RE: [backstage] Psiphon
From P Edwards (Monday, November 27, 2006 11:19 PM): I think it is pretty laughable :-) I am very happy to pay for quality and expensive programming, but being censored from the same, just because of a legal precedent, is almost the ultimate insult, especially if one does have a UK TV license. In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal department about a month to change the contracts for content production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and white TV. Probably less time, but I guess the problems isn't that the Beeb can't find the time for contract-updating. I imagine every recording has associated contracts and releases, and often after the initial broadcast and an agreed number of re-broadcastings, the artist release evaporates, and the rights revert to the performers. I can hear the voices of resistance still. There is absolutely no reason not to Hosting all that media, not to mention distributing it at a reasonable rate, is not going to be cheap. So where exactly did all this locking out and streaming certain content to certain places come from? Big brother? :-) It certainly annoyed me when in Cologne: I could watch Planet Earth but not the website. On the other hand, I would be more annoyed if, after paying my TV Tax/Licence, I couldn't watch the website because the bandwidth is consumed by people outside the UK who don't pay for it. Maybe that's selfish of me :) How about leading the way with both feet in to a new world of a really universal BBC on the net, with none of the boundaries? The opposite to the TV world. To be fair, it is the British Broadcasting Corporation, not Universal ;) Flippant, but I do think that it is not the job of the British Broadcasting Corporation to be addressing the world (save the World Service, World news channel): rather, shouldn't Auntie be taking care of broadcasting to the British people? I'm sure that a way could be programmed to reverse Psiphon or the like, with something like real-time P2P to distribute the feeds via a massive server of trusted associates, now that would be exciting. Doesn't P2P tend to distribute the lowest common denominator? So it'd still be hard to find my little history documentaries online. I'll pay and deliver, how's that? I hope that the future is MAC addresses, not IP's. It's much easier to spoof a MAC address than an IP address, though. Lee I rather like Mark Thompson Goddard Not a BBC Employee - 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/
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal department about a month to change the contracts for content production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and white TV. I reckon many people in the BBC would like to be in your hallucination! Alas the world of legal issues can take months, sometimes years to sort out - one only has to look at the case of BBC7 which had to launch with a limited set of programmes on pretty heavy rotation for several months whilst negotiations took place with various parties which would finally allow the channel to replay the much wider variety of programmes that it does now. And that was mostly programmes made in-house - programmes made by independent production companies are even more problematical. The BBC may pay for a programme from an indie, but the rights it has over a programme are surprisingly limited because the indie has the right to commercially exploit the programme after (IIRC) six months in the UK. And of course there's international sales... It's a huge cultural mindshift across the entire, global industry to make. That's the kind of thing that's going to take time. I can hear the voices of resistance still. And all that is before you've even got to the public viewpoint - it doesn't take much digging on message boards to find a band of people who are completely opposed to anything that is paid for by the license fee, being made available outside the UK. bbc.co.uk included. And that's an even bigger challenge! Just me 2p's worth :) - 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/
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
On the other hand, UKTV is part (50%?) owned by the BBC, so there *are* new ways the Beeb can work, and the Beeb is capable of finding them. Which is a bit of a surprise, but a pleasant one. -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio * Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · * 020 776 50849 ? lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk - 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/
[backstage] Enquiry about commerical use of BBC News RSS data
Hello All, I was wondering if anyone knows a contact at the BBC that I could make enquires about commercial use of the RSS news data. I've noticed one or two commercial products out there that include the BBC's news feeds and wondered how they went about getting approval. Thanks in advance, James Brook
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
Hi Lee, I accept your points, at the same time though, the British are being sold on this idea of privacy with a number, an ID number. Well, as a public Corporation the BBC could reverse that thinking and treat us all as UK residents wherever we are in the world already.. it is still far easier to find people that you can trust, than to be weighed down by the thoughts of people that you cannot. That is pandering to the lowest common denominator. The benefits far out-weigh the negatives for a closer social community. I think it is a shame that all that power goes to support the tiny worse case scenario. As far as I am aware, every song on TOTP up until 1983 was re-recorded so that the BBC owned the rights of broadcast in the charter it clearly states that the BBC must distribute its content to the UK public. so where is all that music that I payed for :-) I am sure that similar can be said for BBC TV. All they would have to do is say publically that