ITV “In Discussions” With Sony

TSA Staff 53 Comments

The Telegraph (via Made2Game) is reporting that ITV is “in discussions” with Sony about launching ITV Player on the PS3 games console, according to “a senior TV executive close to ITV” speaking to the newspaper.

The service, which The Telegraph understands to be the case, would be “streamed and advertising supported” and should be available by the beginning of September.

In contrast, the Wii doesn’t allow advertising and Xbox 360 doesn’t allow free content, apparently.

ITV is also, according to the newspaper, trying to get the Player onto iPhone, Android and Blackberry.  There’s likely to be a small charge for those applications.

Source: The Telegraph

Tags:

Related stories from TSA

12 Minute Xbox One Dashboard Video, Media Partners Listed
Netflix, BlinkBox, LoveFilm, ITV And NowTV Missing The Next-Gen Launch
ITV To Trial Micropayments For ITV Player
ITV Player and 4OD Now Live

53 Comments

  1. Nice hopefully 4Od and fivelive player will soon follow suite and i can ditch my digi box and tell the license guy to bugger off as i`ll only be watching recorded tv at my own pleasure :)

    • You still need a license for that unfortunately. The general rule of thumb is that if you have the means by which to watch television then you have to pay a license fee. Now that live and recorded tv can be streamed via the internet more or less everyone has the means one way or another

      • no no u r wrong mate if it is recorded ur ok withoiut a license aslong as u can prove u dont use tv for tele and aslong as u dont watch live streams, Trust I have actually enquired as iv just moved house and posed this question to the guy when he came round when i 1st moved in.

      • No you’re wrong

        If you record a program on recorder, PVR, computer, console or anything then you DO need a TV licence its only if you ONLY watch catchup service online that you don’t

      • No actually, your all wrong…
        If you ‘own’ any device capable of receiving a broadcast programme in any way then you need a TV license. Even for a mobile phone …..

    • The key thing is whether you can watch TV “live” as it is broadcast. If you can, you need a license.
      Of course the fact that (for example) tvcatchup streams almost all freeview channels live, technically you could argue that everyone in the country with internet access “can watch TV live” ;)
      Presumably that is why you now need a logon to use TVCatchup.com.

      • You need a TV licance for TV and radio, but internet is still off the list. Your TV has to be a certain distance feom the arial point at all times inorder not to pay the licence. My uncle has a TV that he just watches DVD’s, and they have done random checks to make sure the TV is away from the arial point. Not sure if this still happens, as it seems a waste of time and money.

        i wouldnt have a TV licence if i didnt have Sky box… no point, its all utter crap on standered TV. i never watch anything apart from shows only availbe on sky.

      • This is what I checked into recently. You don’t need a license for BBC iPlayer as far as I could find out.

      • You certainly do need a TV licence for catchup viewing.

      • You need a license for any live broadcast that you watch regardless of what you watch it on.

        So if you watch the news or the footie you need a license.

      • You don’t need a licence for catch up tv. You just need to tell them that you won’t be watching “live” tv. My mate doesn’t have a licence he’s told them and there’s no problems.

      • Yep. Thought so. Simultaneous broadcasts (TV and online) requires a license but catching up on stuff doesn’t.

      • I was under the impression that watched within 7 days counted as live thus covering the BBC’s iPlayer

        However if you only watch catchup service and never watch a program live and never record a program to watch later then you do not need a TV licence

        Source: TV Licence website

      • Just to add to the confusion (and winning the world’s most misleading website name award) tvcatchup.com streams live TV, it’s not actually a catchup TV service!
        So if you watch TVcatchup you need a license, but if you only watch some OTHER TV catchup service, you don’t ;)

      • They’re launching a PVR capability at some point in the future though

      • CC-STar, matey you are wrong.. the beeb say so…

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_not_require_a_tv_1.html

        TV LIcensing themselves say “”only watching or downloading programmes that have already been broadcast using the iPlayer or other internet services, a licence is not required”.”

      • Which is exactly what I said about 3 comments ago o_O

      • No, you said that if you were using iPlayer you needed it. That link from the BBC says otherwise.

      • Just pay the effing License people. We all watch tv, catchup tv, listen to BBC radio, go to One Big Weekend, visit it’s websites and of course we all benefitted years down the line from it’s investment in the home consoles industry about 25years ago. So everyone just shut up

  2. ITV in my view are more than welcome to join the family, I’d also be very glad whe they get their shows on the mobile devices
    I dont like a lot of ITV’s programming but sometimes there is something worth watching, maybe a Judge Judy or two, one day when im off work, ;-) LOL

  3. good to hear, iplayer on the ps3 is amazing, im still hoping for 40d which i guess is alittle bit harder to sort as your able to pay to watch programs and films etc

  4. Harry Hill ftw!!!

    But what else is there? wouldn’t mind Channel four

  5. Good stuff, TBH I’m probably more interested in the iPhone version than the Ps3 one.
    Does anyone know if BBC/ITV are planning to include High Definition content like the full PC version ?

