Ofcom - Current Investigations

(25-03-2012 21:26 )HoneyRocks Wrote:  The whole thing of obtaining foreign licences so easily to escape the rules or regulator whether it be because of OFCOM or other licencing organisatation here in the UK or
...
ulate???

Masses of points there HoneyRocks, too many to respond to individually or in any depth that does them justice, here are 2 quick thoughts:

Regulation of the internet - we have an untouchable regulator exercising control with only a tenuous link to legislation or surveys that are supposed to give it authority, and whose rulings are often based on a very flexible reading of the rules, rules they wrote themselves. It really doesnt matter if this is applied to just one small unfashionable sector. Thats just a restraint they impose on themselves and it could all change tomorrow.

They could apply arbitrary rules to anything they chose, including the internet.

BTW Microsoft now blocks Pirate Bay links on Live Messenger. Good news for copyright holders, apart from the ones hosting their own legit material on Pirate Bay. How long before all ISPs are legally required to block whole categories of sites hosting legal material on a regulators say so in the absence of anything as boring as evidence, a Court hearing or rights of appeal? BBC

As for the Cellcast thing, forwarding a complain about foreign channels while allowing mirrored UK channels is odd. What we dont know is if Ofcom supported the complaint or simply forwarded it without comment, like a postbox.

COMPETITION TIME

I found this rather offensive image. The best suggestion for what it is or caption wins the prize of a pat on the back and the warm glow of knowing they won.

(06-09-2012 01:11 )eccles Wrote:  COMPETITION TIME

As Yoffi becomes distracted, Fingermouse de-bags & rips Scampi a new one.
[#80's reference]

I don't get all this "Dutch licence is better" stuff as, as far as I can see, it makes not one iota of difference for the encrypted Babestation Extreme.
They still operate within Ofcon's "No penetration, no expilicit sex and we are doing this to protect children" dogma which is not the case in similar channels in the Netherlands.

I will admit that I don't watch the babechannels to any degree as to be able to make an informed choice on which one is less censored.

(06-09-2012 17:59 )blackjaques Wrote:  I don't get all this "Dutch licence is better" stuff as, as far as I can see, it makes not one iota of difference for the encrypted Babestation Extreme.
They still operate within Ofcon's "No penetration, no expilicit sex and we are doing this to protect children" dogma which is not the case in similar channels in the Netherlands.

I will admit that I don't watch the babechannels to any degree as to be able to make an informed choice on which one is less censored.

well babestation still cant show pussy on the normal tv show neither , so what actual difference idoes it make ?

(06-09-2012 18:10 )shankey! Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 17:59 )blackjaques Wrote:  I don't get all this "Dutch licence is better" stuff as, as far as I can see, it makes not one iota of difference for the encrypted Babestation Extreme.
They still operate within Ofcon's "No penetration, no expilicit sex and we are doing this to protect children" dogma which is not the case in similar channels in the Netherlands.

I will admit that I don't watch the babechannels to any degree as to be able to make an informed choice on which one is less censored.

well babestation still cant show pussy on the normal tv show neither , so what actual difference does it make ?

It doesn't make any difference for Sky viewers or seem to make much difference content wise, but the Dutch licence makes a difference for the freeview viewers and for Cellcast/BS themselves, without a Dutch licence BS wouldn't be able to start broadcasting on freeview until after 12am like Playboy does, Ofcom don't allow phone in babe channels to start until after 12am on freeview , because BS has a Dutch licence and is not regulated by Ofcom they can broadcast on freeview from 10pm , this gives Cellcast/BS a advantage over their rivals and allows the freeview viewers to call and tune into the show from 10pm , the Dutch licence also renders BS immune from Ofcom "in breach" rulings, fines or even getting their licence revoked .
Financially this Dutch licence must be a advantage to Cellcast as it allows them to broadcast on freeview at a peak viewing babe channel times when no other UK Ofcom licensed phone in babe channel is allowed to broadcast , so they have no competition for callers/viewers .

I still don't get it ( apart from the two hour earlier start).

BS Extreme is still censored to Ofcon's wishes. Wherever the licence is held, Ofcon are still getting their way in that they are insisting on no explicit sex on UK TV. BS Extreme follow their guidelines.
In fact, their output is even more censored than the Playboy group.

