes such as HARDtalk are available for a whole year.

I'd also like to have access to the entire BBC archive online but if their revenue stream from DVD et cetera were cut I'm sure the Licence Fee would go up - something most people would not be happy with.

Well DVDs are on their way out anyway so it won't be long before they go the same way as records with everyone downloading everything rather than buying a physical product.

The best solution would be for the cost of the BBC TV licence to depend on what services you use. You could say get a discount of 20% if you didn't use their online or radio services, and maybe also choose to pay a supplement to be able to have unlimited downloads of their shows.

90% of my downloads are tv rips, the reason being I hate adverts. Tv rips come through advert free and often way ahead of the UK. While ever its easy to do so I will and I know many other people will continue to download them.

Why pay for sky, 90% of its crap, the rest is filled with adverts every 2 mins. I orefer paying my £5 p/m to usenet and being able to download any show I want in 5 mins advert free and in HD.

When it comes to BBC programmes, if you own a TV licence you've already paid for the programme to be made so you should be able to download whatever BBC content you want whenever you like rather than be stuck with the iPlayer, which only lets you watch shows from the last 7 days. It's a rip off!

How is offering something that didn't exist a few years ago, for free, a rip off?

What would be your solution for people with licenses giving the content to people who don't? Wouldn't that be a rip off?

If by keeping their catalogue safe and selling it via DVD's etc... the BBC has money to put back in to programming while keeping the license fee low, I'm happy.

How is offering something that didn't exist a few years ago, for free, a rip off?


Okay it's not as much a rip off as it was before iPlayer but it's still a rip off!

What would be your solution for people with licenses giving the content to people who don't? Wouldn't that be a rip off?

Why would this be a problem? If I buy a BBC DVD it's not illegal for me to lend it to a mate, is it?

Okay it's not as much a rip off as it was before iPlayer but it's still a rip off!

How?

Why would this be a problem?

You don't buy any BBC content, you pay for a license to recieve and watch it. If your mate watches or takes a copy for himself, then the BBC have lost revenue, and my license fee goes up (or worse, the BBC goes bang).


If I buy a BBC DVD it's not illegal for me to lend it to a mate, is it?

Not at all but that's nothing to do with broadcast TV.

When it comes to BBC programmes, if you own a TV licence you've already paid for the programme to be made so you should be able to download whatever BBC content you want whenever you like rather than be stuck with the iPlayer, which only lets you watch shows from the last 7 days. It's a rip off!

While it is true that the BBC is financed by the license fee, that does not mean that you "own" what they broadcast.

Strictly from a legal standpoint, you pay the fee because you have a device in your home that is capable of receiving broadcast television signals. This is also the reason that "I only watch ITV and Sky" is not a valid defence against not having a TV license.

Now, if you and others are going to download TV shows for free, it means that my colleagues and I will no longer be able get paid for our work at some point. Do you think that's fair?

Eventually, program makers will shift to a business model where they embed adverts in to the actual show itself (product placement etc). Then it wont matter so much if TV shows are distributed online by <whatever> method. Everyone will be happy, the advertisers, the program makers, the people downloading and watching free copies of their favorite TV shows now heavily saturated with product placement etc.

Everyone's a winner! ;)

As one who believes in the BBC I have to agree that actually I do and should have the right to watch the archive for free, I didn't just pay for the licence fee this year but for the last 40 years and as an owner of the BBC like every other person in the UK paying to support it, surely democratically speaking I have that right. Again I have paid for that right over 40 years.

Also in response to videopro I do watch content for free all the time it's on ITV, my part of the transaction is to sit thru the ads.

Product placement is horrible.

From a screenplay writer's viewpoint, they have to work the story to allow for those products to be shown. The story suffers.

From a camera opertor's viewpoint, the emphasis is less on taking time to get the photographic composition right and more on whether company X's logo was in focus. The story suffers.

From an editor's viewpoint (my job), I have to make sure that the logo is on screen long enough for the viewer to register it. The dramatic pacing is interfered with. The story suffers.

From the consumer's viewpoint, everyone stops watching because the story is insufferable.

Torrents for me everytime....

I need my csi,heroes,dexter,stargate universe weekly...