such and such a show was going to be aired on the net, in not best quality, and that the original producer would be payed X. If he doesn't agree - fine - but right now is anyone asking that question? If you can see a matrix of good honest people, the vast majority, across the planet, all UK residents if you want, all hosting bits of a show and streaming it, then the BBC doesn't have to host anything. it simply has to control the first issue and the delivery mechanism. Which is exactly what it is trying to do now along with Sky, ITV etc. The first lines do not have political leanings, please excuse me if it comes across that way. I am not interested in negative or political social engineering, but take a look, the fact is that it is happening all around us right now. Richard On Tuesday, November 28, 2006, at 09:52AM, Lee Goddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From P Edwards (Monday, November 27, 2006 11:19 PM): I think it is pretty laughable :-) I am very happy to pay for quality and expensive programming, but being censored from the same, just because of a legal precedent, is almost the ultimate insult, especially if one does have a UK TV license. In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal department about a month to change the contracts for content production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and white TV. Probably less time, but I guess the problems isn't that the Beeb can't find the time for contract-updating. I imagine every recording has associated contracts and releases, and often after the initial broadcast and an agreed number of re-broadcastings, the artist release evaporates, and the rights revert to the performers. I can hear the voices of resistance still. There is absolutely no reason not to Hosting all that media, not to mention distributing it at a reasonable rate, is not going to be cheap. So where exactly did all this locking out and streaming certain content to certain places come from? Big brother? :-) It certainly annoyed me when in Cologne: I could watch Planet Earth but not the website. On the other hand, I would be more annoyed if, after paying my TV Tax/Licence, I couldn't watch the website because the bandwidth is consumed by people outside the UK who don't pay for it. Maybe that's selfish of me :) How about leading the way with both feet in to a new world of a really universal BBC on the net, with none of the boundaries? The opposite to the TV world. To be fair, it is the British Broadcasting Corporation, not Universal ;) Flippant, but I do think that it is not the job of the British Broadcasting Corporation to be addressing the world (save the World Service, World news channel): rather, shouldn't Auntie be taking care of broadcasting to the British people? I'm sure that a way could be programmed to reverse Psiphon or the like, with something like real-time P2P to distribute the feeds via a massive server of trusted associates, now that would be exciting. Doesn't P2P tend to distribute the lowest common denominator? So it'd still be hard to find my little history documentaries online. I'll pay and deliver, how's that? I hope that the future is MAC addresses, not IP's. It's much easier to spoof a MAC address than an IP address, though. Lee I rather like Mark Thompson Goddard Not a BBC Employee - 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/ - 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/
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
I would love to see the BBC reverse its thinking and engage us, as the public, in allowing much more access, even if they have to pressure government to change the law. There is nothing to fear :-) oh we know that - honestly, we really do. we're in the business of maximising the value our programmes offer the public, which in many (but not all) cases equates to maximising access to them this principle is accepted, hell, no, it's embraced by the BBC now. but messy reality swiftly intrudes. Our rights holders (the people who actually own the programmes we broadcast), and our regulators / competitors take a bit more persuading ... which takes time, given there can be dozens of different rights holding bodies, and hundreds of individual rights holders in just one programme. And other commercial broadcasters fear the BBC will set a 'free' price point in the minds of consumers at which point it potentially limits their business models. (personally, i think there's always been free and paid for, but hey, i'm biased) so the BBC's job is to persuade rights holders and competitors whose livelihoods are based on the existing model that a new model is better - better for them, not you... given that sports rights maximise their revenue by selling rights on a region by region basis right now, it's highly improbable that the sports rights model will change any time soon. you simply cannot buy global internet rights to high-profile soccer/cricket/the olympics, and even if you could, i don't think it'd offer most licence fee payers value for money to offer it to the rest of the world for free, given the premium we'd need to pay for global rights.. If it costs us x amount more to buy the rights to allow download of our programmes than it costs us to broadcast them at present, is it good value for money to buy download rights now? When only 10% of internet users are regularly watching video on the web, and only 75% of the population online - so the premium we'd pay would only add value to a small percentage of licence fee payers. Now those numbers are changing all the time, and so is the premium we'd have to pay, and the bbc's job is to drive innovation, but my point is that it's a question of value (and hence timing), not principle. that battle is won. moving at all is decidedly non-trivial given the uncertainty over business models - rights holders are scared about all the uncertainty, and thus are not generally minded to agree to anything that might compromise a future, as yet unidentified revenue stream. fundamentally, it's all about the cost of rights. the tech bit is the easy part - 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/
