On 29/10/2007, David McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * From the interview, it is clear that the reason that the current DRM > requirements exist is because rights-holders did not want the end-user the to > be > able to redistribute content to others
Asking people to agree not share with friends and betray their community is evil :-( > * Rights buy-outs: it's not necessary to buy out the rights to putting on live > shows, publishing books and many of the other functions mentioned by Ashley in > the podcast in order to set up a functional, DRM-free iPlayer service. > > Moreover, his assertion that all of the downstream rights - for books and so > forth - would become worthless if the shows themselves could be readily > downloaded seems dubious. I guess there is confusion with the issues associated with the Creative Archive. > * One of the things Ashley talks about is a potential new future distribution > model which he hopes that technology will enable the publication of content > "with no DRM" -- but distributed in an "intelligent wrapper" that is able to > enforce a set of rules for how it should behave. > > I think someone needs to tell Ashley that the mythical future technology he's > describing _is_ what the rest of us would call DRM! Speechless. -- Regards, Dave All my own opinion here, nothing reflects the views of any employers in any way. - 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]/
