On 14/03/2008, Tom Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > cos the start was in 2003/4, at which point in time the world looked > > > very different to both the BBC and to rights holders > > > > > > Really? The world looked the same to me then, except that the other > > media industries were yet 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 BBC appeared to be know DRM is bankrupt, but spinelessly failed to defend the freedom of the British public. As the evidence mounts up, will it make real efforts to do so? Or will it act to silence people who make efforts to defend their own freedom to, as Iain says, watch digital video on his TV? > > a Director handwaving about "in > > an ideal world..." shows how little clue he has about the real world > > of free software; > > The BBC policy is that DRM and proprietary software are desirable. > > That appears to be entrenched. > > Have you read the groklaw interview, Dave? Do you think a Director of > the BBC would say that kinda stuff to a website who was going to > publish it in perpetuity without wishing to signal a change in policy? Sure - why wouldn't he want that kind of publicity for... > Why would he agree to talk to groklaw about DRM if that wasn't his > intention? ...the tech equivalent of greenwashing? That kind of thing is a well known and simple PR exercise in muffling dissent. > It's not like him saying no to their interview request His silence was drawing increasing criticism, so saying "no" would not have been strategic. > I don't see how the policy laid out in > http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071118205358171 > squares with your assertion that current BBC policy is that "DRM is > desirable" - unless I've missed some more recent statement, which is > quite possible. If DRM isn't desirable, why has the BBC made it stronger this week? > > From my perspective, the BBC is facing one way and talking about "in > > an ideal world" and "open innovation" while making large, definite > > steps and official statements of policy in the other direction. > > what, "large definite steps" that result in someone called Dave > Crossland writing a blog post entitled "BBC iPlayer now DRM Free!" ? You'll note that the body of the post is about the BBC's ability to turn on DRM means "that may not last." Large definite steps being making DRM stronger this week, and issuing a vaguely threatening official statement to news vendors that innovating around BBC iPlayer will be "taken seriously." > I'm quite ready to accept that I could well be wrong - that the BBC > could in future decide to put DRM onto its flash streams, and could in > future shift to a yet-to-be-announced iPhone DRM "solution". > > But right now I've got access to a non-DRM'd BBC programmes on my > mac. And I've got a clear policy laid out in writing from the relevent > BBC director stating the BBC's desire to drop DRM. I'd call that > progress, albeit too slow for my liking. A chat on Groklaw is nowhere near "clear policy" and you may hae non-DRM access today, but will you in 6 months? I don't think so :-( -- Regards, 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/[email protected]/
