I would assume that the rules for content protection would bar user created
plugins from having access to the data. The Ofcom document had some comments
from content providers about updates to the tables being necessary in the
future if it gets broken, but it doesn't look like there are any firm
On 15 Jun 2010, at 09:53, Mo McRoberts wrote:
either way, they'd just get reverse-engineered again. they could push
out new tables every week, but they went to lengths to explain how the
one they have was specially-generated to be wonderfully optimised (in
order to qualify as being some kind
The BBC had a choice
a) do nothing and run the risk of content not be available to licence
fee payers
b) do something which does achieve the desired effect and has a very
small negative impact on a very small group of people if indeed it has
any negative effect at all
On 06/15/2010 03:21 PM, Andrew Bowden wrote:
We can argue around this one as much as we want but I'm afraid there's one
simple truth. Most people don't care one bit and just want to watch their
programme.
They do. And they won't take long to work out that technology, content
and services
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 15:49, Nick Reynolds-FMT
nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
The BBC had a choice
a) do nothing and run the risk of content not be available to licence fee
payers
b) do something which does achieve the desired effect and has a very small
negative impact on a very small
On 06/15/2010 02:08 PM, Andrew Bowden wrote:
If the alternative was this system did not exist and rights holders told
broadcasters (for this is not just a BBC issue) that the broadcaster
could not broadcast their content in HD on the Freeview platform...
They threatened something like this
_however_, who do people like Graham Plumb work for? AFAIK,
he's BBC proper, not the subsidiary. _The Corporation_ has
made representations in favour of this idea (rather PR-heavy
representations, at that - possibly the single aspect of this
I'm least happy about).
In some situations
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 15:57, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 15:49, Nick Reynolds-FMT
nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
The BBC had a choice
a) do nothing and run the risk of content not be available to licence fee
payers
b) do something which does achieve the
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 15:49, Nick Reynolds-FMT
nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
The BBC had a choice
a) do nothing and run the risk of content not be available to licence fee
payers
b) do something which does
The group of licence fee payers who have been affected by all this lockdown is
larger than you realise, Nick.
And they're also early adopters as well. For instance, my Nokia N900 may have
Flash 9.4 on board, but i'm sure unadorned streams woukld play out better.
I run Ubuntu on an Atom
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:16, Adam Bradley a...@doublegeek.com wrote:
If the desired effect was to limit what the average consumer can do with TV
- i.e. only making one recording, and limiting how they can transfer this
around their home - then it looks like it could achieve it. This ensures
a) broadcast in other countries without this scheme or an
equivalent
b) distributed widely prior to it hitting the UK
And on BBC HD on satellite to the UK and large parts of Europe.
The horse-and-cart makers still can't stand the existence of the car...
Won't be long until the DRM is
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:16, Adam Bradley a...@doublegeek.com wrote:
If the desired effect was to limit what the average consumer can do with TV
- i.e. only making one recording, and limiting how they can transfer this
around their home - then it looks like it could achieve it. This ensures
On 15 June 2010 16:23, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote:
why can I not watch Freeview HD on my (slightly older) HD TV?
This (HDCP) is one of the restrictions I understand the least. It's
like screwing shut the cat-flap (the DVI/HDMI signal) when the door
(unencrypted broadcasts) is open. If
From: Adam Bradley
Similar questions to Andrew's above will be asked, of course.
Why can't I record this TV show?,
Unless I've missed something (and I'm sure someone will tell me if I
have!) there's no proposals on the table to prevent people from
recording HD content - as long as the user
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:37, Andrew Bowden andrew.bow...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
From: Adam Bradley
Similar questions to Andrew's above will be asked, of course.
Why can't I record this TV show?,
Unless I've missed something (and I'm sure someone will tell me if I
have!) there's no proposals on
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Andrew Bowden andrew.bow...@bbc.co.ukwrote:
From: Adam Bradley
Similar questions to Andrew's above will be asked, of course.
Why can't I record this TV show?,
Unless I've missed something (and I'm sure someone will tell me if I
have!) there's no proposals
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:33, Paul Battley pbatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 June 2010 16:23, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote:
why can I not watch Freeview HD on my (slightly older) HD TV?
This (HDCP) is one of the restrictions I understand the least. It's
like screwing shut the cat-flap
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:48, Adam Bradley a...@doublegeek.com wrote:
Point taken, but it would be nice if someone made it easy in future and this
just makes it less likely.
Perhaps Why can't I stream this on my network player upstairs would be a
more likely question in the future.