Re: [backstage] Enquiry about commerical use of BBC News RSS data
Hi James As a first port of call, contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] - she'll point you in the right direction. Bests -Tom On 28/11/06, James Brook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello All, I was wondering if anyone knows a contact at the BBC that I could make enquires about commercial use of the RSS news data. I've noticed one or two commercial products out there that include the BBC's news feeds and wondered how they went about getting approval. Thanks in advance, James Brook - 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/
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
Hi Lee I'm probably one of the top brass to which you refer, and I can assure you there's no selling of soul planned... ;o) Like I say, the tech side is the easy bit, and is getting easier by the month. Aside from the lng process of gaining formal regulatory permission, there are two interrelated really hard ugly issues wrt releasing the archive: Metadata and rights. We'll try to start fix the former using the programme catalogue, once it relaunches (soon... soon... urgh...) http://open.bbc.co.uk/catalogue/infax/ Bests -Tom On 28/11/06, Lee Goddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Richard, I appreciate the time you took on that, and that you didn't take my early-morning tappings the wrong way. Yes, of course you are right: one of my current nags is the Beeb's concentration on Sky and comparative ignorance of Freeview and Media Centre What it really comes down to, I imagine, is pragmatics forced by financial considerations. The BBC are trying to find a way of releasing the archive, and I know that members of the top brass are consulting with the likes of Google, MSN, big VCs. I imagine the eventual outcome will be that a Blue Chip partnership will provide servers and bandwidth in exchange for ... our very souls. Or the right to incorporate the BBC-branded content into their MCE-friendly services. I hope that those in Beeb involved realise the power the BBC with this content, and don't undersell themselves or do something silly like sell everything off and then lease it back... Whatever happens, there will be a torrent or two -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio * Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · * 020 776 50849 ? lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Edwards Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:49 AM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Psiphon Hi Lee, I accept your points, at the same time though, the British are being sold on this idea of privacy with a number, an ID number. Well, as a public Corporation the BBC could reverse that thinking and treat us all as UK residents wherever we are in the world already.. it is still far easier to find people that you can trust, than to be weighed down by the thoughts of people that you cannot. That is pandering to the lowest common denominator. The benefits far out-weigh the negatives for a closer social community. I think it is a shame that all that power goes to support the tiny worse case scenario. As far as I am aware, every song on TOTP up until 1983 was re-recorded so that the BBC owned the rights of broadcast in the charter it clearly states that the BBC must distribute its content to the UK public. so where is all that music that I payed for :-) I am sure that similar can be said for BBC TV. All they would have to do is say publically that such and such a show was going to be aired on the net, in not best quality, and that the original producer would be payed X. If he doesn't agree - fine - but right now is anyone asking that question? If you can see a matrix of good honest people, the vast majority, across the planet, all UK residents if you want, all hosting bits of a show and streaming it, then the BBC doesn't have to host anything. it simply has to control the first issue and the delivery mechanism. Which is exactly what it is trying to do now along with Sky, ITV etc. The first lines do not have political leanings, please excuse me if it comes across that way. I am not interested in negative or political social engineering, but take a look, the fact is that it is happening all around us right now. Richard On Tuesday, November 28, 2006, at 09:52AM, Lee Goddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From P Edwards (Monday, November 27, 2006 11:19 PM): I think it is pretty laughable :-) I am very happy to pay for quality and expensive programming, but being censored from the same, just because of a legal precedent, is almost the ultimate insult, especially if one does have a UK TV license. In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal department about a month to change the contracts for content production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and white TV. Probably less time, but I guess the problems isn't that the Beeb can't find the time for contract-updating. I imagine every recording has associated contracts and releases, and often after the initial broadcast and an agreed number of re-broadcastings, the artist release evaporates, and the rights revert to the performers. I can hear the voices of resistance still. There is absolutely no reason not to Hosting all that media, not to mention distributing it at a reasonable rate, is not going
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
