They are planning to develop new tech which they might open source. But all this still has to be approved by the regulator and the government.
That said, I have seen some of the tech from the inside ~10 years ago. The ARD player was developed by a third party and there was no budget to bring this in house. Things might have changed but redoing everything just to open source it sounds like a waste of money.
The rest of the system wasn't very interesting back in the day, just an off-the-shelf CMS and internal feeds to pull in all the content from the different channels automatically.
Here is an old interview with the technical directors from back then explaining some of the internals: https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_2010-Q1_Mediathek.p...
The sites have changed quite a lot since then and they have added subscription content as well. Maybe they now have code which would be more interesting to open source.
The key difference is that taxes are completely under discretion of parliamentary control, whereas the Rundfunkbeitrag is under discretion of the individual broadcast authority governance boards (which are too closely tied to politicians for my comfort, but that's another thing).
Duty. (like stamp duty)
Fee.
Licence/License. (maybe like the BBC licence fee?)
Levy. (see below)
There is also the concept of the hypothicated tax. The only exemplar I know is the Australian Medicare levy, the money is solely to be used, and spent on Medicare, and no other purpose enshrined in law. People often claim petrol tax was designed to pay for roads infrastructure but it wasn't legally bound, and is not a hypothicated tax. Nor is the ULEZ and like costs to drive in the inner city with a petrol engine. They are designed to discourage use of ICE not to pay for them.
https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-Urteil-Staatlicher-Wetterdiens...
"ARD and ZDF want to offer their streaming code as open source"
EDIT: Looks like it is only broken for me in FireFox...
They've since changed their tune and ceased uploading whole episodes, only excerpts go onto YouTube now with links to their own "Mediathek".
From my understanding they're doing so because the content is paid for by public money, and YouTube is a foreign for-profit company. So they were essentially spending the citizens money to provide content to a private entity that's headquartered abroad
That's one thing, but IIRC the larger part was that the private broadcasters whined as they always do.
They did upload there, but fortunately it was available elsewhere too.
While a two-stream recommendation loop is quite common in both systems, the loop above only happened twice for me so far. Still, it might just perfectly highlight the lack of passion and user focus plaguing their current platforms.
So, whatever they come up with in the new and maybe open one... ah, who am I kidding.
If you stream via Chromecast, you can see your connection getting dropped by adaptive bitrate streaming in realtime.
It's always low quality, medium quality, high quality, ultra high quality, lag, then low quality again. You cannot change it to a fixed level manually too, on the Chromecast.
use of an adblocker is universally advised though
ca. 2003, I'm getting rid of my tv-card which has been free until now, or else I have to pay a fee...
ca. 2010, They've got a website now, if you have a computer or phone, you gotta pay the fee...
great... now I have to pay the fee because I have a github... or what
ca. 2015, you have to pay it anyway, with no exemptions
ca. 2020, they start randomly sending out delay penalties, even if you are late by days, without ever notifying you of the due dates
ca. 2022, they sneakily shift the 3-months fee forward, first you can pay it at the end of the period, then in the middle month, then soon at the beginning
meanwhile, the programming gets worse and worse every year. Then they get surprised if people vote for parties which promise to abolish it.
When I think of "Contributions" I think of a voluntary transfer of money, whether from an individual to an organization or from an individual to themselves (like "contributions" to an IRA or 401k for example). But a contribution could even be sharing ideas with a group of friends (contributing to the conversation) or anything really.
A Beitrag is bound to a well defined objective which means it is determined what the money will be used for at the moment it is collected whereas a Steuer contributes to the household as such.
Also, public TV is not controlled by the government but by a council that is more or less democratic. Still far from perfect, sure
Of the countries I lived in, the quality of the broadcasting and reporting in Germany has been the better one so far.
And when you see the flow of vomit produced by most of the private television in the countries around, you realise that the compromise is not perfect, but it's nonetheless miles ahead of most other options.
You also quickly realise that most private channels are owned by powerful players pushing their own agenda, which can bring even more bias and one-sidedness.
https://www.dwd.de/DE/presse/pressemitteilungen/DE/2020/2020...
I've since been encouraging everyone I know to do the same, and I never forget to tell this backstory.
Besides, DWD is hands down the single best weather app in the DACH region anyway.
Broadcast license is what broadcasters pay for in order to be allowed to broadcast the licensed content.
The downside is that it's a per head (or per household) sum, not coupled to income like taxes would be. This is usually explained away by the fee being separate from the state, but the reality is that Germany actually has it all implemented, in the form of the opt-in "church tax" coupled to taxable income just like regular tax. Handled by the tax office, but not going too government coffers. Would be so easy to extend the implementation to public broadcasting, because you don't pay to consume the media, you pay to live in an environment that is not dominated by profit-driven broadcasting media. There are many negative things to say about our public broadcasting, but when I look at other countries that don't have strong public broadcasting, it's so much the lesser evil, totally worth the fee.
(personally, I'd love to see that "church tax implementation" opened up to all kinds of opt-in membership organisations that would see value in income-coupled membership fees, I believe that a lot of good things could work that way, with people of all income levels enjoying an objectively fair way of contributing)
Back in Portugal, we took the approach that radio tax is part of the electricity bill, and when TVs came to be, the radio tax became TV tax as well.
Nothing else, doesn't matter how many people live on the household, if there are Internet devices, radio on the car, whatever.
Same applies to the church tax, everyone pays, it is part of the taxes and no one else, besides the state gets to see how much it is in practice.
Beitrag Wikipédia pages are available in other languages, namely Swedish and Esperanto. The meaning doesn't exactly match German's.
If you don't want people who don't care for TV or Radio (they do exist) to vote for AfD then you shouldn't have introduced a Rundfunkbeitrag that's very unpopular with many more. Scandals about money being badly spent just adds to the distrust and lack of interest people have in ARD, ZDF etc.
I didn't mind the old system to finance ARD/ZDF/... as I don't care about TV or radio and choose not to have either, but the new system is just not fair.
The French were smart enough to change their funding to be drawn from the general state budget: Less effort and no more grumpy people like me.
Well, they aren't actually. Lay off the hyperbole.