On 22-Jan-2010, at 19:42, Kieran Kunhya wrote: >> Well, it would, and that's the easiest way to make the >> point about it. >> The fact it'll affect people running MythTV et al >> themselves *as well* >> is less of a concern for them (or the BBC). >> > > What I mean is most (all?) the complaints before were from people wanting to > watch on a Linux PC.
Er, no they weren’t. > Low cost Chinese knockoff STBs won't care about the Freeview logo and will > just get the codes from whoever reverse engineers them. Low-cost imported STBs weren't the concern, particularly. > IANAL but there are also reverse engineering exemptions for interoperability > purposes. (made stronger by the non-commercial use) I honestly dread the hoops (not to mention time and money) you’d have to jump through before this became a certainty one way or the other :\ > The silly thing is this isn't going to deter anyone. Cheap boxes with reverse > engineered codes will soon roll off the factory line in China. Again DRM is > just affecting ordinary people wanting to record things for personal use. > Nobody is going to replace all their devices at home with HDCP compatible > ones. This is like Adobe's RTMP "DRM" which is just gives content providers a > nice walled garden feeling in spite of the RTMP passkey being the phrase > "Adobe Flash". ^^ with this bit, we are in complete agreement :) 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/[email protected]/