I see your 'written by a Torrent site' and raise you a 'written by a broadcaster' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6168950.stm Some 43% of Britons who watch video from the internet or on a mobile device at least once a week said they watched less normal TV as a result. Sigh. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester Sent: 27 November 2006 18:24 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Psiphon Its certainly interesting. Something I was reading the other day http://torrentfreak.com/downloading-tv-shows-leads-to-more-tv-watching/ Earlier this month we estimated that almost a million viewers get their latest Lost episode through BitTorrent. TV broadcasters are now beginning to realize that making shows available for download is helping their business, instead of hurting it. CBS's chief research officer David Poltrack said that online distribution services like YouTube and BitTorrent are friends, not foes. Poltrack is not too keen on the paid distribution model iTunes offers right now. He thinks that TV shows should be available for free via ad-supported models. In a panel discussion at the Future of Television Forum Poltrack said that if [consumers] are going to steal it, give it to them anyway. But also make it easier to access and present it better than YouTube or BitTorrent or anywhere else. :) Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || x83965 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard P Edwards Sent: 27 November 2006 18:07 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Psiphon I believe that the music market place has already answered your question Ian. The only successful new model allows the customer to use any authorised device to play the downloaded music on. therefore quelling a few of the customers complaints, but still not going far enough. If I can already watch content on my computer, then the BBC has to acknowledge that the same computer can travel with me, so using Geo IP becomes a censorship which I will either find a way around, or go and view someone else's content. As is mentioned on today's News site, perhaps the real debate should therefore be the other way around, how does the BBC keep its viewers. and why is there so much fear about losing content, when as soon as it appears on TV it is effectively sold anyway? I agree with Ricky Gervais, I don't think that a program loses its value just because someone can download it. In fact, if it is good enough then it finds a larger market place. I understand the law completely, but as has also been affected today, perhaps the thinking of the suits is slightly out of touch where copyright is concerned. :-) I would love to see the BBC reverse its thinking and engage us, as the public, in allowing much more access, even if they have to pressure government to change the law. There is nothing to fear :-) On 27 Nov 2006, at 16:01, Ian Forrester wrote: Alright alright, I walked into the last two comments :) But its certainly an interesting debate, what would (we) the BBC do if Geo IP was so easily passed. And what would you do if it was so easy? I thought this might be amusing for some. http://blogs.opml.org/tommorris/ 2006/11/27#obviousTruthsForIdiotsInSuits Specially this line - Television isn't dead yet. But, for me, it's lying on the ground wounded. Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || x83965 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jakob Fix Sent: 27 November 2006 14:54 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Psiphon On 11/27/06, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What happens when setting up a proxy service is as easy as running an application and using one is as easy as typing in a url? isn't that what Torpark is all about? http://www.torrify.com/ -- Jakob. - 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/ - 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/ - 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/ - 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/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
On 28/11/06, Kim Plowright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see your 'written by a Torrent site' and raise you a 'written by a broadcaster' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6168950.stm Some 43% of Britons who watch video from the internet or on a mobile device at least once a week said they watched less normal TV as a result. Sigh. devil in the detail... same article But online video viewers are still in the minority, with just 9% of the population saying they do it regularly. Another 13% said they watched occasionally, while a further 10% said they expected to start in the coming year. and it's claimed data, which is notoriously unreliable when you ask people if they do something they perceive as being aspirational (which is why you get those surveys saying a third of the UK has a blog...) - 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/
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
I agree with Tom, too much can be read into data like this. Just to add some more data to the mix, and for a different slant: Consumers cool on video downloads: http://www.mrweb.com/drno/frmemail/article6175.htm (what have I started here... this has moved into a direction I wasn't thinking of when first posting about Psiphon :-)) On 11/28/06, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 28/11/06, Kim Plowright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see your 'written by a Torrent site' and raise you a 'written by a broadcaster' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6168950.stm Some 43% of Britons who watch video from the internet or on a mobile device at least once a week said they watched less normal TV as a result. Sigh. devil in the detail... same article But online video viewers are still in the minority, with just 9% of the population saying they do it regularly. Another 13% said they watched occasionally, while a further 10% said they expected to start in the coming year. and it's claimed data, which is notoriously unreliable when you ask people if they do something they perceive as being aspirational (which is why you get those surveys saying a third of the UK has a blog...)
