RE: [backstage] DRM
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: 28 January 2007 22:27 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] DRM On 1/26/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The flip side is that every format you add, has some extra setup costs of various magnitudes, and when belts have to be buckled because it's public money, why spend it when you're satisfying most people now. After all, how many people are not listening to (say) Radio 1 live online just because it's not being streamed in MP3 format. At least 10%, if not more. An interesting job to compare this with how many people listen to radio through Telewest, and the setup charges of that (even just the carriage fees). I'd argue strongly that streaming MP3 is better value. Ah well, the public service broadcasters do have some gifted capacity on Cable. I've no idea how far it extends, but it might extend to the radio stations :) However I take your point!
RE: [backstage] Weather RSS feeds broken?
No thanks for the email, I've passed it on to the weather team Cheers, Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || cubicgarden.com || geekdinner.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iain McWilliams Sent: 29 January 2007 08:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Weather RSS feeds broken? Sorry if this isn't the place to bring this up, but the weather RSS feeds on the BBC weather web site have stopped updating and continue to contain data from 24th/25th January. eg:- http://feeds.bbc.co.uk/weather/feeds/rss/5day/id/1769.xml The link is still present on the 5 day weather forecast screen so hopefully that means the service hasn't been withdrawn. http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?id=1769 Does anyone know if it is a glitch that will shortly be repaired, or is it a sign the RSS feed is to be withdrawn? Thanks, Iain McWilliams -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - 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/
[backstage] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billion question (or RE: [b ackstage] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Somerville Sent: 29 January 2007 01:14 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] £1.2 billion question (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents) Brian Butterworth wrote: Sorry if you didn't get why this is a backstage issue, let me explain more carefully. I didn't say any such thing, someone else in the thread did. I don't recall say that YOU did. But you can use a PVR (Sky+), Media Center, Windows or Mac to record off-air onto a hard drive does, as does using a video cassette recorder with a video cassette or DVD-R burner with a blank DVD. Yes, as I said. The law allows you to make any recording you like and watch it where you like as long as the recording and viewing is done in domestic premises. You can pick up your laptop, PVR or computer and take it somewhere else and watch legally. Yes, I agree. Also you can copy from a PVR onto a DVD burner legally. Are you sure? Where is that copyright permitted? Copying things like that (e.g. for backup) is not, as the Gower review made clear, as this petition says: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/privatecopy/ and as the government response agrees. So I really can't see how using a computer network such as BitTorrent breaks any law, as long as both parties are domestic. It's not just domestic use in section 70, it's private and domestic use. I really can't see how using BitTorrent, in your proposed operation, counts as private use. In the terms of private and domestic use the word private means that it is done by a private individual, rather than a company or other organization. There is no restriction on taking a videoed TV programme to another private dwelling and viewing it there. domestic means in the home (ie not in a shop, church, etc). There is no restriction in law to carrying a VHS cassette or DVD in a car, on a train or sending it in the post. As long as no money is accepted then such a transaction is private. If it *IS* illegal then the Slingbox is illegal too, isn't it? I presume you have to log in to the Slingbox, thereby guaranteeing it is you for your own private use? I don't know much about it. It's not a case of what I think about the law, it is my understanding of it. There is no legal precedent to support your position. Yours neither. :-) Well there is two precedents. Firstly the BBC took BSB to the high court to stop them showing highlights of the World Cup in 1990 - and lost. http://nic.suzor.com/articles/TransformativeUse.pdf page 141 The second is the withdrawal of the BBC and ITV (and soon C4 and Five) from using BSkyB's encryption service on satellite, because the EU Television Without Frontiers directive allows them not to. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 - 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] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billion question (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents)
On 1/29/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's not a case of what I think about the law, it is my understanding of it. There is no legal precedent to support your position. Yours neither. :-) Well there is two precedents. Firstly the BBC took BSB to the high court to stop them showing highlights of the World Cup in 1990 - and lost. http://nic.suzor.com/articles/TransformativeUse.pdf page 141 The BBC vs BSB paragraph in this PDF reads as follows (and yes, I can copy this legally!)... In BBC v BSB (The 1990 World Cup Case),475 the defendant rebroadcast highlights of the BBC's live broadcasts of football matches over the course of the 1990 World Cup in Italy, and asserted that the rebroadcasting was fair dealing for the purpose of news reporting. The UK High Court took a broad approach to the question of fair dealing, holding that the rebroadcasts were for the purposes of reporting the news, rejecting the suggestion that the BSB's purpose was not to report the news, but that it had an 'oblique motive' to quickly boost their popularity by using the most memorable highlights of the matches. The fact that the highlights were also entertaining, and that the BSB benefited from providing them, did not mean that the purpose of the rebroadcast was not for reporting the news. This deals in 'fair-dealing' for use of excerpts in news broadcasting. I don't quite follow how it's relevant to allowing UK users to copy, in full, copyrighted material. The second is the withdrawal of the