Eventually, program makers will shift to a business model where they embed adverts in to the actual show itself (product placement etc). Then it wont matter so much if TV shows are distributed online by <whatever> method. Everyone will be happy, the advertisers, the program makers, the people downloading and watching free copies of their favorite TV shows now heavily saturated with product placement etc.

Everyone's a winner! ;)

I'd consider being force-fed advertisements a loss.

product placment has been going on in usa tv for years. Or rather sponsorship (not that sillyness we have over here with bla bla is sponsored by ford etc on the begining and end of ads). It is done as product placment, for example apple are the biggest sponsor in usa tv. Cisco are also a big sponsor in usa tv. Also look out on cars, all but one car companys badge will be present on cars.

Just shows you that adverts in TV really isn't that viable now days as revenue for TV stations (at least in america)

Just recently they where talking about the fact that ads are not supporting channels here (or perhaps it is all BS and they want people to pay more licence money)

On the topic of the BBC, we all pay for everything that is made on there, so yes we should not have to pay for the content again. If the BBC did provide us with every show though, it would cost way too much and the licence fee wouldn't cover it. DVDs of BBC shows.... we pay for the packaging and disc which is ok I supose. It is about time that BBC licence was scrapped anyways. They don't put on any decent shows at all.

the thing I don't like about IPTV is that every channel that serves content comes up with it's own means of viewing it

we have iPlayer, ITV Player, 4oD, Demand 5, Virgin on demand, Sky on demand and probably a few others that I can't remember

now I know it's "only" software but to watch all of the above you need the software equivalent of a different TV set for each channel

what we need is a standard for delivery of IPTV that covers both free to air and subscription content, including advertising content

then we can have a single viewer application developed independently and the content providers merely have to provide a link to the content

a bit like HTML is a standard for web site content delivery OK, code your website to that standard and pretty much any browser can render it (with varying degrees of success). now OK we have several standards and revisions but you still only need one browser, now if you needed a different browser for each website we'd still be using dial up and if the content provider had to develop the browser as well we wouldn't have an internet

IPTV won't take off big time as long as broadcasters continue faffing about making their own content viewers instead of agreeing a standard for content delivery

this won't happen because each provider wants everyone else to license their viewer technology - i.e. corporate greed

and that won't happen because the winner would have a monopoly and monopolies are frowned upon by governments

so they will each continue developing their own viewer applications with money that should be going to providing content and we'll suffer poorer content because of it

my 2p worth

Deleted by me!

I'd consider being force-fed advertisements a loss.

Of course, you're correct.

If program makers need to resort to advertising in order to have a business model that works, that would be a natural consequence of the masses downloading and watching content without paying for it. The more people who do that, it will just result in a drop of program quality (because the people who are producing these things are not being funded for their efforts).

Regarding the axing of dollhouse etc, a valid argument if the usa station it was on is broadcast world wide. Most downloaders are from outside the usa, and that is the ONLY place where the show ratings are important.

Sorry for the delayed response, but been working.

Anyway...

My point, however, was that the show (and many others that get cancelled) are, indeed, popular worldwide. If all those people who enjoy the show do as was said in the original post (buy the DVDs), then there wouldn't be a problem. The show would be allowed a loss on TV as it would more than make up for it on DVD sales worldwide (see Family Guy as a great example where this worked to bring a show back).

Sadly, I guarantee that very few of those who download the show will go on to buy it, so the network has to rely on the advertising revenue on broadcast as a prime factor in deciding whether to continue to make the show. Dollhouse, as the example, was given a second season chance (this allowed them to see what kind of figures the DVD sales did, and if this would boost the viewership). It didn't sell well, nor did viewers return to the show - advertisers were, therefore, reluctant to pay for ad space, and it was finished (the final epsiodes are going to be shown in double bills apparantly in the US...to get it out the way fast).

Family Guy is (again) a good example to use, as the Blue Harvest episode (the Star Wars spoof) was so heavily downloaded that worldwide sales of the DVD were somewhat disappointing. Bizarrely the plan for the next Star Wars spoof (Something Something Dark Side) have thus been altered so that it is released on DVD first, and gets aired on TV sometime next year, in an attempt to boost the DVD sales and get some revenue on it. Personally I think that all this will result in is a better quality rip being downloaded by the same people who will never buy a DVD in their lives.