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
The Alexa stats for YouTube v BBC over the past six months tell the story well, parity six months ago, today YouTube has nearly four times the traffic. What will it be like in another six months. In some cases there is a migration, but for younger viewers/listeners/users, they just aren't going to the BBC in the first place. It's not just television, radio will get sidelined too. Half the BBC Radio 4 content I would like to listen to is not available yet in a podcast friendly format, so that half gets replaced by mostly US content, which seems more positive in tone. Occassionaly the ipod will fail in the car, I run out of podcasts and TWIT gets replaced with You and Yours on FM, but not for long. On 28/11/06, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see your normal tv down the dumper but raise you a tv alright after all (its that flakey cbs data again but with added stuff online in US but not UK..yet...caveat) ICM's data would seem to run counter to recent data from American networks. A recent poll from CBS indicates that viewers who are exposed to video online become regular viewers offline. (CBS is also the most popular producer on YouTube.) If you give credence to the CBS online exposure strategy, and you understand that UK media companies don't offer as many programs online as do their American counterparts, then it's possible that the ICM survey data simply indicates that British viewers aren't being redirected to view offline programs. In other words, they're migrating to the Web and aren't being offered any incentives to migrate back to television. That hypothesis will be put to the test in the next year, during which the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 will begin offering most of their shows on demand on the Internet. http://www.reelpopblog.com/2006/11/bbc_online_view.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kim Plowright Sent: 28 November 2006 10:45 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Psiphon I see your 'written by a Torrent site' and raise you a 'written by a broadcaster' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6168950.stm Some 43% of Britons who watch video from the internet or on a mobile device at least once a week said they watched less normal TV as a result. Sigh. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester Sent: 27 November 2006 18:24 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Psiphon Its certainly interesting. Something I was reading the other day http://torrentfreak.com/downloading-tv-shows-leads-to-more-tv- watching/ Earlier this month we estimated that almost a million viewers get their latest Lost episode through BitTorrent. TV broadcasters are now beginning to realize that making shows available for download is helping their business, instead of hurting it. CBS's chief research officer David Poltrack said that online distribution services like YouTube and BitTorrent are friends, not foes. Poltrack is not too keen on the paid distribution model iTunes offers right now. He thinks that TV shows should be available for free via ad-supported models. In a panel discussion at the Future of Television Forum Poltrack said that if [consumers] are going to steal it, give it to them anyway. But also make it easier to access and present it better than YouTube or BitTorrent or anywhere else. :) Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || x83965 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard P Edwards Sent: 27 November 2006 18:07 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Psiphon I believe that the music market place has already answered your question Ian. The only successful new model allows the customer to use any authorised device to play the downloaded music on. therefore quelling a few of the customers complaints, but still not going far enough. If I can already watch content on my computer, then the BBC has to acknowledge that the same computer can travel with me, so using Geo IP becomes a censorship which I will either find a way around, or go and view someone else's content. As is mentioned on today's News site, perhaps the real debate should therefore be the other way around, how does the BBC keep its viewers. and why is there so much fear about losing content, when as soon as it appears on TV it is effectively sold anyway? I agree with Ricky Gervais, I don't think that a program loses its value just because someone can download it. In fact, if it is good enough then it finds a larger market place. I understand the law completely, but as has also been affected today, perhaps the thinking of the suits is slightly out of touch where copyright is concerned. :-) I would love to see the BBC reverse its thinking and engage us, as the public, in allowing much more access, even if they have to pressure
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
