Let’s talk about BBC

[midlandsgrimpeur]

I see they are claiming the interview was available in Florida, through using a VPN.
While not illegal in itself, it is a breach of the BBC’s terms of service.
Also, the iPlayer will usually pick up on anyone accessing using a VPN.

They claim specifically that "millions" of Florida residents use a VPN to view content and that this is "well established" whilst managing to cite no evidence at all to back this up. Plus, as you say (and as TWH cited in the Ireland example) the BBC has widespread VPN blocking in place across the world.

 

[CXRAndy]

Love the twisting of y'all to weave a defence.

Let the courts bash it out in a public televised event.

 

[briantrumpet]

They claim specifically that "millions" of Florida residents use a VPN to view content and that this is "well established" whilst managing to cite no evidence at all to back this up. Plus, as you say (and as TWH cited in the Ireland example) the BBC has widespread VPN blocking in place across the world.

And Trump is claiming that he didn't say the quotes that were stitched together, claiming they've been produced by AI. Good luck with that.

 

[cookiemonster]

Apparently he’s filed a second lawsuit, claiming breach of trade practice laws, also for $5bn.
No idea how a private individual can seek to benefit in this way.

I see they are claiming the interview was available in Florida, through using a VPN.
While not illegal in itself, it is a breach of the BBC’s terms of service.
Also, the iPlayer will usually pick up on anyone accessing using a VPN.

Not if you use a proper, reliable, paid for VPN.

I watch BBC regularly using one.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Not if you use a proper, reliable, paid for VPN.

I watch BBC regularly using one.

True, but I suspect that if they are claiming millions of Florida residents are using paid for VPN's to watch Panorama that seems something of a stretch.

 

[secretsqirrel]

True, but I suspect that if they are claiming millions of Florida residents are using paid for VPN's to watch Panorama that seems something of a stretch.

Not only that nobody complained after they watched it.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Not if you use a proper, reliable, paid for VPN.

I watch BBC regularly using one.

They typically block all the main VPNs, because it is trivial to find their IP addresses. If you pay for a private IP address, then it won't be blocked, but that is not common. That said, it sometimes works for me.

 

[First Aspect]

True, but I suspect that if they are claiming millions of Florida residents are using paid for VPN's to watch Panorama that seems something of a stretch.

It is going to turn out to substantially baseless. That's not the point.

I do think the BBC will decide to fight this to the bitter end. Which ought to stretch beyond his presidency. Because it will likely improve their standing as an independent news organisation to do so.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Not only that nobody complained after they watched it.

Well, it was only available for a year so they didn't have much time.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

It is going to turn out to substantially baseless. That's not the point.

I do think the BBC will decide to fight this to the bitter end. Which ought to stretch beyond his presidency. Because it will likely improve their standing as an independent news organisation to do so.

Agreed, pretty much every lawsuit he brings is baseless and part of his smoke and mirrors tactics. That's why the best way to take him on is to give him the metaphorical middle finger by fighting the troll in court.

 

[laurentian]

Love the twisting of y'all to weave a defence.

. . . even putting on the accent now !

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

I know this is the BBC and not the Trump thread but I was thinking last night what a sad sorry state the world is in when this man can become POTUS on two occasions. One of the most exalted positions in the world, held by Jefferson, Lincoln, Washington, FDR, Eisenhower, Carter, Truman and so on. To elect such a feeble, bankrupt void of a human being is an embarrassment and a stain on the American people who voted him in, making a mockery of the office and the people that held it before him.

 

[Psamathe]

If the BBC pays a single cent I will be annoyed.
They shouldn’t even pay legal costs. The Florida court can’t enforce a fine anyway.

I think if the BBC pay Trump anything they will lose a lot of UK license fee payers, those who are close to "should I or should I not" eg me, only live TV program I watch on my premesie is Channel 4 evening news and I can manage without that (often do) so it's already a very expensive subscription with my money not even getting to the broadcasters of the one program I watch anyway (hence all complete madness).

 

[Psamathe]

I would have thought the issue would come down to cause. If someone broke the law to view the programme - which would be the case if a Florida resident used a VPN to pretend to be a UK resident - I'm struggling to see how the BBC could be held liable for a third party's illegal behaviour.

It's all such madness it wouldn't surprise me if they produced a "witness" who was visiting the UK at the time and watched it on their hotel TV ... Sure that isn't the case but my complete guess is it's not about a case but about a bully expecting the BBC to cave "'cos it's cheaper".

 

[CXRAndy]

It is going to turn out to substantially baseless. That's not the point.

I do think the BBC will decide to fight this to the bitter end. Which ought to stretch beyond his presidency. Because it will likely improve their standing as an independent news organisation to do so.

The lawyers will publicly drag all those directly involved in the program, editing, senior staff head of BBC through a public humiliation on the stand.

It will be like watching the Johnny Depp case. Extremely entertaining