BBC and ITV (and soon C4 and Five) from using BSkyB's encryption service on satellite, because the EU Television Without Frontiers directive allows them not to. This is related to territorial rights granted by those that hold the copyright; again, I don't quite follow how it's relevant in allowing UK users to copy, in full, copyrighted material. Copyright in most television and radio programmes are not, in actual fact, wholly owned by the broadcaster. From music rights to other areas, copyright rests in a whole set of bodies which isn't easily entangled. In most cases, the broadcaster has negotiated limited rights in a limited time-frame and a limited territory to exploit copyright material: for which wholesale and free copying via BitTorrent without DRM is wholly unrealistic. I admire your obvious enthusiasm, mind. j - 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] RE: [backstage] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billion que stion (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bias??? C lick and Torrents)
(snip) The second is the withdrawal of the BBC and ITV (and soon C4 and Five) from using BSkyB's encryption service on satellite, because the EU Television Without Frontiers directive allows them not to. This is related to territorial rights granted by those that hold the copyright; again, I don't quite follow how it's relevant in allowing UK users to copy, in full, copyrighted material. The point was a simple one: it illustrates that the BBC has been 100% WRONG before about this kind of issue and the BBC should consider what is and what is not legal. The BBC wasted an awful lot of licence fee payers money on those damn Solus cards and the quite unnecessary encryption system. Therefore I simply propose that the BBC considers - especially in light of the licence fee settlement being down two billion quid, that there may be an existing legal framework that would cost it no money whatsoever - again. Copyright in most television and radio programmes are not, in actual fact, wholly owned by the broadcaster. From music rights to other areas, copyright rests in a whole set of bodies which isn't easily entangled. In most cases, the broadcaster has negotiated limited rights in a limited time-frame and a limited territory to exploit copyright material: for which wholesale and free copying via BitTorrent without DRM is wholly unrealistic. But, as I pointed out there are exclusions from copyright which protect the rights of consumers and viewers. The whole point of my argument is that if a network of domestic devices that exchange private, domestic recordings with each other in the UK was legal, then any points about the problematic and complex issues of rights and DRM simply won't apply. I agree that it would be unrealistic if the recording or exchange service was provided by a company, organisation or charity. But it would be fine for such to run trackers and searches of the torrents, IMHO. I admire your obvious enthusiasm, mind. I'm always happy to save Auntie a billion quid. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 - 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] Music, (meta)data, musicbrainz and the BBC
All tru Brainz has advanced relationships to break Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel into paul Simon and Art Garfunkel (bad example I know) And for that matter Peter Andre and Jordan into Peter Andre and Jordan [http://tinyurl.com/2yxx76] This link is to Amazon.co.uk which reminded me I was told that all authors have a unique id, so that all the authors (called John Smith or Nitesh Patel etc) have unique identifier (like books have ISBN) and furthermore that Amazon ignore this identifier. Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billion question (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents)
On 29/01/07, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In most cases, the broadcaster has negotiated limited The distributor's limited rights have been extended in the opposite direction to where distribution technology has taken us. rights in a limited time-frame and a limited territory to exploit copyright material: for which wholesale and free copying via BitTorrent without DRM is wholly unrealistic. Wholly unrealistic seems pretty nutty when http://www.uknova.com/ and friends are doing it anyway. Copyright as it stands has been broken by our new digital circumstances. I concede that most BBC content is being held to ransom by copyrights held by 3rd parties. But whatever isn't, should at least be made available along the lines Brian Butterworth has made out. As a British citizen and BBC-Tax payer, I personally find that it being made available to look at, but not touch and reuse, isn't enough - this material should be released under a copyleft license for me. As a human being, and having seen wonders like Wikipedia, I'd like it to be released under a copyleft license for worldwide use. -- Regards, Dave - 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] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents
At 14:49 + 27/1/07, Brian Butterworth wrote: I'm horrified (again) to see Auntie misrepresenting technologies on Click The BBC's flagship technology programme Both the programme and web page call the sharing of TV programmes using BitTorrent systems 'illegal'. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/6301355.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi?redirect= fs.stmnbram=1bbram=1nbwm=1bbwm=1news=1nol_storyid=4977542 However, DOMESTIC sharing of programmes broadcast free-to-air in the UK is NOT ILLEGAL. To quote Section 70 of Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended), The making in domestic premises for private and domestic use of a recording of a broadcast solely for the purpose of enabling it to be viewed or listened to at a more convenient time does not infringe any copyright in the broadcast or in any work included in it. The BBC has never charged anyone for this offence, and your assertation that using a torrent to watch TV shows is illegal is incorrect and has no legal basis in the UK. The BBC should not assert that something is illegal when there is no law being broken and no legal precedent. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What do you mean by DOMESTIC sharing exactly? Timeshifting (e.g. family sits down to catch on a programme record previously) is different from re-distribution (i.e. sharing). Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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] Joost anyone?