As far as I am aware, every song on TOTP up until 1983 was re-recorded so that the BBC owned the rights of broadcast in the charter it clearly states that the BBC must distribute its content to the UK public. so where is all that music that I payed for :-) A lot of it got discarded, even the good stuff - The story also features The Beatles in a film clip. It was originally planned for the band to appear as themselves, but under heavy aging make-up, to represent themselves in the future; but their schedules conflicted. Thus, footage from the BBC pop music magazine programme Top of the Pops was used instead. Ironically, considering the number of lost Doctor Who episodes, this is the only surviving clip of the Beatles from Top of the Pops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase_(Doctor_Who) cheers, m http://www.currybet.net On 28/11/06, Richard Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Lee, I accept your points, at the same time though, the British are being sold on this idea of privacy with a number, an ID number. Well, as a public Corporation the BBC could reverse that thinking and treat us all as UK residents wherever we are in the world already.. it is still far easier to find people that you can trust, than to be weighed down by the thoughts of people that you cannot. That is pandering to the lowest common denominator. The benefits far out-weigh the negatives for a closer social community. I think it is a shame that all that power goes to support the tiny worse case scenario. As far as I am aware, every song on TOTP up until 1983 was re-recorded so that the BBC owned the rights of broadcast in the charter it clearly states that the BBC must distribute its content to the UK public. so where is all that music that I payed for :-) I am sure that similar can be said for BBC TV. All they would have to do is say publically that such and such a show was going to be aired on the net, in not best quality, and that the original producer would be payed X. If he doesn't agree - fine - but right now is anyone asking that question? If you can see a matrix of good honest people, the vast majority, across the planet, all UK residents if you want, all hosting bits of a show and streaming it, then the BBC doesn't have to host anything. it simply has to control the first issue and the delivery mechanism. Which is exactly what it is trying to do now along with Sky, ITV etc. The first lines do not have political leanings, please excuse me if it comes across that way. I am not interested in negative or political social engineering, but take a look, the fact is that it is happening all around us right now. Richard On Tuesday, November 28, 2006, at 09:52AM, Lee Goddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From P Edwards (Monday, November 27, 2006 11:19 PM): I think it is pretty laughable :-) I am very happy to pay for quality and expensive programming, but being censored from the same, just because of a legal precedent, is almost the ultimate insult, especially if one does have a UK TV license. In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal department about a month to change the contracts for content production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and white TV. Probably less time, but I guess the problems isn't that the Beeb can't find the time for contract-updating. I imagine every recording has associated contracts and releases, and often after the initial broadcast and an agreed number of re-broadcastings, the artist release evaporates, and the rights revert to the performers. I can hear the voices of resistance still. There is absolutely no reason not to Hosting all that media, not to mention distributing it at a reasonable rate, is not going to be cheap. So where exactly did all this locking out and streaming certain content to certain places come from? Big brother? :-) It certainly annoyed me when in Cologne: I could watch Planet Earth but not the website. On the other hand, I would be more annoyed if, after paying my TV Tax/Licence, I couldn't watch the website because the bandwidth is consumed by people outside the UK who don't pay for it. Maybe that's selfish of me :) How about leading the way with both feet in to a new world of a really universal BBC on the net, with none of the boundaries? The opposite to the TV world. To be fair, it is the British Broadcasting Corporation, not Universal ;) Flippant, but I do think that it is not the job of the British Broadcasting Corporation to be addressing the world (save the World Service, World news channel): rather, shouldn't Auntie be taking care of broadcasting to the British people? I'm sure that a way could be programmed to reverse Psiphon or the like, with something like real-time P2P to distribute the feeds via a massive server of trusted associates, now that would be
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
On 28/11/06, Richard Hyett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I trust more the evidence of my own eyes, not some survey that I haven't read. The evidence of my own eyes is that the HiFi in family homes is gathering dust, or has become the ocassional play thing of the senior member, the kids use the computer to listen to their music. All of my nephews and nieces, and I have a lot, know what YouTube is. It seems obvious to me that this transition, led by music will mean that they spend more time on the PC, watching than they do on the TV. Its a generational thing not sure i buy this - Youtube is a *new* media experience - it's active, short form, shareable media at 3 feet most TV view is lean back, immersive, long form - it meets a different, more passive need (and i'm personally happy that my kids are much more interested in active media than passive...) now since there are only so many hours in the day, it's pretty certain that TV's dominance in terms of time (and it's *hugely dominant, even for kids) will be challenged - but yotube won't kill TV - it'll change it, just like TV changed radio, but radio listening is more popular than ever. video didn't kill the radio star - the only media form to die has been cave paintings, and that's cos caves are cold, and we're less scared on wild animals now! - 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/
