On 03/04/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, of course. However, I said more people put the unDRMed file on the
torrents. The file without DRM will be easier to distribute, therefore
perhaps more people will.
Apart from the fact that once the DRM is stripped no one else has
Hi Jason!
On 15/06/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really don't want to get back into this :-)
I think this is important, and I hope you do too. So thanks for
contributing to the debate :-)
DRM is wrong. Pretty much anything that stops the free flow of
information and ideas
From a Canadian colleague
it looks like a CBC are now going to put DRM-free BitTorrent
distribution for a major prime-time show see the post
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9897923-7.html?tag=nefd.lede
Phil
2009/1/12 Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk:
Actually I do wonder if the itunes store going non-DRM will finally be
enough to convince copyright owners that releasing content under a licence
but with no DRM is a good thing for everyone involved?
I mean what other popular DRM is there now
Any DRM system will be hacked regardless of platform. GNU/Linux is no
exception.
Does that make any Linux DRM potentially any less secure than a
Windows version? I doubt it myself.
I totally agree, however I think spending money developing DRM is a waste of
licence payers money because
On 12/06/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah yes. An insecure-by-design DRM scheme. Well that's useful, isn't
it.
Can't be worse the defective by design DRM we have now
A Digital Rights Management system that doesn't actually allow
you to manage anything.
You've just
Wrong - the door is open with a welcome sign because all the progs are
broadcast first of all on TV without DRM. Adding DRM later on is just a
meaningless waste of money. If people want to get content online, they can
and they will.
This is irrelevant really because we're after a legal, long
This requires the BBC to develop an alternative DRM framework to enable
users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to access the
on-demand...
I'm now taking bets on how soon BBC DRM is cracked.
Seriously, do the people who wrote that paragraph seriously think that they
can better HD
Aleem B wrote:
(why is it so surpising that microsoft would prefer
DRM-free content).
Their prior actions, corporate culture, general technological
strategies, partnerships and regulatory environment.
And you have stripped the emphasis of the original. There is no evidence
that MS *have
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 13:19, Tim Dobson li...@tdobson.net wrote:
We'll have to see what happens, but it wouldn't surprise me if 2010 was
the year video DRM got dropped as DRM for audio and in music has been in
the last year or two...
I'm not that hopeful. I think the biggest driver behind
Circumventing DRM is explicitly permitted by law, for the purpose of
fair dealing. And penalties apply to those who attempt to use DRM to
prevent fair dealing.
http://www.gorila.hr/go/brazil-s-copyright-law-forbids-using-drm-to-block-fair-use_feeds_boingboing_net
http://www.myce.com/news/brazil
bit better than it did before,
but to give the best value it possibly can. It's not doing the best it
can, and this isn't good enough.
Obviously DRM free content is even better, but it's not feasible right
now.
It is feasible right now, for some content, if not all.
The sentiment here seems
Hi Jeremy,
From your first link:
This requires the BBC to develop an alternative DRM framework to enable
users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to access the
on-demand services.
They do realise that this will be virtually impossible, don't they? any
iPlayer client that offers
Hi Jeremy,
From your first link:
This requires the BBC to develop an alternative DRM framework
to
enable users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to
access the on-demand services.
They do realise that this will be virtually impossible, don't
that then there would be choice!
I think its a mistake to concentrate on choice: If that's what is
promoted, then we'll just get a cross platform DRM system, which will
be even worse, because even more people will get their freedom
trampled.
DRM is not acceptable, and no iPlayer is preferable
Actually I do wonder if the itunes store going non-DRM will finally be enough
to convince copyright owners that releasing content under a licence but with no
DRM is a good thing for everyone involved?
I mean what other popular DRM is there now? Windows media plays for sure?
-Original
MICROSOFT DRM? I would really like to know so I
can email my MEP about this matter. In case they want to add the BBC
as an accessory to whatever they are prosecuting Microsoft for today.
Or is it not in fact true that the rights holders would be happy with any DRM?
I believe the actual facts
On 13/03/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13/03/2008, Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i.e. have you found a BBC programme you'd like to watch which includes
the property of a
third-party and written to that third party petitioning them to re-think
their stance on DRM
MS has a lot of employees - many have never liked DRM, many would bet their
future on it. En-masse I thinkg MS tends towards the latter rather than the
former.
I don't think DRM will go away either but that doesn't mean I like it. If I
were a company seeking out to build a music player I
On Sunday 23 November 2008 21:07:04 Aleem B wrote:
one of the more amusing aspects about
that is that some people prefer DVD because it doesn't have any DRM.
...
DVDs are not DRM free.