So, to summarise, what I was using the examples for was to suggest that the original point that piracy leads to people buying DVDs is flawed. Yes a minority will go on to get box sets, but a majority will not. Thus it leads simply to loss of advertising revenue, and thus cancellation of failing shows until all we have left are sad little reality game-shows.

NB: I must add that I am guilty of watching shows via t'net, and do buy the occasional DVD set...but not as many as I should. However, if a worldwide subscription figure were ever worked out to legally watch the shows as they air in the US, I'd be willing to pay for them (or sit through regionalised adverts before viewing). Networks need to stop thinking locally, and start looking globally, if they wish to thrive in the net-savvy future.

ETA: Please do not provide links to sites which link to any downloads, etc. Let's keep this thread to a discussion about the topic, without crossing over to the providing of details on how to download, where to download etc (which would breach forum rulings). Cheers.

Torrents for me everytime....

I need my csi,heroes,dexter,stargate universe weekly...

See, I am like this. However, if the shows got a worldwide release, I'd be happy to watch them as they air (or Sky+ them). It just frustrates me in this era of internet that, say with Dexter, I would have to wait around 9 months to see the new series, by which time I'd have found it nigh on impossible to encounter any news stories which would spoil the story for me (be it talk about who has left the show, who is still there, or what happened in the finale). The only way to avoid any spoilers would be to stop using the 'net for months at a time.

With Flash Forward it isn't too bad, and I do use Channel 5 seeing as they are only a few days behind - why can't all shows be like that :)

Slightly O/T but - I have tested a few downloaded TV shows last night and have a question. Is it normal for most of the stuff to be slightly jerky. It appears the frame rate is quite low? I have tested some other HD video that didn't come via Bit Torrent and that plays fine. It is more than one TV show too, so I don't think it was just that particular copy, I tried a few different format. It isn't really bad but it isn't the same quality as HD on Sky for example. This could be normal though as I have a feeling some people wouldn't even notice? I thought it could be because of the different frame rates between UK and US standards but I don't think that is still an issue.

Thanks in advance for any response.

Slightly O/T but - I have tested a few downloaded TV shows last night and have a question. Is it normal for most of the stuff to be slightly jerky. It appears the frame rate is quite low? I have tested some other HD video that didn't come via Bit Torrent and that plays fine. It is more than one TV show too, so I don't think it was just that particular copy, I tried a few different format. It isn't really bad but it isn't the same quality as HD on Sky for example. This could be normal though as I have a feeling some people wouldn't even notice? I thought it could be because of the different frame rates between UK and US standards but I don't think that is still an issue.

Thanks in advance for any response.

I find the quality of downloaded HD shows to be higher than that of sky hd etc. Were the file sizes between 1.2gb and 2gb? If they were it might be your hardware that was having issues playing it as most tv rips come in .264 and mkv formats. never had any issues with 'jerks' on my rips.

Slighlty off topic, but have the thread police been on here as I had posted a nice little site that shows you when shows are AVAILABLE to download, not to a site which actually lets you download, so i'm afraid mods but you should read threads before deleting :loopy:

I find the quality of downloaded HD shows to be higher than that of sky hd etc. Were the file sizes between 1.2gb and 2gb? If they were it might be your hardware that was having issues playing it as most tv rips come in .264 and mkv formats. never had any issues with 'jerks' on my rips.

Slighlty off topic, but have the thread police been on here as I had posted a nice little site that shows you when shows are AVAILABLE to download, not to a site which actually lets you download, so i'm afraid mods but you should read threads before deleting :loopy:

Thanks for the reply. I think the issue I am seeing is to do with refresh rates. My graphics card is outputting at 60hz and the downloads are 23.976fps. Hopefully by adjusting my graphics card I will see an improvement.

Hopefully by adjusting my graphics card I will see an improvement.

No you won't, unless you're using really old drivers, in which case update them. Most PCs run at between 60 & 100 fps, pretty much all downloadable TV broadcast (legit or otherwise) is around 25fps.

Either way a PC that's doing over what the video file is should be able to play fine, assuming the PC's up to it.

I've had problems recently with jerky video when using vlc, before you go messing with system settings try a different program to play the things.

Either this (http://mpc-hc.sourceforge.net/) or this (http://www.gomlab.com/eng/GMP_download.html) would be a good place to start. The first one comes in a 64-bit version too if you have that.

