|
Post by garystevens on Feb 8, 2021 15:34:04 GMT
It seems there's a purge going on by UK Broadcasters.
In the last 4 days, 5 YT Channels showing old Archive material have been shut down.
Obviously, I think most of us on here know where the taken down channels got their (ARCHIVE PORTAL) material from.
Whilst blatant stealing and uploading of "archive assets" is totally a non starter, you can understand why it goes on, when the broadcasters (bar Talking Pictures TV) never repeat such gems as Get It Together, Whittakers World Of Music, 2 G's And The Pop People, Pop Quest, The Geordie Scene, Cheggers Plays Pop, The Generation Game, Blankety Blank etc etc.
Not to mention the excellent Drama's & kids programmes they used to make, why is it left sitting on shelf, doing nothing?
People of a certain age don't wanna be bombarded with someone in a mask pretending they can sing, or ice skating in
Between the UK broadcasters they have the capacity (additional channels apart from their main ones) to show classic 1960s/70s & 80s shows
But the people who have "stolen" our TV heritage from the online portals, should be ashamed of themselves. They have denied the broadcasters an income (that would be ploughed back in to making TV) they have also denied the people seen in those productions (both on screen and behind the scenes) an income too.
These people have probably ruined any chance of seeing any good old 60s and 70s material coming out commercially or even stuck on Britbox.
|
|
|
Post by stevehoare61 on Feb 8, 2021 20:13:14 GMT
I totally agree with you Gary. I collect predominantly old British tv from the 60s onwards,and I used to buy an enormous amount of material on ioffer, that has been stopped too..and I am finding it increasingly difficult to find anyone that wants to sell or swap these days. I agree, IF the BBC and ITV etc had an Archive channel coming online with old, material, Id understand it, but they dont, material is constantly being recovered and returned which excites us all, but then, thats that, it isnt like we will ever see it.I made a comment recently that programmes such as Razzamatazz and Cheggars both need repeating, along with other music shows etc, due just to the amount of fantastic material they have in them.Its very frustating all round,, because when you find someone these days, they charge a small fortune
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Walsh on Feb 8, 2021 20:33:38 GMT
Repeat fees on music shows can be astronomical for a bloody Rubettes clip let alone the really legendary stars (I do love the Rubettes). It's a stumbling block that will very rarely be overcome. Marc Bolans show being the perfect example.
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 8, 2021 20:42:02 GMT
I suspect copyright has an effect.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,854
|
Post by RWels on Feb 8, 2021 20:45:17 GMT
Didn't I already say the crackdown was probably because of the leaking of the Royal Family 1969 documentary, oh wait you posted this twice didn't you?
|
|
|
Post by stevehoare61 on Feb 8, 2021 20:58:29 GMT
The agreement that BBC4 has, to show all the Top of the Pops episodes, would this not be the same for repeats of Cheggars etc? Or has a differnt agreement have to be reached for each show?
|
|
|
Post by John Smith on Feb 8, 2021 21:23:07 GMT
Wondered where they were getting all the stuff from, so most was ripped from ITN etc then.
|
|
|
Post by Ray Langstone (was saintsray) on Feb 9, 2021 0:42:01 GMT
The agreement that BBC4 has, to show all the Top of the Pops episodes, would this not be the same for repeats of Cheggars etc? Or has a differnt agreement have to be reached for each show? They have different agreements for every show, pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by Dan S on Feb 9, 2021 1:32:45 GMT
But the people who have "stolen" our TV heritage from the online portals What do you mean by online portals? You mean things like Britbox? If the TV shows recently removed from youtube were already available to view on 'online portals' (whatever they are) then we'd all be watching shows there instead of needing people to upload the material to youtube. Didn't I already say the crackdown was probably because of the leaking of the Royal Family 1969 documentary, oh wait you posted this twice didn't you? Funny, I wasn't remotely interested in an old Royal Family documentary, but "Streisand Effect" meant that it ended up being reposted all over the net and I just had to see it.
|
|
|
Post by Ray Langstone (was saintsray) on Feb 9, 2021 2:43:09 GMT
I can think of at least two examples where things uploaded to youtube were later broadcast on terrestrial television because the original programme extracts were wiped?
I have lots of opinions about this, but....another time, maybe.
Let's just say youtube has done me many favours; I'm always of the mindset that I want programmes to viewed by as many people as possible.
and with that, not wanting to start arguments (because I can't be bothered), BOINNNNNNG!, said Zebedee, time for bed....
|
|
|
Post by garystevens on Feb 9, 2021 2:52:57 GMT
Feb 9, 2021 1:32:45 GMT Dan S said:
"What do you mean by online portals? You mean things like Britbox? If the TV shows recently removed from youtube were already available to view on 'online portals' (whatever they are) then we'd all be watching shows there instead of needing people to upload the material to youtube".You wouldn't find this stuff on Britbox/iplayer or ITV Hub Try www.itvarchive.com/login/and archivesearch.tools.bbc.co.uk/welcomeThese portals are not intended for public consumption, but for programme makers/worldwide broadcasters (like Talking Pictures)/Network/Simply Media and research professionals only. www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc4j7G6r2rgwww.youtube.com/watch?v=PK-z_Xeackc
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Feb 9, 2021 3:38:44 GMT
I reckon that what is happening to Google in Australia will just be the beginning. And then there is the fall out following the US election. Once Facebook and Google are defined as publishers, are made liable for content and have to pay, it will be the end of seeing anything unauthorised.
We all like free stuff but, as someone who has been creating content for more than 40 years I have often had material taken by really nasty, arrogant, ignorant people who even cut off URLs to disguise who created it and is the copyright owner. Just this weekend there was an incident. When no one pays for anything anymore it is pretty galling to see your creative work "shared" by people who think they have some "right" to make it available without asking because "it's 30 years ago".
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,854
|
Post by RWels on Feb 9, 2021 9:13:10 GMT
The problem is, I think, that everyone here is thinking of the good examples that perfectly support their own opinion. There are respectless people and there are also cases where a program was never going to go anywhere and the few hundred youtube viewers are genuinely moved to see it. Both scenarios happen.
(The Royal Family reminded me of Hardwicke House... when it finally became available - it now seems it already was on a torrent site in late 2020 - it wasn't the least bit shocking.)
|
|
|
Post by Dan S on Feb 9, 2021 12:10:37 GMT
Ah, that BBC link looks like a similar one (different url) someone showed me a few years ago (I remember the page said something like "you shall not pass"). When I searched for series older than a few years it never had a complete series, just a small sample of about 1/4 of the series maybe. But when someone is uploading "Aliens in the Family" for example, complete with the 'broom cupboard' links at start and end, it can only come from off-air copies though, can't it?
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Feb 9, 2021 23:33:31 GMT
The problem is, I think, that everyone here is thinking of the good examples that perfectly support their own opinion. There are respectless people and there are also cases where a program was never going to go anywhere and the few hundred youtube viewers are genuinely moved to see it. Both scenarios happen. (The Royal Family reminded me of Hardwicke House... when it finally became available - it now seems it already was on a torrent site in late 2020 - it wasn't the least bit shocking.) There are both types of people and we all like seeing stuff. But that doesn't make it OK to "share" to an audience without permission. People who take stuff always have an endless supply of reasons for doing it. Content doesn't have to "go anywhere" ever if the copyright holder doesn't want it to. That's the bottom line. The question is how can we change things so that copyright holders want to.
|
|