Sigh. You obviously can't read. I said I found it amusing that people prefer
DVD because they says
I love how they make it sound like Apple's recent dumping of DRM was an
embrace of some form of DRM that would work on any and all devices:
Digital Rights Management (DRM), properly applied, also has a role (i.e.
where it allows users to access content on any device that they own, rather
than
Yes even the ones that that harp on
about DRM noon and night ;)
Actually the DRM discussions in recent weeks have been incredibly
stimulating and provocative and much appreciated inside BBC towers and I
hope for other subscribers. (I always knew I shouldn't try and make weak
jokes
On 03/04/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that many CDs have some form of DRM on them.
And that recently the publishers stopped putting DRM on CDs, because
they've realised that hurting their customers only hurts them.
--
Regards,
Dave
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion
On 25/06/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, because the DVB-T standard is open and anyone can build hardware or
software to it. MS DRM and KDM are not open standards, and anything that
glues standards together to create a vertically integrated product is, by
definition, only
http://www.betanews.com/article/Classical_music_joins_the_DRMfree_trend/1196714195
*Adding to the canon of DRM-free music, a Universal Music Group subsidiary
has made a large portion of its catalog of classical performances available
online free from digital rights protection.*
Today, a label
2009/6/18 Phil Lewis backst...@linuxcentre.net
This shouldn't be a problem from a rights perspective AFAIK. Currently
all web based iPlayer content (including the 3200 kbps HD streams) is
delivered without any DRM. RTMP is not DRM or content protection.
RTMP may not be DRM, but I it's close
On 2/9/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where did you get the idea that DRM is a benefit to the computer's owner?
If content-owners* require DRM to be able to release content for use on your
computer (currently the case in the BBC iPlayer, and/or Channel 4's
on-demand plater
Oh, and where did you get the idea that DRM is a benefit
to the computer's owner?
It's a benefit to me, in that I subscribe to an online music library for
less than I used to spend on CDs. I have more music, and more money - I
call that a benefit.
That requires neither treacherous
and collectively to an
extent greater than the BBC's negative market impact
This is a nice argument against BBC DRM, I think :-D
Let's not be un-necessarily emotive. There is no such thing as BBC DRM
The BBC is using DRM in the iPlayer. BBC DRM. I'm sorry if that was
unclear, and am not sure what you
On 12/06/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having never written or Product Managed the writing of a
reliable DRM
system
No one has ever and no one will ever write or Product Manage
the writing of a reliable DRM system.
There can never be such a thing.
Please don't be taken
Stephen Deasey wrote:
The BBC has many thousands of hours of programming which it holds
sufficient rights to enable it to published on the Internet, DRM-free.
If DRM is so distasteful, then why isn't this being done? Surely the
BBC should be taking steps to move towards a DRM-free world
On 16/06/07, mike chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the actual facts are...
1. Rights holders insist on time limited DRM solution.
2. Only Microsoft supports a time limited DRM.
3. Therefore, in order to conform to point 1, BBC have to use
Microsoft based DRM.
I accept axiom 1
to adondon DRM.
as you say, in 2003/4 rights holders in other media industries still
thought DRM would work
Many people who understood the nature of digital networks knew it
wouldn't work in 03/04, and now some rights holders have finally
listened to those people and given up with DRM.
In 03/04
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 15:00, Sean DALY sdaly...@gmail.com wrote:
David, I'm curious, what's your basis for asserting that FLOSS is
incompatible with DRM? Sun's Open Media Commons project is designed to
allow media playback restriction. OpenIPMP
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/openipmp
marketing manager Mike Seamons, charged with demonstrating the charms
of the Windows 7 version of Media Center, said that Microsoft has always
preferred DRM-free content, adding that the company nonetheless understands
the need for protections.
On Sunday 23 November 2008 09:36:41 Aleem B wrote
Shame; even thought I hate DRM, I know that PHBs love it, and if they cant work it, it means the Beeb might scram iMP :(On 13/11/05, Dave Whitehead
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems BBC may have a problem with the iMP trial,
apparently it's possible to get round the DRM thus taking away
The Trust will require the BBC Executive to adopt a platform-agnostic
approach within a reasonable timeframe. This requires the BBC to develop an
alternative DRM framework to enable users of other technology, for example,
Apple and Linux, to access the on-demand services.
Can anyone tell me
On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 20:07 +, vijay chopra wrote:
And I'm sure the proposal for Linux DRM will go down well in the
FLOSS community, as well as a lead balloon anyway.
Well, Linus seems to think it's OK...
http://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/2003042401126OSKNLL
I can see the slashdot
On 13/03/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remember we're in it for the long run... not the short hike.
