On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:43, David Tomlinson <d.tomlin...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> They don't want an open market, they have enjoyed a monopoly through > broadcasting (limited bandwidth/broadcasters) and through copyright. > > They don't wish this to change. Regardless of the potential of new > technology for increasing the public utility. (Gains for the public). Not quite what I meant by “open market”. There was never a requirement in the past for CE makers to join logo/licensing programmes to ensure their kit worked—they just followed the specs. That wasn’t limited to CE makers, either, which is how things like MythTV came to exist. FTA isn’t that “anybody can receive the broadcasts [if they buy from one of our approved manufacturers]” it’s “anybody can receive the broadcasts provided what they have adheres to the open specs”. > If the HD signal is encrypted or licenced, then this can carry over to the > Internet where simulcasts, would be encrypted or otherwise restricted. It’s harder when you’ve got Internet-based delivery, because you have to hand over both the crypto mechanism and the decryption key to something which is primarily under user control—it’s not a “black box” in the same way that an STB or TV is. But, it’s not something those doing Internet-based delivery don’t often attempt to do (look at iPlayer Desktop, for example). M. - 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/
