Torchwood - Adrift

THOUGHTS ABOUT ADRIFT...

( It's good because ANDY'S in it, yes? )

All in all, a solid episode and one of my favourites so far.

ETA: JUST REALISED THOUGH: WTF??? Jack wears PANTS??? That just seems so... unlikely to me.

So... before Fragments airs...

I'd like to refer the right honourable viewing public to a poll I created in torchwoodcoffee 15 months ago HERE.

And, the results of said poll, and my ramblings about WHY EVERYONE WHO VOTED IN SAID POLL WAS TOTALLY WRONG, HERE.

*preemptively does the TOLD YOU SO dance*

Seriously. Watch this space. They totally DONE IT well before Cyberwoman, and I think we all know there was an Agenda.

MANWHORESPY

Good God...

I really do have nothing better to do with my time...

I just sent the following email:

Dear Mr. [censored],

I'm afraid I don't quite understand, no. What you seem to be saying is that web content does not fall under any sort of agreements as to programme broadcasting rights. I assume this is the case, as I have never come across any other website of any other broadcasting corporation that denies access to individual programme subsites based on whether or not the broadcasting rights to those programmes have been sold to specific countries. I am, for example, allowed to view the Fox Corporation's Simpsons subsite (http://www.thesimpsons.com), regardless of whether or not the rights to the Simpsons programme itself have been sold to a terrestrial Dutch television channel. I assume this is also the case with the BBC.

Furthermore, you claim that, not being in possession of a UK television licence, the only thing I SHOULD not be allowed to access on your site is so called "live" content. You say that I do NOT need to have a television licence to view video on demand or any other "non-live" web content. But I can't view either of those things. Based solely on my Dutch IP address, I am NOT allowed to access the BBC iPlayer (your video on demand service) and, I am not allowed to view ANY content on the Torchwood subsite. Not a text file, not a single wallpaper image. What you seem to be explaining to me is exactly why I SHOULD be able to access all of those things, so my question still stands, and, in fact, I'm more confused than ever. Why am I not allowed access to these things if what you're saying is true?

If what you are trying to tell me is that I DO need a UK television licence to view your non-live web content, then I'm baffled as to your legal grounds for being allowed to equate ownership of a valid UK IP address (because you are filtering on COUNTRY, solely, nothing else) with possession of a valid UK TV licence. To be honest, I find that legally highly questionable and I'd like to see you back that up. In these days of slingboxes and global communications, I find it hard to believe that, say, a UK resident who resides two months per year in Holland, takes their slingbox with them for those two months and uses said slingbox to access their UK digibox at their UK address where they have a valid television licence, isn't allowed to view your web content based solely on their IP address for those two months. Furthermore, do those people within the UK who are not in possession of a TV licence or television receiving equipment get put on a UK IP blacklist for your website? Somehow I doubt that. You are filtering on country, perfectly normal web content, no live streaming video, just pictures and words that I am NOT ALLOWED to look at because of the country of origin of my IP address. And I would like to know why.

Kindest regards,

Why A. Whelk.

Well, it didn't say Why A. Whelk, obviously, but still.

I AM FIGHTING THE MAN ON YOUR BEHALF, PEOPLE!!!