Actually there's a really interesting internal trial running across our ROT (Record of Transmission) service, that does speech recognition across an audio stream (TV and Radio) then indexes it to the relevant part of the broadcast file... It's really handy, and because it's a phonetic search engine - actually very useful once you get into your head that English is the most un-phonetic language in the world.
I'm working very hard on trying to make a sub-set of this data (Five Live over a week) available in a few formats in connection with the latest call to arms - the Five Live Partnership - http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/news/archives/2007/01/five_live_partn.html But once you've got that stream... What are you going to do with it? m -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 11 January 2007 14:02 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] RSS feeds of the BBC TV subtitles? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore > Sent: 11 January 2007 13:42 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: Re: [backstage] RSS feeds of the BBC TV subtitles? > > On 11/01/07, Matthew Somerville > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brian Butterworth wrote: > > > Does the Copyrights Designs and Patents Act 1988 cover > the subtitles > > > associated with a TV channel? Would implementing a > "search" feed, > > > rather than a complete feed be OK with the Act? > > > > I would guess (IANAL) subtitles are part of the work, so would be > > copyrighted for things like dramas (as it's basically the spoken > > section of the script, more if it includes noises), and you > might have > > fair use for news broadcasts and the like. Google seems to think > > storing everything for search is okay, so you might be okay there... > > I'd guess we could implement a search feed without infringing > copyright. But in my experience they don't work too well, since you > really need to see the context in which a word was used to judge its > relevence - and showing the context in text would infringe. Once the iPlayer is up and running (again) then having the program name and an ofset would be useful. At what point would it be illegal to show the context? Would be wrong if the current sentence was use? The current paragraph? > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, > please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.9/622 - Release > Date: 10/01/2007 14:52 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.9/622 - Release Date: 10/01/2007 14:52 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