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Hyett It seems obvious to me that this transition, led by music will mean that they spend more time on the PC, watching than they do on the TV. Its a generational thing Yeah: keep the kids away from the remote control for my big screen and media PC, and they'll have to watch TV on their sorry little PC! Is this the place to ask why BBC News have such an excellent MCE package, and BBC2 Broadband doesn't? -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio * Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · * 020 776 50849 ? lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
On 28/11/06, Lee Goddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Richard Hyett It seems obvious to me that this transition, led by music will mean that they spend more time on the PC, watching than they do on the TV. Its a generational thing Yeah: keep the kids away from the remote control for my big screen and media PC, and they'll have to watch TV on their sorry little PC! I The conversation continues here, let's just declare TV dead and move on. http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/11/27/lets-just-declare-tv-dead-and-move-onhttpwwwtechcrunchcomwp-adminpostphpactioneditpost3865/
Re: [backstage] Psiphon
So the facts support the premise that the BBC can embrace this audience, or let someone else... Google/MSN earn the profit and pay the BBC for the right. Is it wrong for the public to be afforded the same right, as in this case, we are contributors to the original cost of production? Tom, I'm with you - thank you for your insight. Two points may help though, one is that it seems that a trial version, or beta, can be set up overnight. and the other is that you need a clause similar to the record industry, for promotional purposes only. That has been used in many contexts, and coupled with either a re- edit or a huge drop in quality, I am sure that the world now realises that these new distribution models are extremely valuable. Especially in the case of the BBC where I believe that it is the value of content when it arrives in the public domain that determines whether it is successful or not, not necessarily only financial income. The BBC can have its own YouTube, in weeks if it likes, perhaps the facts will allow the connected problems to disappear in the wash. There must be an easy beginning point which doesn't include external rights holders, as in reality, it is just another type of search engine. I hope so. Regards Richard On 28 Nov 2006, at 12:29, Lee Goddard wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Hyett It seems obvious to me that this transition, led by music will mean that they spend more time on the PC, watching than they do on the TV. Its a generational thing Yeah: keep the kids away from the remote control for my big screen and media PC, and they'll have to watch TV on their sorry little PC! Is this the place to ask why BBC News have such an excellent MCE package, and BBC2 Broadband doesn't? -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio ☺ Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · ( 020 776 50849 ♫ lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk
[backstage] Sport RSS Feeds?
Does anyone know if there are or plan to be feesd of sport (rugby) leagues on the BBC? -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio * Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · * 020 776 50849 ♫ lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [backstage] Psiphon
now since there are only so many hours in the day, it's pretty certain that TV's dominance in terms of time (and it's *hugely dominant, even for kids) will be challenged - but yotube won't kill TV - it'll change it, just like TV changed radio, but radio listening is more popular than ever. What will be most interesting to me is what happens 20 years down the line. What happens to those kids who sit in front of their PCs and You Tube now. I wonder because I look at my own life. Fifteen to twenty years ago, I spent a lot of time in my room playing computer games on my Spectrum/Atari ST/386. I watched little television - and even less in the main room. Zoom forward to present day and I sit on my sofa with my widescreen TV quite a bit. I no longer have a joystick. The PC sits upstairs - if I'm on it, I'm checking emails, messing with stuff. Behaviours change - situations change. What is common to do at one point in your life, will not always be so. - 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/
RE: [backstage] Sport RSS Feeds?
