I just watched the BBC demo from mix06. Stunning. But while watching it, it occurred to me that the BBC's unique position of being publicly funded is a huge advantage for adopting new media technology, and that advertising-funded media in the States seems to be battling against these same advancements.
Since UK citizens fund the BBC (at least, that's my simplified interpretation) it is in the BBC's interest to make their content easily available to all (paying) citizens. In other words, DVR's, IPTV, and video iPod's can be embraced rather then feared. Additionally, since their funding is somewhat fixed and consistent (ie., no spiky ad revenue) it is also in the BBC's interest to reduce content distribution costs where possible to free up money for new content creation (ie., P2P file sharing amongst their customers is a good thing since it cuts the BBC's direct bandwidth costs.)
Where it gets particularly interesting though, is that the BBC should be in no way threatened by the idea that their viewers will be copying, re-mixing, fast-forwarding, place-shifting, and sharing the content. With no need to track ad impressions, there's no dreaded "30-second-skip" attacking legacy business models. Surly they still need to track customer interest to know which shows to fund, but that seems a lot easier then developing content based on how lucrative a viewing audience is for advertisers.
What's great about this situation is how well it demonstrates the connection between business models and the ability to embrace change and adopt to consumer needs. In the States, we are at risk of legislation making it illegal to watch movies on one's computer and even more illegal to share a video with a friend. In the UK, IPTV and P2P networks might just save the country money.