RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Brian Butterworth wrote: The whole Astra 2D thing is a bit of a red herring. The Television Without Frontiers directive (89/552/EEC CHAPTER II, Article 2) allows for any terrestrial channel to be broadcast via satellite in Europe without encryption. There is no legal requirement for the broadcaster to use a tight beam. (*) Are you sure you have quoted the right directive Brian? I can't find any reference to terrestrial broadcasters. A brief summary of what section II article 2 of TVWF says is: Member states must ensure that broadcasters based within (or using satellite uplink or other frequencies within) their jurisdiction must comply with local laws. Also Member States are not allowed to block reception of other Member States' broadcasts being transmitted into their territory, or being retransmitted within their territory except under very special circumstances (such as protection of children). Anyone interested in the original can download the language and format of their choice here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31989L0552:E N:NOT My understanding of this (and IANAL) is that should a broadcaster broadcast content outside the territory they have licensed the content for, then they will be in breach of copyright or other laws in the Member State of transmission. Chapter 2 Article 2 of TVWF says the broadcaster must comply with the laws in the Member State of transmission, and so the broadcaster has to be prosecuted for this according to TVWF. So I don't see how TVWF would help a broadcaster legally beam their content unencrypted into a territory they do not have rights for. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Gareth, From what I remember (it was a while ago now), it is the bit about retransmission: Whereas the requirement that the originating Member State should verify that broadcasts comply with national law as coordinated by this Directive is sufficient under Community law to ensure free movement of broadcasts without secondary control on the same grounds in the receiving Member States; CHAPTER II General provisions Article 2 2. Member States shall ensure freedom of reception and shall not restrict retransmission on their territory of television broadcasts from other Member States for reasons which fall within the fields coordinated by this Directive. From what I recall, because no other member state has the right to block a broadcast from a member state, no member state is required to implement anything that can be used to block the reception of said services on behalf of another member state. Retransmission is of any service that is broadcast free-to-air in the member state. 2008/10/20 Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brian Butterworth wrote: The whole Astra 2D thing is a bit of a red herring. The Television Without Frontiers directive (89/552/EEC CHAPTER II, Article 2) allows for any terrestrial channel to be broadcast via satellite in Europe without encryption. There is no legal requirement for the broadcaster to use a tight beam. (*) Are you sure you have quoted the right directive Brian? I can't find any reference to terrestrial broadcasters. A brief summary of what section II article 2 of TVWF says is: Member states must ensure that broadcasters based within (or using satellite uplink or other frequencies within) their jurisdiction must comply with local laws. Also Member States are not allowed to block reception of other Member States' broadcasts being transmitted into their territory, or being retransmitted within their territory except under very special circumstances (such as protection of children). Anyone interested in the original can download the language and format of their choice here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31989L0552:EN:NOT My understanding of this (and IANAL) is that should a broadcaster broadcast content outside the territory they have licensed the content for, then they will be in breach of copyright or other laws in the Member State of transmission. Chapter 2 Article 2 of TVWF says the broadcaster must comply with the laws in the Member State of transmission, and so the broadcaster has to be prosecuted for this according to TVWF. So I don't see how TVWF would help a broadcaster legally beam their content unencrypted into a territory they do not have rights for. -- *Gareth Davis* | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division 8 http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ + 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Iain Wallace wrote: So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. In a sense, some of your money goes towards Channel 4 because they get free analogue spectrum in return for their public service responsibilities. Hard to say exactly what the value of that subsidy is. Whatever happened to backstage's OFCOM mole? Kevin. - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 Kevin Hinde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Iain Wallace wrote: So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. In a sense, some of your money goes towards Channel 4 because they get free analogue spectrum in return for their public service responsibilities. Hard to say exactly what the value of that subsidy is. This isn't strictly true. Channel 4 IS a public service broadcaster, has been since the first day.For this reason they were provided with the fourth UHF channel in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland by the Broadcasting Act 1980, and granted half a Freeview multiplex by the 1996 Act. Whatever happened to backstage's OFCOM mole? He got too senior a job there! Kevin. