Ofcom and non-EPG 'other channoh

I know we've touched upon this subject a few times in other threads, but I'm not sure I've read a detailed and acccurate explanation on what control Ofcom have over 'other channels' that can be tuned in via a standard Sky box.

For example, Bang Media obtain a Dutch licence (already suggested in another thread that they've done preciclely that) and buy some space on the Astra satellite. They then give out the frequencies for their new channel on their website and forums such as this. Now, in that Sky box owners would simply be using their box as a free-to-air receiver (other, simple fta receivers can be bought for very little) to view the channel, would Ofcom have any say-so over content?

(02-01-2011 01:34 )StanTheMan Wrote:  I know we've touched upon this subject a few times in other threads, but I'm not sure I've read a detailed and acccurate explanation on what control Ofcom have over 'other channels' that can be tuned in via a standard Sky box.

For example, Bang Media obtain a Dutch licence (already suggested in another thread that they've done preciclely that) and buy some space on the Astra satellite. They then give out the frequencies for their new channel on their website and forums such as this. Now, in that Sky box owners would simply be using their box as a free-to-air receiver (other, simple fta receivers can be bought for very little) to view the channel, would Ofcom have any say-so over content?

Stan,You probably know deep down that Ofcom would do whatever possible to control anything that a channel shows.
In the past they have even got licences removed from Real sex subscription channels both on Hotbird satellite and Astra 19 degrees east through there bullying ways,complaining that these encrypted channels could be picked up in Britain.
That was before the television without frontiers regs came into force,and now it seems they have shyed away from what other countries show[which is what we are allowed to show in Britain according to the TWF agreement] and are just concentrating on making our lives a misery.

(02-01-2011 02:12 )nailpouchofmine Wrote:  Stan,You probably know deep down that Ofcom would do whatever possible to control anything that a channel shows.
In the past they have even got licences removed from Real sex subscription channels both on Hotbird satellite and Astra 19 degrees east through there bullying ways,complaining that these encrypted channels could be picked up in Britain.
That was before the television without frontiers regs came into force,and now it seems they have shyed away from what other countries show[which is what we are allowed to show in Britain according to the TWF agreement] and are just concentrating on making our lives a misery.

I refer to the bit I've bolded here, but that's precisely my point, NPoM. Could this not be Bang Media's way of avoiding Ofcom?

Ofcom might not like the idea, but what I'm trying to establish is whether they have any legal control over content not on Sky's EPG.

I have a really stupid question to ask regarding Babestation Xtreme. If that show is allowed on regular freeview TV, with the only security being a simple red button to push on the remote, then why does Ofcom think encryption is not safe enough??? Am I missing something here?

(02-01-2011 03:24 )mrmann Wrote:  I have a really stupid question to ask regarding Babestation Xtreme. If that show is allowed on regular freeview TV, with the only security being a simple red button to push on the remote, then why does Ofcom think encryption is not safe enough??? Am I missing something here?

Its really best not to ask these questions. Ofcoms old reluctance to allow any adult channels on Freeview was because there is no standard universal way of blocking adult channels, unlike Sky where a parent can lock or delete the entire adult section at a touch. As a concession Ofcom allowed adult channels, provided they were "book-ended" with a warning channel and not shown before midnight (later than Sky).

Babestation Extreme and the other encrypted channels have stronger content, and rely on the payment system to confirm that the viewer is over 18, for example a credit card. If this is challenged Ofcom will simply ban the channels. Its not just a red button, is what lies behind it.

(02-01-2011 03:57 )eccles Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 03:24 )mrmann Wrote:  I have a really stupid question to ask regarding Babestation Xtreme. If that show is allowed on regular freeview TV, with the only security being a simple red button to push on the remote, then why does Ofcom think encryption is not safe enough??? Am I missing something here?

Its really best not to ask these questions. Ofcoms old reluctance to allow any adult channels on Freeview was because there is no standard universal way of blocking adult channels, unlike Sky where a parent can lock or delete the entire adult section at a touch. As a concession Ofcom allowed adult channels, provided they were "book-ended" with a warning channel and not shown before midnight (later than Sky).