Because the BBC is committed to DRM, this is scary.
--
Regards,
Dave
Personal opinon only.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
2008/4/25 Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Some DRM news, from the BBC:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/digitalp/digitalp_20080422-1232.mp3
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01
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!
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:18, Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.ukwrote:
I mean what other popular DRM is there now? Windows media plays for sure?
Audible.com still DRMs their audiobooks, in their own proprietary formats.
security through obscurity is no security still
holds (and is why even closed DRM has proven ineffective), it's hard to see
how FLOSS DRM would be in any way effective. At least with closed DRM, it
might take a little time to break.
While I can't see much argument for FLOSS DRM, I can see a lot
#FAIL
http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-freeview-allowed-to-use-drm-to-curtail-online-piracy/
http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-freeview-allowed-to-use-drm-to-curtail-online-piracy/Not
much of a shock really. Or much use for the stated purpose.
--
Brian Butterworth
follow me
OK, so the BBC has decided to use something more involved than a simple user
agent check to determine whether it will serve up standards compliant and non
DRM encumbered media to a client.
Fair enough. What I still find rather confusing is that, short of using
whatever DRM capabilities
DRM doesn't exist on my planet... but then nor does BBC TV
according to the BBC. Talk about restricting culture, it seems
at every level. I don't believe that DRM is to stop the customer
or help the original Rights owner. but it sure allows some
control factor from the distributor
Hi Jason!
On 03/04/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. However, I said
more people put the unDRMed file on the torrents. The file without DRM will be easier to
distribute, therefore perhaps more people will.
The point about this Apple/EMI deal is that they have costed
On 03/04/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 13:15 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote:
The point about this Apple/EMI deal is that they have costed out
thecost of non-DRM. This is very significant, and something
MilesMetcalfe suggested in the DRM Podcast.
The BBC
asta la vista DRM debate
I wouldn't be so sure about that; isn't there DRM in Flash video
streaming too?
sorry - you're right - flash streaming using flash media server can be DRM'd
Is the Flash iPlayer using flash media server with the DRM turned on?
I dunno - given Flash
On 13/12/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
asta la vista DRM debate
I wouldn't be so sure about that; isn't there DRM in Flash video
streaming too?
sorry - you're right - flash streaming using flash media server can be
DRM'd
Is the Flash iPlayer using flash media
And don't forget the 'OMA DRM 2' used by iPlayer mobile.
On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 12:25 +, Alan Pope wrote:
2009/1/12 Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk:
Actually I do wonder if the itunes store going non-DRM will finally be
enough to convince copyright owners that releasing content
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 10:19 +0100, mike chamberlain wrote:
1. Rights holders insist on time limited DRM solution.
2. Only Microsoft supports a time limited DRM.
3. Therefore, in order to conform to point 1, BBC have to use
Microsoft based DRM.
I would phrase it slightly differently.
1
Actually, lots of FLOSS code produces supersecure encryption; GnuPG for example.
Digital Restrictions Management of broadcast media is harder to do
than text messages or filesystem volumes.
Most commercial DRM developers don't give a hoot about GNU/Linux
platforms since marketshare is so small
this will thrive in the long term.
Redressing things in the discourse of corporate businesses, like this,
is okay, but can lead to nasty outcomes like thinking that DRM is
legitimate.
since when has a value chain been the discourse of corporate business?
Corporate businesses don't tend
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glyn Wintle
Sent: 24 January 2007 09:17
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] DRM
--- Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you come up with a solution to distribute content
and detects the watermarks in them so
that we can enforce the membership rules, then we could be a step closer
to an alternative to DRM.
Hmmm... I wouldn't get excited if I were you.
As Tom said on the blog post that was referenced from this thread
somewhere, it's the business models that need fixing
Tom Loosemore wrote:
Why would he agree to talk to groklaw about DRM if that wasn't his
intention? It's not like him saying no to their interview request
would have been hard... and rights holders do know how to share
links...
You will find if you spider the backstage blog etc that I actually
Aleem B wrote:
BBC is a public service so the issues don't really translate to
Microsoft/DRM which is inclined to support DRM so it can sign deals with
labels and sell their music players.
Unless the BBC uses MS solutions with their DRM systems that aren't turned off.
Which IIRC it did.
MS
The vast majority of users are quite happy to use the content as it's
provided, and have no problems doing that.
(I ask this politely) On what basis do you say that?
I don't know anyone who is happy with DRM. My 70 year-old neighbour refuses
to buy DRM material just on the principle that rights
All my personal point of view, as usual
Seriously guys why the need for DRM, I've only just reconciled myself
that I'm not going to get radio in ogg format, and will have to put up
with real player as long as I want Radio on demand; now this?!
