The BBC will snoop on your WiFi to detect iPlayer users

scare tactics to frighten people into paying up. high time the license was abolished.
 
This has been pretty throroughly debunked - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/06/bbc_detector_van_wi_fi_iplayer/
with the BBC issuing a press release saying it's nonsense.

Why on earth would the BBC need to snoop on your WiFi signal when they can just link your TV licence number to a log in account?

Edits are being made to the article to reflect this new information.

Man proof read your text. :)

Big brother is watching you again....

Sorry, the editor likes to make text appear twice during edits. It should all be fixed now.
 
I haven't paid for a license in five years and I'm not about to start now. If they somehow manage to forcibly stop me or threaten me with legal action with substantiated evidence then I'll just stop watching iPlayer on-demand content. My wife won't be happy that she'll no longer be able to watch Casualty and Holby City, but it just isn't worth £150 a year.
 
scare tactics to frighten people into paying up. high time the license was abolished.

I haven't paid for a license in five years and I'm not about to start now. If they somehow manage to forcibly stop me or threaten me with legal action with substantiated evidence then I'll just stop watching iPlayer on-demand content. My wife won't be happy that she'll no longer be able to watch Casualty and Holby City, but it just isn't worth £150 a year.

Indeed, the TV licence is really not worth that much money when compared to other services.
 
Indeed, the TV licence is really not worth that much money when compared to other services.

Sorry, no. More expensive does not mean less value for money they are two very different things especially considering the vast differences in content available. Streaming serivces like Netflix etc dont have access to News/Analysis, Sports or Radio.

Much of the BBC's premier content is also licenced to Netflix - can't say the same for Sky who lock all of their own, and content they purchase, behind a paywall that requires you to be a Sky customer with a dish and set top box and at the same time line the pockets of Rupert Murdoch. Nuts to that. Want to watch The Walking Dead, Blacklist etc legally and without resorting to a VPN on demand? Nope, Sky have those locked off by holding the broadcast rights.

I get the distinct impression those that complain about the licence fee, which admittedly is not perfect, don't even use the BBC services. Do you really want content punctuated with Payday Loan adverts? Really?

It isnt the 90's anymore when we only had 5 channels and no ability to stream content, you dont need a licence fee to acccess ITV's, Channel 4 or Channel 5's on demand content so you dont have to pay for one.
 
Sorry, no. More expensive does not mean less value for money they are two very different things especially considering the vast differences in content available. Streaming serivces like Netflix etc dont have access to News/Analysis, Sports or Radio.

Much of the BBC's premier content is also licenced to Netflix - can't say the same for Sky who lock all of their own, and content they purchase, behind a paywall that requires you to be a Sky customer with a dish and set top box and at the same time line the pockets of Rupert Murdoch. Nuts to that. Want to watch The Walking Dead, Blacklist etc legally and without resorting to a VPN on demand? Nope, Sky have those locked off by holding the broadcast rights.

I get the distinct impression those that complain about the licence fee, which admittedly is not perfect, don't even use the BBC services. Do you really want content punctuated with Payday Loan adverts? Really?

It isnt the 90's anymore when we only had 5 channels and no ability to stream content, you dont need a licence fee to acccess ITV's, Channel 4 or Channel 5's on demand content so you dont have to pay for one.

I do agree with you when it comes to news content. It is pretty much the only thing I turn my TV on for these days.

I just think that there needs to be an option for people to watch TV and avoid BBC if they want to. Why lock out the publics ability to watch channel 5 or ITV if they don't support the BBC.

I have a TV licence that I am about to renew, just because I like to watch the news and my housemate enjoys grand designs and a few cooking shows.
 
I do agree with you when it comes to news content. It is pretty much the only thing I turn my TV on for these days.

I just think that there needs to be an option for people to watch TV and avoid BBC if they want to. Why lock out the publics ability to watch channel 5 or ITV if they don't support the BBC.

I have a TV licence that I am about to renew, just because I like to watch the news and my housemate enjoys grand designs and a few cooking shows.

But you can avoid paying the licence fee and watch those channels, on demand. A licence fee isnt going to be required for that. And while the BBC will be closing the iplayer loophole nothing has been said about other channels "watch live" functions. That will be decided by the TV licencing company, not the BBC. Given it budget cuts for the new BBC charter I doubt they will be spending money on very expensive serveylence equipment a feet of vans and staff to run them in order to catch people out.

The original article from the Telegraph, who being a rather right wing publisher that has zero love for the BBC should tell you that it was a load of rubbish not to mention the the revised snoopers charter doesn't cover surveylence like this and is still a draft bill that might not even pass.

EDIT:
There is a arguement to be made that someone would want to be a Sky customer and at the same time not essentailly be a BBC customer which I have sympathy for but at the same time Sky, like their American cable network cousins havent innovated and allowed their content to be viewed without a dish/set top box/Sky broadband connection.
 
Last edited:
They could solve this problem easily and not be so invasive at the same time.

Only those with a TV license can access iplayer by having the service only be accessible if you register with your TV license details.

They should make it so if you want BBC services you have to pay for a service and if you don't want BBC then you don't pay or get access to them, Forcing a license onto people is Orwellian.
 
They could solve this problem easily and not be so invasive at the same time.

Only those with a TV license can access iplayer by having the service only be accessible if you register with your TV license details.

They should make it so if you want BBC services you have to pay for a service and if you don't want BBC then you don't pay or get access to them, Forcing a license onto people is Orwellian.


that is exactly what they will be doing. (register to your post code and house address)
no idea why this click bait is allowed to gain traction.

the whole packet sniffing thing is just ludicrous as a packet size is defined by the clients MTU not the host.
then you have the fact its much easier to check ip addresses that connect to iplayer and do a automated who is look up.
 
If it were true, it could be a catastrophe when a huge number of residents change their WiFi network name to F*CK BBC and can't figure out which signal to log in to.
 
Well if it was true only the Beeb could get away with such an illegal act such as packet sniffing....... wait what did it used to be called, oh yeah Wardriving.
 
Back
Top