> > Restricting the availability of the BBC downloaded version > allows them > > to do that. If a BBC downloaded version was available to > all forever, > > it would destroy their commercial exploitation online. So > to restrict > > the availability, you /currently/ need Windows DRM. > And why could the BBC not develop an openly specified DRM. It > would be able to support _any_ restrictions they want and it > is ridiculously simple. > I have stated this before, but there is no reason why you > can't represent restrictions in XML and tag it before the > media file. Simply have the player parse the XML (not > difficult, there are libraries for this libxml for instance)
I have no involvement on iPlayer so I don't know their logic and their reasoning. What I know is that it's a huge project within the BBC, and because it's so big, they've decided to take a phased approach to the delivery of that project. Rightly so. A phased delivery naturally means that not all features are going to be available in the first release. Which will disappoint people (including incidentally, quite a lot of people who work on the project!) Part of my job is making similar (abliet smaller) decisions myself. I've had to make calls to prospone things I really want built straight away. And it's annoying because you know you will never please everyone. Someone is going to stand there and say - why didn't you do X? And the only answer is, litterally, that we didn't do X because we decided that doing A,B,C,F,Y,U and Q was more important at the time, for Z, P and $ reasons. > The BBC is claiming it could take over 2 years to do this. > This is complete rubbish. Having never written or Product Managed the writing of a reliable DRM system, I couldn't possibly comment on timescales I'm afraid. Nor can I answer why it would take two years to build such a system. I'm not sure that something that was robust and scalable to millions of users could be created in a couple of days though. For starters, it may need a couple of days development, but you'd also need a couple more days for testing! Then you'd need to write the code to implement the DRM mechanism into the player application. And test that. And so on. Slowly but surely you go from a couple of days to a couple of weeks. Then maybe someone comes up with a new feature, and that adds a couple more days which becomes a couple more weeks. And then you're into months... Maybe years. I don't know how the 2 year figure came about, but based on my own experience, I can imagine! > > So whilst rights holders wouldn't have insisted on Windows > > DRM, they > > have got Windows DRM because it does what the rights holders want. > So it _is_ the BBC who make it only work on a single platform Yes. By the default of there only being one DRM system currently on the market that can be used. > > [1] I read somewhere that ITV will be getting round this > > whole issue > > by streaming content rather than allowing download. Don't know how > > true that is. > I doubt that. The bandwidth would cost ITV a fortune. Then > there is the fact that many people don't have connections > fast enough to actually stream full screen high quality video. I'm sure it will cost them a fortune. And I've just found the link of the site where I read it. http://informitv.com/articles/2007/05/01/itvrevealsextensive/ > So BBC what _are_ the restrictions that the "content producers" want? > There is no reason not to tell us, unless you are hiding something? The PACT terms of trade are available online somewhere. It's really not my area - I just product manage interactive TV applications and the project development. It's an interesting job, but doesn't help me answer all questions on all areas :) - 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/[email protected]/