Most BBC stations have a Windows Media stream
It depends what you mean by failed Fairplay (Apple's DRM) is
circumvented by simply burning your tracks to CD, then ripping to MP3.
I'd count that as a failed DRM mechanism, as it's essentially useless.
If the BBC implements DRM that's as good as Fairplay, I'll be happy
(as long
directly beneficial to the owner, and DRM is only one. In fact,
it's not the strongest use case in my opinion.
There's not a single benefit that treacherous computing brings that cannot
be solved another way, in your example you can hold secrets via any number
of numerous encryption methods, my home
Hi gang,
Completely the wrong list one imagines, but with all the current banter
about DRM, cross OS operability, etc etc, it reminds me that I'm yet to get
WMV files to play on my Mac. Specifically these new fangled WMV9/drm
protected thingybobs. Googling such seems to produce people wanting
in many
cases)
Can you provide references for how much more non-DRM publication costs
compared to DRM publication? Can you tell anonymised stories of what
ficticious rights holders told the BBC when the BBC approached them
about non-DRM publication? :-)
--
Regards,
Dave
-
Sent via
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 01:28 +0100, Christopher Woods wrote:
Nah, because the technology-friendly minority of the world's population will
figure out both how to crack the DRM, and how to produce one-click tools
which strip the DRM from crap-ridden files they've downloaded.
The world rejoices
Is this not what would happen with iPlayer? Hello Jim, I enjoyed Spooks
on
iPlayer last night, Really Jason? I'll go and watch that on my
iPlayer,
cable catchup, or whatever without the hassle of cracking the DRM out of
the
WMV file and working out how to get it off your computer via
I couldn't agree more. The problem seems to be that everyone has bought the
DRM snake oil, and no one is willing to admit they got it wrong. Indeed I'm
sure there are many people who still believe that DRM is the solution to a
problem*; and no one in the broadcasting industry seems to be capable
On Thursday 29 November 2007 10:32:36 David Greaves wrote:
So, should we DRM email programs?
Oh, I missed that. People do use DRM in email. Ian Forrester does for
example - he restricts your right to redistribute any email he sends you by
appending:
This e-mail is: [x] private; [] ask first
On 12/12/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/12/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/12/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
asta la vista DRM debate
I wouldn't be so sure about that; isn't there DRM in Flash video streaming
too?
sorry
We only have the BBC's word that the content providers have forced
them to develop iPlayer this way.
There is a built-in detection mechanism. We can ask the content producers.
Or just read the evidence they gave to MP's as part of the All Party
Internet Group's inquiry into DRM
PACT
I had some background discussions with PACT while preparing my
interview with Ashley and what I learned (unsurprisingly) is that
rights holders want to be compensated; the actual method is up for
discussion. They hear that DRM doesn't work or is ineffective, but
they don't see an alternative
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
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
http://www.betanews.com/article/Is_DRM_on_its_last_throes_at_last/1231547605
let's not miss the big picture. Look at the way Apple has deployed DRM --
not for piracy reasons but for pure anti-competition reasons. He cited code
in new Apple gadgetry that locks your new iPod to the iTunes file
Is DRM on it's last legs? Not according to this news story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7825428.stm
When we people learn that trying to stop people copying or playing
Audio/Video after a certain date is not possible due to Replay
Attack[1]?
I'm not sure whether they intend to deploy
Sean DALY wrote:
David, I'm curious, what's your basis for asserting that FLOSS is
incompatible with DRM? Sun's Open Media Commons project is designed to
allow media playback restriction. OpenIPMP
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/openipmp/) is not an active project
AFAIK, but it is Mozilla MPL
This is a bigger problem as iMP is using standard Microsoft WMA DRM
files. As this is widely used, there are more people interested in
bypassing the DRM system, and so eventually it will always be bypassed,
plus its created by Microsoft.
Other codecs are less widely used and known about, so
--- Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you come up with a solution to distribute content
that satisfies all
the requirements of the relevant rights holders then
there is whole
industry of people willing to give you money.
Otherwise, its Windows
Media Player DRM all the way if you
]Those watching the DRM debate will be interested to see the latest music
industry developments which will presumably set the precedent for download
video bus models.
Last week's Music Week (the weekly UK music industry trade paper) led with the
headline reporting from Midem (the annual
execs at the expense of the general public. Besides, the BBC's job
isn't t satisfy Media execs, it's to satisfy licence fee payers, and pouring
money down a DRM drain won't satisfy anyone. It won't satisfy us because of
the DRM, when thee DRM is cracked the media execs will cease being
satisfied
Greetings,
Interesting discussion - primarily useful for the we don't have the rights
arguments that haven't been effectively aired until now.