Oh, but
American TV producers and film companies used the same argument a few years
back that if the broadcast flag wasn't allowed then they wouldn't allow HD
content to be broadcast on non-encrypted channels. Congress rejected the use
of the broadcast flag and American producers caved in and allowed
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:37, Andrew Bowden andrew.bow...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
Ease of use aside, even the iPhone 4 doesn't really have the screen
resolution to require HD content - will many handheld devices really
need HD?
The Archos 7 Home Tablet handles 720p. I would expect HD capability to
Andrew Bowden andrew.bow...@bbc.co.uk writes:
It's so hard for me currently to get SD content off my PVR and on to
my iPod that I've never done it.
This is easy enough to automate however you like if you're using a
software PVR such as MythTV -- it's the only way I listen to radio these
days.
On 15-Jun-2010, at 20:34, Adam Sampson wrote:
While I'm sure the Huffman tables will be reverse-engineered soon
enough, it'd be much better if I, as a license fee payer, could obtain a
legal copy from the BBC for my personal use. UK copyright law is already
very clear on exactly what I'm
But you can already obtain legal copies in many different ways, can't
you Andrew?
Explain to me how you can't...
-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Adam Sampson
Sent: 15 June 2010 20:35
To:
On 15-Jun-2010, at 20:58, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
With respect to you Mo presumably this person who wrote this comment on
the Media Guardian story doesn't understand it either:
!?!?!
with some caveats, that doesn’t actually contradict what I’ve said!
nwhitfield
14 Jun 2010, 7:04PM
My
Nor does it contradict anything I said either!
-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
Sent: 15 June 2010 21:06
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On
On 15-Jun-2010, at 21:13, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
Nor does it contradict anything I said either!
through omission, no. that’s hardly a ringing endorsement, is it?
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
Panasonic HD avert on ITV right after the match just now said record HD TV
(Freesat or Freeview) to BluRay and save forever
Paul
Omission from who?
Me?
Or the person quoted?
-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
Sent: 15 June 2010 21:21
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On
On 15-Jun-2010, at 20:58, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
With respect to you Mo presumably this person who wrote this comment on
the Media Guardian story doesn't understand it either:
those caveats, which make quite a significant difference:
nwhitfield
14 Jun 2010, 7:04PM
My understanding is
On 15-Jun-2010, at 21:36, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
Omission from who?
Me?
Or the person quoted?
the person quoted. he didn’t contradict you because he didn’t cover those
points in enough detail. sheesh.
-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
On 15-Jun-2010, at 21:38, Mo McRoberts wrote:
On 15-Jun-2010, at 20:58, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
With respect to you Mo presumably this person who wrote this comment on
the Media Guardian story doesn't understand it either:
those caveats, which make quite a significant difference:
Well as always I suspect we will argue about this until the cows come
home and not resolve it.
Your caveats seems weak and speculative. People won't miss something
they never knew they had in the first place especially if they are able
to do all the things they can now, which it appears they will
right,
I’m going to level with you all:
I’m tired. very tired. I’m juggling a day-job building e-commerce websites with
a hobby helping to build some very very cool things, and I’ve put an awful lot
of time and effort into questioning, gaining understanding of and explaining
this whole
People won't miss something they never knew they had in the first place
especially if they are able
to do all the things they can now, which it appears they will be
damn, someone invented the car and forgot to tell anyone. still we won't miss
what we never knew...
or miss seems an odd word
It is sincerely wearying. I wish we were more honest. If it was me doing the
talking for us, it would be different, but i don't get that clout.
Cheers for the input.
a
Sent from my HTC
-Original Message-
From: Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net
Sent: 15 June 2010 22:13
To:
Mo,
The BBC has made its position quite clear on the blog - not once but
several times. We have been straight about it as you can see from these
blog posts, not just recently but as far back as April last year (see
Danielle Nagler's post in the list below) - so the idea that we didn't
want to
On 06/15/2010 10:11 PM, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
People won't miss something
they never knew they had in the first place especially if they are able
to do all the things they can now, which it appears they will be.
They'll find out soon enough, they're not, and it doesn't.
This is a problem.
On 15-Jun-2010, at 22:41, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
The BBC has made its position quite clear on the blog - not once but
several times. We have been straight about it as you can see from these
blog posts, not just recently but as far back as April last year (see
Danielle Nagler's post in the
Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote:
Well as always I suspect we will argue about this until the cows come
home and not resolve it.
No what the BBC is doing is illegal under European law, (encrypting the
broadcast - the EPG is broadcast), or at least, failing a legal opinion,
in breach of the spirit of
40 matches
Mail list logo