Babestation Extreme and the other encrypted channels have stronger content, and rely on the payment system to confirm that the viewer is over 18, for example a credit card. If this is challenged Ofcom will simply ban the channels. Its not just a red button, is what lies behind it.

Yeah, but it's kind of like, if a child can gain access to the pin codes somehow for a SKY show, then they can likely get ahold of their parents' credit card and punch it in. I don't see why SKY can't do it how Xtreme does it, with us being able to push one of the colored buttons, and put our credit card info in, as it would be no different. Am I crazy to think this?

(02-01-2011 01:34 )StanTheMan Wrote:  I know we've touched upon this subject a few times in other threads, but I'm not sure I've read a detailed and acccurate explanation on what control Ofcom have over 'other channels' that can be tuned in via a standard Sky box.

In the first instance Ofcom can contact the other countries regulator and complain. It would need to establish that the UK is being specifically targetted rather than being signal overspill. If the other regulator does not play ball, then Ofcom can run crying to the European Commission and complain that big boys are not playing fair. The sarcasm is deliberate - it would be a clear admission of how feeble they are, a cry for help, and as one national regulator had deemed the material safe, Ofcom would probably have to establish a very solid case for harm and offence.

In reality the EU would probably make a completely opaque decision based on politics as much as legalities.

However before going through formal procedures Ofcom might resort to pressure against Astra, Eutelsat or Sky. They could for example warn Sky that if the channel is not dropped all channels on the Sky platform will be subject to hostile review. As a major customer Sky might go to Eutelsat or Astra and give them an ultimatum: drop Channel X or loose 300 channels of business. Fact is the entire 28 degree slot is paid for by Sky and it is not impossible that there is some sort of exclusive deal. Of course neither Ofcom nor Sky would do anything like that, but it is atheoretical possibility.

(02-01-2011 04:09 )mrmann Wrote:  I don't see why SKY can't do it how Xtreme does it, with us being able to push one of the colored buttons, and put our credit card info in, as it would be no different. Am I crazy to think this?

They do. There's dozens of encrypted adult shows in Sky's 900s. Okay, so they might not be liveshows, but that's only because none of them are bothering. The fact that Sky have no explicit liveshows on subscription is nothing to do with Ofcom.

(02-01-2011 04:17 )eccles Wrote:  They could for example warn Sky that if the channel is not dropped all channels on the Sky platform will be subject to hostile review.

But Murdoch could get Ofcom disbanded at the drop of a hat, with a quick word in a particular politican's ear, so I can't see Ofcom taking him on directly - they wouldn't stand a chance.

(02-01-2011 04:17 )eccles Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 01:34 )StanTheMan Wrote:  I know we've touched upon this subject a few times in other threads, but I'm not sure I've read a detailed and acccurate explanation on what control Ofcom have over 'other channels' that can be tuned in via a standard Sky box.

In the first instance Ofcom can contact the other countries regulator and complain. It would need to establish that the UK is being specifically targetted rather than being signal overspill. If the other regulator does not play ball, then Ofcom can run crying to the European Commission and complain that big boys are not playing fair. The sarcasm is deliberate - it would be a clear admission of how feeble they are, a cry for help, and as one national regulator had deemed the material safe, Ofcom would probably have to establish a very solid case for harm and offence.

In reality the EU would probably make a completely opaque decision based on politics as much as legalities.

However before going through formal procedures Ofcom might resort to pressure against Astra, Eutelsat or Sky. They could for example warn Sky that if the channel is not dropped all channels on the Sky platform will be subject to hostile review. As a major customer Sky might go to Eutelsat or Astra and give them an ultimatum: drop Channel X or loose 300 channels of business. Fact is the entire 28 degree slot is paid for by Sky and it is not impossible that there is some sort of exclusive deal. Of course neither Ofcom nor Sky would do anything like that, but it is atheoretical possibility.

Used to be` PROBABLEY` but now very improbable as I stressed before `TVWF`
google it and you will see what I mean,and you also might realise why Ofcom are making there own rules and going against these very rules that were agreed by all of the European states[and are the only ones that are doing it]