well there's certainly a Rugby Union feed here http://newsrss.bbc.co.uk/rss/sportonline_uk_edition/rugby_union/rss.xml and a league feed here http://newsrss.bbc.co.uk/rss/sportonline_uk_edition/rugby_league/rss.xml but I'm guessing you're after deeper club by club feed? The WIL sites carry club information http://www.bbc.co.uk/bristol/sport/bristol_shoguns/index.shtml which I know is built from internal feeds (I built them). But I can't seem to find public access to those feeds... anyone else know? But frankly the only feed I can see anyone being interested in is the Welsh Rugby feed... but I can't find that either... no one is allowed to mention this weekends game. m From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Goddard Sent: 28 November 2006 14:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Sport RSS Feeds? Does anyone know if there are or plan to be feesd of sport (rugby) leagues on the BBC? -- Lee Goddard Independent Contractor, Software Development/Analysis BBC Radio * Room 718 · Henry Wood Hs · Regents St · London W1 1AA · * 020 776 50849 ♫ lee(at)server-sidesystems.ltd.uk mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [backstage] Psiphon Next Gen content
Yes, actually most kids my sons age - 20 ish don't watch tv at all. They might watch YouTube occassionally but mostly they are either watching DVD's on their wide screen laptops, or creating their own content with digi-cams, photoshop artwork, websites or generally out and about Speaking as someone in this age-group (although possibly atypical given my tech background), its not that we don't watch TV, its just that TV programs aren't good enough to keep our interest. My flatmate makes time for Torchwood each week - I have a habit of forgetting its on so end up either setting our TV up to record it, then watch it later, or I pick it up from a torrent site. The whole concept of remembering when a show is on and watching it is now totally alien to me - I want content on demand, and youtube delivers that. Its just that its generally trashy content on there, and whilst you can sometimes spend hours watching what fun people have with... Y'know... Putting firecrackers down their pants or whatever Its not exactly the kind of high-brow stuff people want from a proper broadcasting outfit. Youtube is generally lowest-common-denominator content, but the trend is definitely towards not being told when in our busy day we're going to take time to watch something when the technology to watch it when we want to is so pervasive. Increasingly, television as a medium is going to fall by the way-side as other newer mediums take over. These are predominantly going to be to some extent internet-driven. That doesn't mean that the programmes are going to end, but they are going to evolve. Ten years ago, choosing which angle you viewed a football match from would have seemed insane, nowadays you just have to press a button on your remote. Ten years from now, who knows what will be possible, but as some level of abstraction, there's still going to be sound and pictures being transmitted. - 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/
RE: [backstage] Psiphon Next Gen content
Hi Luke Yes - scheduling of prime time is what is dying as you can on TIVO (or whatever) record, download, watch it when you want etc. I'm interested in what that will mean for content creators in terms of how to alert people to the fact that something is actually worth recording and watchign later, so, as advertisers scramble to leap into the new interactive world i think it will be your generation which dictates what that world will become...but as a doco maker and content creator, i'm keen to keep making stuff, thats for sure! clare www.evebaystudio.co.nz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Luke Dicken Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 10:33 a.m. To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Psiphon Next Gen content Yes, actually most kids my sons age - 20 ish don't watch tv at all. They might watch YouTube occassionally but mostly they are either watching DVD's on their wide screen laptops, or creating their own content with digi-cams, photoshop artwork, websites or generally out and about Speaking as someone in this age-group (although possibly atypical given my tech background), its not that we don't watch TV, its just that TV programs aren't good enough to keep our interest. My flatmate makes time for Torchwood each week - I have a habit of forgetting its on so end up either setting our TV up to record it, then watch it later, or I pick it up from a torrent site. The whole concept of remembering when a show is on and watching it is now totally alien to me - I want content on demand, and youtube delivers that. Its just that its generally trashy content on there, and whilst you can sometimes spend hours watching what fun people have with... Y'know... Putting firecrackers down their pants or whatever Its not exactly the kind of high-brow stuff people want from a proper broadcasting outfit. Youtube is generally lowest-common-denominator content, but the trend is definitely towards not being told when in our busy day we're going to take time to watch something when the technology to watch it when we want to is so pervasive. Increasingly, television as a medium is going to fall by the way-side as other newer mediums take over. These are predominantly going to be to some extent internet-driven. That doesn't mean that the programmes are going to end, but they are going to evolve. Ten years ago, choosing which angle you viewed a football match from would have seemed insane, nowadays you just have to press a button on your remote. Ten years from now, who knows what will be possible, but as some level of abstraction, there's still going to be sound and pictures being transmitted. - 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/ - 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/