  6. iPlayer is great and 4OD & Demand5 broadcast on YouTube anyway, the best place to view them on your PS3 is
    http://www.youtube.com/xl
    So just bookmark that, it has an interface which is designed to be used on TVs.

    Can’t remember anything I’ve watched on a catchup service, my SkyHD box records everything I’m interested in and the new Sky Anytime+ (launching later this year) will catch everything else. As soon as they open it to all ISPs not just their own, that is.

    • Thing is, and i think that link proves it, TV channel providers dont get that much of the TV licence we fork over every year if they are will to give it for free over internet. 5-10years time, and we wont have a licence, the BBC will just have to have adverts like everyone else, and it will all be free down the internet pipes. only thing we will always have to pay for is sporting events. purly down to the sports demanding lots of cash

      • Channel 4 is a public service broadcaster (one of the reasons they make so many documentaries and has quality news output) but only receives a low amount & uses advertising for the rest. Channel 5 is purely ad funded and receives nothing from the Licence Fee.

        Subscription mechanisms will always be around for premium sports and movies and obviously highly sought after TV programs like 24 get caught up in this.

        The licence fee doesn’t just pay the BBC to make programs. It pays them to produce content in the public interest.

        So whether that’s playing thousands of hours of unsigned bands on various radio channels every year, or your local gardening hour on a some obscure radio station, or splurging millions on Olympics coverage and losing out on ratings because your showing some crappy Curling event instead of Cash In The Attic… the licence fee should be treasured and as long as the BBC try and get value for each £ spent, I’ll always support it.

        Otherwise we’ll be left with something as shit as ITV, who’s news is shit, sport is shit, original programming is shit. In fact without Simon Cowell’s record company & his vested interest I don’t think anyone would watch ITV

      • With all that said… Sky News seems to break news quicker than BBC, The radio stuff should just have adverts like the rest, and as for documentrys, they should do what ever Nat Geo and discovery channels do to get there stuff out (i know they sometimes use BBC footage, but i have seen BBC programming use others aswell). As more and more stuff hits the web, we are using the broadcasting infrostucter less as well. Johnathan Ross, Cris Moiles, Clarkson ect get paied way to much, and that comes from the ‘unique way inwhich the BBC is funded’ as they keep telling me. Along with the tat shows the BBC have, id hardly say they are any better than ITV IMO. The only thing terestrial TV has on it worth watching is the Champions Leauge.

        Time will tell i guess, but as more and more people get internet enabled TV’s in the living room, faster wireless links to upstairs computers to show video downstairs, and more OnDemand services from more channels being added to devices like the playstation, i just cant see the TV licence being able to justifiy its self.

      • Here Here CC, couldn’t have said it any better myself
        Just to say that BBC is superior to ITV in every almost every respect.

      • But thats okay since Clarkson is pure entertainment!!

      • I watch SkyNews all the time and prefer it, they appear to break news quicker than the beeb because they don’t have the same level of editorial control.
        eg. They break something and then worry about the details later, unlike the BBC it doesn’t matter when they correct themselves even sometimes mid-sentence. Whereas BBC are bound by a much stricter editorial code.

        This another key point of the BBC, namely Sky are only as good as they because they’re trying to better the Beeb all the time whereas if Sky just had ITN to compete against if would be laughable.

        Sky also raise billions a year through subscriptions so it kinda proves that ad-supported programming will always be of the itv standard whereas public money and/or subscription will raise standards to the level of BBC, Ch4 & Sky

      • “Sky News seems to break news quicker than BBC,”

        Because they don’t check their stories.

        The BBC double check everything with The Press Association and Reuters.

        News isn’t about being “First!” its about being correct.

    • BBC supior to ITV is debatable, but paying the TV licence dosent seem like vaule IMO. I pay Sky each month, and watch loads of great TV. Then paying a TV licence for the terestral stuff i never switch on is a bit of a piss take really.

      • You only listen to commercial radio stations and never use any BBC websites?

      • It’s not that debatable, spend a day watching ad-supported channels like ITV or Ch5 and you’ll soon realise how good publicly funded or subscription output is.

        Ad revenues are falling and unless someone finds a way to monetize the Internet things could get worse

    • I can’t ever envisage any situation in which I turn to one of Rupert Murdoch’s offerings for my news. BBC radio 4 for me if it’s news I’m after.

  7. In a recent email from RTE they said they were also looking to expand their RTE player service across multiple platforms, but nothing specific yet.

  8. Great News. Iplayer has completely changed how I view TV. Brilliant…..

  9. YES! I can finally watch every episode of the Alan Titchmarsh show on my naughty console!

  10. er. . . does ITV even have any good shows?

    • Occasionally. It’s those little bits between the adverts.

    • There’s Harry Hill and there’s …. er…

      • ….a black void devoid of life, reminiscent of a universe in which entropy has run its course and all the stars have shone their last, burning up their fuel reserves – neutron stars and cold dead planets standing as silent witnesses to the death of everything?

Comments are now closed for this post.