More Joost invites anyone? I have a few more invites if anyone is interested? Drop me a personal email Ian Tom Loosemore wrote: On 28/01/07, Libby Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Robert Kerry wrote: Email me if you'd like an invite - not sure how many I can give out though. :o) (belatedly) I work for Joost and have a few invites spare. Libby many thanks libby... much appreciated... - 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] BBC Bias??? Click and Torrents
(snip) What do you mean by DOMESTIC sharing exactly? Timeshifting (e.g. family sits down to catch on a programme record previously) is different from re-distribution (i.e. sharing). The law says The making in domestic premises for private and domestic use of a recording of a broadcast solely for the purpose of enabling it to be viewed or listened to at a more convenient time does not infringe any copyright in the broadcast or in any work included in it. It does not say HOW the recording can be made, NOR that only the person who made the recording can view it, NOR that the viewing has to be made in the same domestic premises as the recording was made. It does NOT say that the recording cannot be transferred or duplicated before it is viewed NOR does it say that it may not pass along any form of communications system NOR does it specify how many people can watch it at a more convenient time. Timeshifting (e.g. family sits down to catch on a programme record previously) is different from re-distribution (i.e. sharing). Actually the re-distribution is quite, quite legal under the EU Television Without Frontiers directive, I'll have you know. That's how come you can watch BBC one and BBC TWO on cable in Holland, and how come BBC and ITV are on Astra 2 unencrypted: Television without Frontiers, EU (89/552/EEC CHAPTER II, Article 2) directive states: 2. Member States shall ensure freedom of reception and shall not restrict retransmission on their territory of television broadcasts from other Member States for reasons which fall within the fields coordinated by this Directive. The UK Copyrights and Patent's Act 1988 (as amended) does not make any distinction between timeshifting and sharing, they are both quite legal as long as done for the purpose of viewed or listened to at a more convenient time. Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 - 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] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billio n question (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bi as??? Click and Torrents)
Brian Butterworth wrote: Brian Butterworth wrote: Sorry if you didn't get why this is a backstage issue, let me explain more carefully. I didn't say any such thing, someone else in the thread did. I don't recall say that YOU did. You were replying to my email, and you wrote you, as quoted above. I'm not sure how else I'm expected to take it. :-) Also you can copy from a PVR onto a DVD burner legally. Are you sure? Where is that copyright permitted? Copying things like that (e.g. for backup) is not, as the Gower review made clear, as this petition says: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/privatecopy/ and as the government response agrees. So I really can't see how using a computer network such as BitTorrent breaks any law, as long as both parties are domestic. It's not just domestic use in section 70, it's private and domestic use. I really can't see how using BitTorrent, in your proposed operation, counts as private use. In the terms of private and domestic use the word private means that it is done by a private individual, rather than a company or other organization. There is no restriction on taking a videoed TV programme to another private dwelling and viewing it there. domestic means in the home (ie not in a shop, church, etc). There is no restriction in law to carrying a VHS cassette or DVD in a car, on a train or sending it in the post. As long as no money is accepted then such a transaction is private. I accept everything you write above. But you're not saying do any of the above, you're saying *make a copy of the recording of the broadcast* - none of the above involve copying. In your other email: The UK Copyrights and Patent's Act 1988 (as amended) does not make any distinction between timeshifting and sharing, Yes it does. It permits you, as you keep quoting it, to make a recording of a broadcast to let you view or listen to it at a more convenient time (timeshifting); it does *not* let you make copies of that recording (sharing). As I said, and you ignored, above. Anyway, this isn't really going anywhere. The sad thing here is I probably completely agree with you that this is a big issue that obviously needs to be dealt with, I just don't think going around saying the law isn't as it is is at all helpful. -- ATB, Matthew | http://www.dracos.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] Joost anyone?
Thanks for that Libby, much appreciated. Off to play with my new toys now ;-) Cheers - Neil At 12:17 28/01/2007, you wrote: On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Robert Kerry wrote: Email me if you'd like an invite - not sure how many I can give out though. :o) (belatedly) I work for Joost and have a few invites spare. Libby Rob evilgreenmonkey On 17/01/07, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any idea how i can get one of those? Already registered on the beta-testers list, Appreciate it, John. On 1/17/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mario, I would be very pleased to accept your token. Thanks in advance. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mario Menti Sent: 17 January 2007 06:52 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Joost anyone? On 1/16/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not after a review, I wish to use it! The message I got when I signed up was to ask someone else 'who has a token' to provide me with one. And if you don't ask you don't get. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Brian - let me know if you have received an invite off-list. If not, I can send you one. (Before anyone else asks, I only have this one spare token at the moment, but more may be forthcoming in future...) Mario. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date: 16/01/2007 16:36 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date: 16/01/2007 16:36 -- John Griffiths http://www.red91.com - 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/