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth NEW LOOK! http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Doesn't the BBC also derive some of it's funding from non-license fee activities? If this is the case then C4 and the BBC are both indirectly funded by the tax payer and commercial activities although in different proportions and to a different scale. Since most residents are TV license payers and the vast majority of those will be UK tax payers, I think there should also be a similar campaign for non-DRM-encumbered output on C4 also :-) After all, national DTT muxes and UHF channels don't come cheap - if they were auctioned commercially to C4 I'm sure the gov't would make quite a large amount of money in the order of billions of £s. On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 11:12 +0100, Brian Butterworth wrote: 2008/10/17 Kevin Hinde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Iain Wallace wrote: So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. In a sense, some of your money goes towards Channel 4 because they get free analogue spectrum in return for their public service responsibilities. Hard to say exactly what the value of that subsidy is. This isn't strictly true. Channel 4 IS a public service broadcaster, has been since the first day.For this reason they were provided with the fourth UHF channel in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland by the Broadcasting Act 1980, and granted half a Freeview multiplex by the 1996 Act. Whatever happened to backstage's OFCOM mole? He got too senior a job there! Kevin. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth NEW LOOK! http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 Phil Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Doesn't the BBC also derive some of it's funding from non-license fee activities? If this is the case then C4 and the BBC are both indirectly funded by the tax payer and commercial activities although in different proportions and to a different scale. BBC Worldwide is forbidden to compete directly with BBC services, but it does flog lots of magazines and DVDs using BBC brands. The main BBC Worldwide activity in the UK is UKTV, home of Dave and Watch, Blighty and Alibi etc. This is 50% BBCWW and 50% Virgin Media. Dawkins knows why UKTV uses SSSL encryption on it's satellite services, free to air channels get all the viewers! Since most residents are TV license payers and the vast majority of those will be UK tax payers, I think there should also be a similar campaign for non-DRM-encumbered output on C4 also :-) After all, national DTT muxes and UHF channels don't come cheap - The new Discovery slot on Multiplex A is said to have cost between £10-£30m p/a to rent from SDN (or ITV plc as they are known). if they were auctioned commercially to C4 I'm sure the gov't would make quite a large amount of money in the order of billions of £s. Well, not billions. But if 1/8th of a multiplex is £20m p/a, that makes C4 statutory half of multiplex 2 worth around £80m a year. However, the coverage of Mux 2 is universal rather than commercial so this would shove the price up a bit. On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 11:12 +0100, Brian Butterworth wrote: 2008/10/17 Kevin Hinde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Iain Wallace wrote: So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. In a sense, some of your money goes towards Channel 4 because they get free analogue spectrum in return for their public service responsibilities. Hard to say exactly what the value of that subsidy is. This isn't strictly true. Channel 4 IS a public service broadcaster, has been since the first day.For this reason they were provided with the fourth UHF channel in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland by the Broadcasting Act 1980, and granted half a Freeview multiplex by the 1996 Act. Whatever happened to backstage's OFCOM mole? He got too senior a job there! Kevin. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth NEW LOOK! http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth 2008/10/17 Phil Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dawkins knows why UKTV uses SSSL encryption on it's satellite services, free to air channels get all the viewers! But not necessarily the money. There's a statistic I saw in the book Sky High - it's a couple of years old now so very out of date, but at that point (~1998) Sky One's revenue was derived 85% from subscription. The rest was a mixture of sponsorship and advertising. A popular channel on subscription can raise a reasonable amount of money that way. Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees.
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? -- Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? Sky effectively subsidise certain costs for (certain) subscription channels. - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Frank Wales wrote: Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? The same company provides EPG and encryption services, so if you buy both you get a discount. I don't know if this is still the case though, it's been a good few years since I've been privy to the commercials of running a Sky Digital channel. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Quoting Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? Sky give you a discount. -- ST [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Frank Wales wrote: Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? The same company provides EPG and encryption services, so if you buy both you get a discount. I don't know if this is still the case though, it's been a good few years since I've been privy to the commercials of running a Sky Digital channel. Given there are no companies that have both unencrypted and unencrypted channels on the EPG, it would still seem that rule is part of Sky's contacts... This is why, for example, Five can't just jump onto Freesat, because it has to do Fiver and Five US at the same time! -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Given there are no companies that have both unencrypted and unencrypted channels on the EPG, it would still seem th at rule is part of Sky's contacts... Sky have unencrypted and encrypted channels - Sky News is Free to Air :o) I'm also going to presume you meant subscription and non-subscription channels as well, as some regional variations of ITV1 are also encrypted because they don't sit on Astra 2D, and due to legacy contractual issues, there are free to air and free to view versions of some Channel 4 owned channels. I'm not entirely sure how much FTV channels (FTA and FTV could be said to be the satellite version of freedom of speech and beer :) have to pay for EPG fees, but they do have to pay for the encryption - when the BBC went in the clear, it saved enough money from not paying encryption, to pay for all the missing regional variations to be broadcast. This is why, for example, Five can't just jump onto Freesat, because it has to do Fiver and Five US at the same time! I suspect Five have a blanket deal that says all their channels are FTV - CHannel 4 certainly had something on those lines.