The reason for using DRM has often been stated thus:
* We need to prevent our users from re-distributing content that we feed them.
However, it now
On 2/13/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is all my personal opinion.
Yes we (me, and it seems most of the list) know DRM is evil. However - in
this case DRM is enabling people to view the content and making it MORE
accessible. Perhaps the industry will change and we'll see
I think the whole discussion about alternative business models and even
philosophical discussions about the nature of copyright are irrelevant
and counterproductive. You don't need to be a revolutionary to observe
that DRM is worthless and causes far more pain to consumers than the
supposed
On 16/06/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many media industry professionals are on record stating their believe
that DRM can work to halt unauthorised sharing,
Many? Links please.
AFAIK bypassing DRM or other copy protection is perfectly legal in the UK
and most of Europe; afterall, in itself it's not a breech of copyright.
Thankfully we don't have an equivilent of the American DCMA so the media
centre hackers have nothing to fear.
(Disclaimer: IANAL)
Vijay.
On 18/06
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely is fit for purpose and actually works now is a requirement. And
all three fail dismally.
A requirement of what?
To disprove the statement there is no Open Source DRM then all that
is needed is one open source drm, Mr Highland
But how is the BBC protecting rights holders when it has online video
instructions telling you how to record progs without any DRM protection.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07 March 2008 15:52
To: backstage
Till then, I would suggest you don't do anything your mother wouldn't be
happy about.
I take it that isn't legal advice... :)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Hannen
Sent: 11 March 2008 00:20
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer, DRM, Free Software and the iPhone
My mum too - she keeps telling me that I should encourage
Quoting Ian Partridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
One thing I've always found unconvincing is the way the BBC bleats
but the production companies won't let us distribute the content
DRM-free!. The BBC has major clout - it could say from now on, all
production contracts we sign HAVE to allow DRM-free
Tim Dobson wrote:
The default Maemo browser is essentially Firefox 3.5+ which supports
video / (not natively H.264 though, but that's a different debate).
With regards to DRM, well, I think some people are generally coming
round to the idea that it may not be the be all and end all.
We'll
Here is episode 2:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/nov/14/bbc-hd-drm
TL;DR?
Cory Doctrow:
The Guardian just published an investigative piece I wrote about the
BBC's successful petition to cripple its public broadcasts with DRM.
Nearly everyone who commented on the proposal
Hi,
A very interesting interview - many thanks to Backstage and Ashley. A few
thoughts:
* It seems clear that all of the portability issues currently affecting the
iPlayer beta are a direct result of the requirement for DRM specified at the
design stage.
If the DRM constraint _were_ relaxed
I think this is blurring the line between what constitutes DRM and
what constitutes a proprietary streaming protocol. The article doesn't
really go into any technical detail about what they're referring to,
but I take it they're referring to RTMP. This isn't DRM as the files
inside the protocol
On 01/03/2008, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is NOT to replace HTTP delivery in order to enforce DRM in the flash
player.
It is! :-)
As far as the flash player goes, this FMS 3 requirement is only
about streaming MP4 container (h264/aac) into the flash player as detailed
Does it in any way run counter to Microsoft's statement that they prefer
DRM-free content? Microsoft has a tainted history of bugs around DRM
(possibly even reason enough them the skip it altogether). The point,
however, is that Microsoft has little to gain from DRM but that's
Hello
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6353889.stm
DRM software like Apple's Fairplay or Microsoft's Windows Media DRM
should properly be called digital restriction management, since its primary
goal is to limit what purchasers can do with downloaded content. (from
Bill Thompson)
Isn't
At 15:56 + 20/2/07, Matthew Cashmore wrote:
Sorry this took longer than planned but the video of the DRM Podcast
is now available - the low quality version is here
http://blip.tv/file/152907http://blip.tv/file/152907
Again it's a Creative Commons Attribution licence.
One small step
Just to keep Auntie on her toes, another company has
decided to not bother with wasteful DRM:
Video content has developed pretty differently from music ... I
wouldn't hold the two in parallel right now, [Steve Jobs] said.
http://media.guardian.co.uk/newmedia/story/0,,2048507,00.html
Hi Tim!
On 03/04/07, Tim Cowlishaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in areas of the
world where internet access is not yet as common as here, DRM is much more
prevalent, as they are attempting to lock down the recorded music market
*before* pervasive internet access becomes a problem
1 - 100 of 1208 matches
Mail list logo