No you won't, unless you're using really old drivers, in which case update them. Most PCs run at between 60 & 100 fps, pretty much all downloadable TV broadcast (legit or otherwise) is around 25fps.

Either way a PC that's doing over what the video file is should be able to play fine, assuming the PC's up to it.

I've had problems recently with jerky video when using vlc, before you go messing with system settings try a different program to play the things.

Either this (http://mpc-hc.sourceforge.net/) or this (http://www.gomlab.com/eng/GMP_download.html) would be a good place to start. The first one comes in a 64-bit version too if you have that.

Thanks. I will try those players. I have already tried a few different ones (including an older MPC) and had the same effect.

It sounds like there is a particular issue with some integrated ATI graphics and these type of video files. I have an integrated ATI HD 4200 which I know is rubbish but it isn't too bad for an integrated one. From what I have read it should be capable of playing HD videos smoothly, there is just an issue with stuff that is 24fps.

As far as on-board graphics go that's pretty good, as with all on-board graphics though it grabs system memory, so the only problem I could see is if you only have 1GB of system memory, in which case it may be struggling once the GPU has "borrowed" 512MB of that.

Maybe it's more of a general ATI problem, vlc has problems on my PC with HD stuff (though both programs I linked to above are smooth), & with my setup it really shouldn't.

I apologise, sorry if it was aggressive.

Paying the license, DOESN'T give you the right to infinite access to the entire BBC back catalogue - if it did you would be paying much more than £12 a month.

Harry Bustard has put it much better a few posts down.

Incidentally it extremely easy to download and keep shows from the iplayer if you have a mac - just google 'Beeb Downloader'.

Well perhaps it should. The debate over whether the TV license should be abolished is an ongoing one and I for one would be happy to pay nothing at all, or a reduced license fee at the expense of a few adverts which I don't watch anyways, so they can get their coffers elsewhere.

At the minute we ARE paying for the programs to be made, so why shouldn't we be allowed to watch what we want when we want rather than the program be sat on a shelf/hard drive for them to air whenthey see fit?

Slighlty off topic, but have the thread police been on here as I had posted a nice little site that shows you when shows are AVAILABLE to download, not to a site which actually lets you download, so i'm afraid mods but you should read threads before deleting :loopy:

Twice on the front page of the site linked it provides a link to another place to download via. (One link being quite prominent towards the top).

Twice on the front page of the site linked it provides a link to another place to download via. (One link being quite prominent towards the top).

If I log out I can see the links you mean, one is a site which lists places(legit ones) to get streams i.e. iplayer.

The other gives you countdown timers to when shows are out.

If we had to remove any links from this forum that could link you to illegal stuff then any Google link would also be in violation.

If I log out I can see the links you mean, one is a site which lists places(legit ones) to get streams i.e. iplayer.

The other gives you countdown timers to when shows are out.

If we had to remove any links from this forum that could link you to illegal stuff then any Google link would also be in violation.

The site that it refers you to is a subscription site for a P2P system for downloading TV, music, etc. The site does not list any legit places, it provides a subscription service to obtain downloads of items. Nor does it link to legal streams - it is a download service site.

If you check the sites T&C you will see that they use the same absolving of responsibility that other file sharing link sites use (whereby they urge the user not to share copyrighted materials).

It is fine to link to a site for list of upcoming shows, but when that site is quite likely affiliated with another which allows downloads (the links are not banner ads or pop-ups, but a part of the core text), then it is treading dubious grounds. Not forgetting that when you click the details for the show air date, the 'DOWNLOAD' link is then added to that page to search the affiliated site's service for the files to download (thus the first site linked is linking in the same way that the torrent sites do)

If you want sites to alert you when a show is airing, why not use http://www.mytvrss.com/ which enables you to set up an RSS feed for the shows you actually care about, without having to wade through lists of those you dont. (most browsers have RSS feed plugins these days, including IE)

If you want sites to alert you when a show is airing, why not use http://www.mytvrss.com/ which enables you to set up an RSS feed for the shows you actually care about, without having to wade through lists of those you dont. (most browsers have RSS feed plugins these days, including IE)

I tried this one but dont like it, with the other site I like the fact that you can choose from 100's of shows, once added to your 'watch' shows it gives you a full tv schedule for the week including when things are available to download.