I'm not sure what you are asking Saiyar....

Sorry, the TV thing just make no sense at all. Just to much difference in Europe on how television is transported/encoded. Also the TV stations are different in each country. IP TV is most unlikely. The costs are too high for it to be "free".

Sorry does not make sense at all to me.

The price cut would be very good news, but I think it would be a bad move for Sony to include Freeview.

Freeview is generally very slow (we tried 3 freeview boxes, before we got Sky), and Sony is trying to make the PS3 look very fast and sleek. Freeview just feels so clunky, slow and unstandardised that it could less-on the feel of the hardware (say someones showing off the PS3 to their neighbours, boots up the Freeview which would take a view minutes and to watch the squares from poor signals move across the screen). There is a reason Freeview is free.

Erm... at least in the UK people need a TV licence to be able to legally watch Freeview. Now thats a moot point considering that most people will already have such a licence, but there will be a small portion of people not using TV's to use their PS3.

Wouldn't giving them Freeview be a potential legal issue?

Somehow I don't see this one being true myself.

Do correct me if I'm wrong on the TV licence thing but that's my understanding of it.

I don't know...I would assume that a global corporation wouldn't make such a sophomoric/illeagal mistake like this, but to be sure we'd just have to wait until Aug 22 when this event starts.

Like I said, it would be that reason I don't see it happening. Sony wouldn't be stupid enough to walk into a legal minefield like that, which I'm sure it would pose.

MrMarc - That wouldn't be up to Sony, in cases like that it would be the consumer that takes responsibility.

For example, when you go to buy a Freeview box, a remote or even a TV you don't get asked for proof of having a TV license, as it wouldn't be Currys, or the TV manufacturers responsibility. If you get caught watching Freeview without a TV license then it is you who gets the fine. Not Panasonic for making the Freeview box in the first place.

Also, if the PS3s version of Freeview didn't pick up BBC channels... then the need for a TV license would be gone, as TV licenses are only needed for BBC channels.

@SamuelRSmith, I'm pretty sure you need a TV license anyway, regardless of whether you watch BBC, it's just the money goes to the BBC, you would still need a TV license to watch ITV.

Personally it doesn't make sense to me, as all TVs (as far as I know), sold new in the UK now have Freeview built-in, I can't really imagine any HDTVs not having it built in in the first place.

No, you only need a TV license if you're gonna watch BBC. However, when you get the fine through the door you can't just not pay it and say 'I don't watch BBC' you actually need to have proof... IE you're TV not actually being able to pick up the BBC channels (which is incredibly rare). I remember a story about a man who actually went to court and got the fine dropped because he was able to proof that his TV was inable to pick up the BBC channels.

my accounting prof is named sammy smith. any relation?