I despair with the fuckers.

I don't know off-hand if Extreme is actually broadcast on a dutch license or not.

As has been discussed ad nauseum, BS broadcast their non-encrypted channels on 2 outputs, Sky and Freeview. For each channel they need two broadcast licenses, one for the Sky feed, one for the Freeview feed. For each channel, they have it so that one of those licenses is a dutch one, one is UK. So, each channels output is ultimately (in theory) restrained to Ofcom standards by that UK license.

The dutch licenses offer a competitive advantage in giving them the 2 hour freeview head start over others, and allows them to use that 2 hour window to advertise the Extreme show before it starts broadcasting.

For some reason Ofcom nevertheless seem to leave BS well alone despite the fact each channel operates one feed under a UK license, so is theoretically under their jurisdiction. Perhaps they are afraid of challenging them in case they lose and open a flood gate that allows BS to broadcast harder content because of the dutch license (seems unlikely), or perhaps there is a secret mutual agreement, Ofcom will leave them alone as long as BS more or less stick to the same content guidelines as everyone else.

(06-09-2012 19:14 )munch1917 Wrote:  I don't know off-hand if Extreme is actually broadcast on a dutch license or not.

As has been discussed ad nauseum, BS broadcast their non-encrypted channels on 2 outputs, Sky and Freeview. For each channel they need two broadcast licenses, one for the Sky feed, one for the Freeview feed. For each channel, they have it so that one of those licenses is a dutch one, one is UK. So, each channels output is ultimately (in theory) restrained to Ofcom standards by that UK license.

The dutch licenses offer a competitive advantage in giving them the 2 hour freeview head start over others, and allows them to use that 2 hour window to advertise the Extreme show before it starts broadcasting.

For some reason Ofcom nevertheless seem to leave BS well alone despite the fact each channel operates one feed under a UK license, so is theoretically under their jurisdiction. Perhaps they are afraid of challenging them in case they lose and open a flood gate that allows BS to broadcast harder content because of the dutch license (seems unlikely), or perhaps there is a secret mutual agreement, Ofcom will leave them alone as long as BS more or less stick to the same content guidelines as everyone else.

Freeview Ch 95 the channel that broadcasts Xtreme has a Dutch licence, nothing that is shown on that freeview channels is ever regulated by Ofcom , from 11pm -11.30pm before Xtreme starts it shows the same feed as Sky Ch 906 , Sky 906 also has the Dutch licence .

(06-09-2012 19:26 )mr mystery Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 19:14 )munch1917 Wrote:  I don't know off-hand if Extreme is actually broadcast on a dutch license or not.

As has been discussed ad nauseum, BS broadcast their non-encrypted channels on 2 outputs, Sky and Freeview. For each channel they need two broadcast licenses, one for the Sky feed, one for the Freeview feed. For each channel, they have it so that one of those licenses is a dutch one, one is UK. So, each channels output is ultimately (in theory) restrained to Ofcom standards by that UK license.

The dutch licenses offer a competitive advantage in giving them the 2 hour freeview head start over others, and allows them to use that 2 hour window to advertise the Extreme show before it starts broadcasting.

For some reason Ofcom nevertheless seem to leave BS well alone despite the fact each channel operates one feed under a UK license, so is theoretically under their jurisdiction. Perhaps they are afraid of challenging them in case they lose and open a flood gate that allows BS to broadcast harder content because of the dutch license (seems unlikely), or perhaps there is a secret mutual agreement, Ofcom will leave them alone as long as BS more or less stick to the same content guidelines as everyone else.

Freeview Ch 95 the channel that broadcasts Xtreme has a Dutch licence, nothing that is shown on that freeview channels is ever regulated by Ofcom , from 11pm -11.30pm before Xtreme starts it shows the same feed as Sky Ch 906 , Sky 906 also has the Dutch licence .

So, why is BSX censored to Ofcon's rules?

I'm sure that in Holland they don't censor their adult programmes to that extent.
Ofcon must be heavily influencing Cellcast and Cellcast are folding when Ofcon complain.