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 ST [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quoting Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Andrew Bowden wrote: Even for smaller channels, there are benefits to being encrypted, such as reduced EPG listing fees. It costs less to tell people about your programmes if you encrypt them? The reason being...? Sky give you a discount. The discount goes some way paying Sky back becuause they charge other broadcasters for providing the free dish and boxes. -- ST [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Brian Butterworth wrote: Given there are no companies that have both unencrypted and unencrypted channels on the EPG, it would still seem that rule is part of Sky's contacts... This is why, for example, Five can't just jump onto Freesat, because it has to do Fiver and Five US at the same time! I thought this was a simple case of capacity on Astra 2D. The rights agreements signed for the content on the 'five' channels would prevent it going FTA on the current transponders as they are on the 'south beam' that covers most of Europe. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Brian Butterworth Given there are no companies that have both unencrypted and unencrypted channels on the EPG, it would still seem th at rule is part of Sky's contacts... Sky have unencrypted and encrypted channels - Sky News is Free to Air :o) That simply points outs that Sky provides themselves unfair access and cross-subsidize their businesses! I'm also going to presume you meant subscription and non-subscription channels as well, as some regional variations of ITV1 are also encrypted because they don't sit on Astra 2D, and due to legacy contractual issues, there are free to air and free to view versions of some Channel 4 owned channels. Yes, Sky are actually encrypting the ITV channels for free. I'm not entirely sure how much FTV channels (FTA and FTV could be said to be the satellite version of freedom of speech and beer :) have to pay for EPG fees, but they do have to pay for the encryption - when the BBC went in the clear, it saved enough money from not paying encryption, to pay for all the missing regional variations to be broadcast. There is a public-domain document out there showing how Sky give significant discounts on the EPG to broadcasters using the encryption services from SSSL. I do know about the BBC stopping using encryption The odd thing for Sky is that as broadband speeds go up, satellite delivery for TV programmes looks like an out of date idea. This is why, for example, Five can't just jump onto Freesat, because it has to do Fiver and Five US at the same time! I suspect Five have a blanket deal that says all their channels are FTV - CHannel 4 certainly had something on those lines. -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/17 Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brian Butterworth wrote: Given there are no companies that have both unencrypted and unencrypted channels on the EPG, it would still seem that rule is part of Sky's contacts... This is why, for example, Five can't just jump onto Freesat, because it has to do Fiver and Five US at the same time! I thought this was a simple case of capacity on Astra 2D. The rights agreements signed for the content on the 'five' channels would prevent it going FTA on the current transponders as they are on the 'south beam' that covers most of Europe. The whole Astra 2D thing is a bit of a red herring. The Television Without Frontiers directive (89/552/EEC CHAPTER II, Article 2) allows for any terrestrial channel to be broadcast via satellite in Europe without encryption. There is no legal requirement for the broadcaster to use a tight beam. (*) I found about this from when I had a great drunken evening at an IBC in Amsterdam back in the 90s with some German broadcasters. What I learned at that BT-backed dinner saved the BBC £60m in the end! (**) It's not like the BBC couldn't allow five a slot on 2D for a short while is it? They have duplicated the BBC News channel on both 2A and 2D at the moment. Five is going to be on BBC multiplex 1 (or is it B) on Freeview in the switch-over regions in less than a fortnight in the Border region. (*) There's details about this in Greg Dykes BBC memoirs. (**) I worked for BT Broadcast Services - we provided most of the satellite capacity, terrestrial, uplinking, monitoring and switching services for UK broadcasters including the BBC and Sky. -- *Gareth Davis* | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division 8 http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ + 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. 'I have opened myself to charges of the most monstrous hypocrisy by championing open source and free software while simultaneously using proprietary systems here and there, hither and yon. I hold my hand up to the sin of being inconsistent – hypocrisy is going a bit far I think. I am no purist or fanatic when it comes to computing, software and the internet, or when it comes to anything, come to that: I like the idea of open source and free software, but I can't honestly find it in my heart to boycott any individual, company or consortium that patents its routines, algorithms, codes or protocols and chooses to make money from of its research, innovation and ingenuity. As in all things I'm a muddled, hand-wringing liberal who believes in a mixed economy. I don't think freedom is indivisible. I can contemplate regulation and entrepreneurialism, cooperatives and corporations, open source and proprietary systems all coexisting. In the end I like structures that are human-shaped, not idea-shaped and humans are great heaps of inconsistency, ambiguity and complexity. All I'm saying is that if you expect this to be a kind of Open Source madrassah you will be disappointed.' Which you can take also as an ad for http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=61 2008/10/15 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. Dave Personal opinion only. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Am I the only person in the world who finds Stephen Fry an unutterable bore? That is a lot of words to use to say Big Fat Nothing. Summed up better as I like the idea of free software but I basically can't be arsed putting myself to any inconvenience Hardly a groundbreaking position for all the talk of human shaped structures (really? did you have to?) As for freedom being divisible? It's too early in the morning for me to deal with that level of meaninglessness. grumpety, grump dee/ Deirdre Harvey :: Web Producer :: BBC Newsline :: Newsroom :: BBC Broadcasting House :: Ormeau Avenue :: Belfast BT2 8HQ :: ph. 02890 338264 http://bbc.co.uk/newsline From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 16 October 2008 07:19 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. 'I have opened myself to charges of the most monstrous hypocrisy by championing open source and free software while simultaneously using proprietary systems here and there, hither and yon. I hold my hand up to the sin of being inconsistent - hypocrisy is going a bit far I think. I am no purist or fanatic when it comes to computing, software and the internet, or when it comes to anything, come to that: I like the idea of open source and free software, but I can't honestly find it in my heart to boycott any individual, company or consortium that patents its routines, algorithms, codes or protocols and chooses to make money from of its research, innovation and ingenuity. As in all things I'm a muddled, hand-wringing liberal who believes in a mixed economy. I don't think freedom is indivisible. I can contemplate regulation and entrepreneurialism, cooperatives and corporations, open source and proprietary systems all coexisting. In the end I like structures that are human-shaped, not idea-shaped and humans are great heaps of inconsistency, ambiguity and complexity. All I'm saying is that if you expect this to be a kind of Open Source madrassah you will be disappointed.' Which you can take also as an ad for http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=61 2008/10/15 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. Dave Personal opinion only. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Brian Butterworth wrote: I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. Hear hear. :-) S - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Are you calling Stephen well covered? Rupert Watson +44 7787554801 www.root6.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Jolly Sent: 16 October 2008 09:02 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc Brian Butterworth wrote: I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. Hear hear. :-) S ROOT 6 LIMITED Registered in the UK at 4 WARDOUR MEWS, LONDON W1F 8AJ Company No. 03433253 - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM I don't think C4 have shareholders, they're a public broadcaster like the BBC (just advertising funded, not tax funded). IIRC, they were originally funded by what amounted to a tax on the ITV companies. This page http://www.channel4.com/about4/overview.html has this - The Corporation's board is appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free.
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM. You are a Channel 4 shareholder. In essence. Channel 4 is a publicly owned corporation, and as such, is owned by the population of the UK. It's just a public corporation which is currently not funded by taxation, and instead funded by advertising. That may, or may not, change in the future. - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. 'I have opened myself to charges of the most monstrous hypocrisy by championing open source and free software while simultaneously using proprietary systems here and there, hither and yon. I hold my hand up to the sin of being inconsistent – hypocrisy is going a bit far I think. I am no purist or fanatic when it comes to computing, software and the internet, or when it comes to anything, come to that: I like the idea of open source and free software, but I can't honestly find it in my heart to boycott any individual, company or consortium that patents its routines, algorithms, codes or protocols and chooses to make money from of its research, innovation and ingenuity. As in all things I'm a muddled, hand-wringing liberal who believes in a mixed economy. I don't think freedom is indivisible. I can contemplate regulation and entrepreneurialism, cooperatives and corporations, open source and proprietary systems all coexisting. In the end I like structures that are human-shaped, not idea-shaped and humans are great heaps of inconsistency, ambiguity and complexity. All I'm saying is that if you expect this to be a kind of Open Source madrassah you will be disappointed.' Which you can take also as an ad for http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=61 Great, but absolutely nothing to do with DRM. The post is in reference to his newly launched site which unlike the old one will be set up in order to generate revenue. If we all paid Stephen Fry a license fee and he'd suddenly started publishing his Podgrammes in DRM'd WMA then it would be a relevant comparison. Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM. On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am I the only person in the world who finds Stephen Fry an unutterable bore? That's entirely likely. He joined Twitter last week BTW and has been posting some great tweets from Africa so far, including a few pics of Rhinos etc. http://twitter.com/stephenfry Cheers, Iain - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Scot McSweeney-Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM I don't think C4 have shareholders, they're a public broadcaster like the BBC (just advertising funded, not tax funded). IIRC, they were originally funded by what amounted to a tax on the ITV companies. This page http://www.channel4.com/about4/overview.html has this - The Corporation's board is appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. This is entirely aside from the fact that DRM as a technology is moribund and I think it's very foolish for any company to invest seriously in it, especially one that is already broadcasting its content in a better format unencrypted and in a manner which is a lot harder to track than over IP. We already linked to XKCD in this thread didn't we? Oh yes, I see that we did :) - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Thanks for sending this - what a wonderfully eloquent and dignified response... ::: John O'Donovan ::: Chief Architect, BBC FMT Journalism ::: BBC Broadcast Centre ::: 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TS ::: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ::: http://www.bbc.co.uk http://www.bbc.co.uk/ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 16 October 2008 07:19 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. 'I have opened myself to charges of the most monstrous hypocrisy by championing open source and free software while simultaneously using proprietary systems here and there, hither and yon. I hold my hand up to the sin of being inconsistent - hypocrisy is going a bit far I think. I am no purist or fanatic when it comes to computing, software and the internet, or when it comes to anything, come to that: I like the idea of open source and free software, but I can't honestly find it in my heart to boycott any individual, company or consortium that patents its routines, algorithms, codes or protocols and chooses to make money from of its research, innovation and ingenuity. As in all things I'm a muddled, hand-wringing liberal who believes in a mixed economy. I don't think freedom is indivisible. I can contemplate regulation and entrepreneurialism, cooperatives and corporations, open source and proprietary systems all coexisting. In the end I like structures that are human-shaped, not idea-shaped and humans are great heaps of inconsistency, ambiguity and complexity. All I'm saying is that if you expect this to be a kind of Open Source madrassah you will be disappointed.' Which you can take also as an ad for http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=61 2008/10/15 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. Dave Personal opinion only. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Deirdre Harvey :: Web Producer :: BBC Newsline :: Newsroom :: BBC Broadcasting House :: Ormeau Avenue :: Belfast BT2 8HQ :: ph. 02890 338264 http://bbc.co.uk/newsline -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iain Wallace Sent: 16 October 2008 10:50 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am I the only person in the world who finds Stephen Fry an unutterable bore? That's entirely likely. :D Maybe I'm just prejudiced against National Treasures. He joined Twitter last week BTW and has been posting some great tweets from Africa so far, including a few pics of Rhinos etc. http://twitter.com/stephenfry Cheers, Iain - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thursday 16 October 2008 14:21:18 Andrew Bowden wrote: Nope. It's fully public - the Channel 4 Television Corporation officially. Ahh, maybe I'm thinking of a discussion in 2004 where it mooted having a share release then, leaving it at 51%. Obviously that never happened. Michael. -- http://www.kamaelia.org/Home - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. I wonder how one can best persuade the relevant people at the BBC to lay out, adopt and embrace a forward thinking strategy to allow end users to access any and all of their services using only free software... Ideas welcome Tim -- www.tdobson.net If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
I wonder how one can best persuade the relevant people at the BBC to lay out, adopt and embrace a forward thinking strategy to allow end users to access any and all of their services using only free software... I suspect that, for the most part, it isn't the BBC that you need to convince. Phil - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
Indeed I had been under the impression there was progress when Ashley Highfield told me last November that long-term, DRM should be open source or better yet, work should be done with rights holders to do away with DRM. In my conversations with people from PACT I got the distinct impression that they are not at all militant about DRM. What they are deeply concerned with are the livelihoods of content creators and maintaining a resemblance to the status quo where more popular content is remunerated in proportion. The BBC is perhaps uniquely qualified to sit down with PACT and the others and hammer out deals which are fair to both the licence fee payer and the creator. DRM is inherently unfair to the licence fee payer, in many cases infringing on users' rights; it is difficult and expensive to implement on common platforms, and even more so on all the others; and is easily defeated by the technically inclined while monstrously frustrating to everybody else. Years ago, the BBC convinced RealNetworks to issue a special version of their player. Adobe has just implemented Speex in Flash 10, it seems to me the BBC could also play a part in getting a free video codec into Flash which to my mind would certainly be a positive step. Isn't there anyone at the BBC willing to take that leadership role? Sean. On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. I wonder how one can best persuade the relevant people at the BBC to lay out, adopt and embrace a forward thinking strategy to allow end users to access any and all of their services using only free software... Ideas welcome Tim -- www.tdobson.net If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
…on any mobile device, set top box (STB), handheld, phone, web pad, tablet or Tablet PC (other than Windows XP Tablet PCEdition and its successors), game console, TV, DVD player, mediacenter (other than Windows XP Media Center Edition and itssuccessors), electronic billboard or other digital signage,internet appliance or other internet-connected device, PDA,medical device, ATM, telematic device, gaming machine, homeautomation system, kiosk, remote control device, or any otherconsumer electronics device, operator-based mobile, cable,satellite, or television system or other closed system device. So forget using it with any non-licensed Linux set top box or non-MS XBMC, Freevo etc. So blatantly pro-Microsoft :-| Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! Phil - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
2008/10/15 Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! The fact that this will run only with proprietary software is continuing the BBC's discriminatory policy against software freedom, and it must be stopped. Dave Personal opinion only. - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Phil Wilson wrote: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! My Linux box is PowerPC. But it is a great comfort to know that you can run it. - - Rob. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkj2Jg4ACgkQCZbRMCZZBfYM+ACgiuuTV9bih3imR2wRv00XKwJt 56IAoIHramhGZj8Tn1FF4hXI6T4N85Ib =7i8y -END PGP SIGNATURE- - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Tue Oct 14 11:32:36 2008, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: the backstage mailing list may be interested in these blog posts - please do leave your comments http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/digital_media_anywhere.ht ml http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/mobile_drm.html drm isn't going to go away - but we are doing our best! http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/digital_media_anywhere.html: Today, we are announcing that in partnership with Adobe we are building a platform-neutral download client. Using Adobe Integrated Runtime (AIR), Basing it on Adobe AIR is just as bad as having a proprietary BBC program running on a native Windows clone (e.g., WINE). AIR still does not support free software[1], and is as far from being platform independent as the current client is. I need to be a) running Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, or GNU/Linux, b) using an x86 compatible processor, c) using a 32‐bit (compatible) operating system. I can tell you I am not using any of the above; when will NetBSD on 64‐bit PowerPC running entirely free software be supported? I take it comes in any colour I like, as long as its black? these programmes are protected with DRM, but in a way that shouldn't affect your enjoyment of our programmes Playing devil’s advocate slightly here, but what if I enjoy watching programmes several years after they have aired? [1] Free as in freedom http://www.gnu.org/ -- Fred O. Phillips http://fophillips.org BBC7 7572 755F 83E0 3209 504A E4F7 874F 1545 9D41 pgp57DE5JFspM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 17:51 +0100, Fred Phillips wrote: Basing it on Adobe AIR is just as bad as having a proprietary BBC program running on a native Windows clone (e.g., WINE). AIR still does not support free software[1], and is as far from being platform independent as the current client is. I need to be a) running Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, or GNU/Linux, b) using an x86 compatible processor, c) using a 32‐bit (compatible) operating system. I can tell you I am not using any of the above; when will NetBSD on 64‐bit PowerPC running entirely free software be supported? I take it comes in any colour I like, as long as its black? these programmes are protected with DRM, but in a way that shouldn't affect your enjoyment of our programmes Playing devil’s advocate slightly here, but what if I enjoy watching programmes several years after they have aired? Even worse, AIR has the same restrictive EULA as flash which prohibits the use of AIR on: …on any mobile device, set top box (STB), handheld, phone, web pad, tablet or Tablet PC (other than Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and its successors), game console, TV, DVD player, media center (other than Windows XP Media Center Edition and its successors), electronic billboard or other digital signage, internet appliance or other internet-connected device, PDA, medical device, ATM, telematic device, gaming machine, home automation system, kiosk, remote control device, or any other consumer electronics device, operator-based mobile, cable, satellite, or television system or other closed system device. So forget using it with any non-licensed Linux set top box or non-MS XBMC, Freevo etc. So blatantly pro-Microsoft :-| - 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/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Tuesday 14 October 2008 11:58:09 Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: the backstage mailing list may be interested in these blog posts - please do leave your comments http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/digital_media_anywhere.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/mobile_drm.html drm isn't going to go away - but we are doing our best! For people who haven't seen this, today's xkcd seems serendipitous: * http://xkcd.com/488/ (not commenting on content beyond being serendipitous :-) Michael. - 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/
