On 11/1/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sharing artistic works is NOT a
central tenet of friendship.
Of course it is. You can't possibly be friends with someone unless you
copy stuff off them. I mean how could you possible be a
On 02/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you disagree with me,
It's not just me who things your a fool! There are experts in the field.
I _am_ genuinely interested in hearing how you
think you can prevent an attacker from accessing the keys they needs in order
to use the
On Friday 02 November 2007 11:53, Andy wrote:
On 02/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you disagree with me,
It's not just me who things your a fool! There are experts in the field.
Huh? Why I am a fool? (Not that I care about looking a fool. Being foolish is
often actually
Sharing artistic works between friends is one of the central tenets of
friendship. Ask anyone under 20 if they've got a laptop, and if they
do, if they have copies of music from their friends. Its almost
certain that they will.
No - it isn't!
Ask 'em. Seriously. On the way to
On 01/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sharing artistic works between friends is one of the central tenets of
friendship. Ask anyone under 20 if they've got a laptop, and if they
do, if they have copies of music from their friends. Its almost
certain that they
I don't know about anyone else's friendships, but I certainly don't share
files with friends. Sure, I recommend or having something recommended to me,
but they (and I) know how to get hold of the media itself without having
files transferred to them by me.
Is this not what would happen with
On 01/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this not what would happen with iPlayer? Hello Jim, I enjoyed Spooks on
iPlayer last night, Really Jason? I'll go and watch that on my iPlayer,
cable catchup, or whatever without the hassle of cracking the DRM out of the
WMV file and
You have misunderstood my point. In summary - I highly doubt DRM affects the
situation as much as you are making out.
I don't share files directly with my friends (DRMed or otherwise) I doubt
many other people do either. There are many reasons for this...
* Poor upload speeds on broadband
Is this not what would happen with iPlayer? Hello Jim, I enjoyed Spooks
on
iPlayer last night, Really Jason? I'll go and watch that on my
iPlayer,
cable catchup, or whatever without the hassle of cracking the DRM out of
the
WMV file and working out how to get it off your computer via
Michael Sparks wrote:
Apologies if that's all a little random - and also, improvements on this
summary (and on criterion) welcome. :-)
Michael, your insistence on resorting to facts and reasoned argument
risks torpedoing this entire prolonged exchange of rants. Keep it up. ;-)
S
-
Sent via
On 01/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sharing artistic works is NOT a
central tenet of friendship.
Of course it is. You can't possibly be friends with someone unless you
copy stuff off them. I mean how could you possible be a friend due to
things like shared interests,
On Thursday 01 November 2007 20:38, Andy wrote:
Compilation of source code is not a cryptographically secure way to
protect data or algorithms.
Giving someone the sourcecode is even less secure - IF the attacker can gain
a significant advantage by doing so. The question is therefore can they?.
On 10/30/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave doesn't mean sharing. Dave means stealing and redistributing
for free. When he says sharing, Dave always means stealing. Dave
wants
everything for nothing.
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not saying you *don't* ever buy music. Once you've bought it though -
you want to copy it and give it to other people so they don't have to pay
for it.
And what precisely is wrong with people wanting to copy stuff. Are you
denying
On 10/31/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not saying you *don't* ever buy music. Once you've bought it though
-
you want to copy it and give it to other people so they don't have to
pay
for it.
And what precisely is wrong
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
your unalterable right to copy what you
want, when you want. You don't say you should be able to make limited
'fair use' copies for... - no, you repeatedly state that it's your right to
do anything you want with any creative material,
On 31/10/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File sharing between friends is essential for friendship
???
I'll try again:
File sharing is an definitive part of friendship in the 21st century,
in parts of the world with high density access to computers.
Example: Your friend sends
On 31/10/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
your unalterable right to copy what you
want, when you want. You don't say you should be able to make limited
'fair use' copies for... - no, you repeatedly state that it's your
On 31/10/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File sharing between friends is essential for friendship
???
I'll try again:
Example: Your friend sends you an instant message, Have you seen
[random-artistic-work]? and you
your unalterable right to copy what you
want, when you want. You don't say you should be able to make limited
'fair use' copies for... - no, you repeatedly state that it's your
right to
do anything you want with any creative material,
File sharing between friends is essential for
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Removing one revenue stream. There are obviously other revenue streams.
Live gigs (although this isn't an option for some artists), merchandise
etc. However, the concept of selling records is critical to most
professional bands.
On 10/31/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me rephrase. For this argument, your choice of terminology is not
important. You don't have the automatic right to redistribute someone
else's artistic endeavours. Trying to argue that you do, simply because you
can is not a valid
On 31/10/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW I think it's a more powerful argument to state that the value of
a recording per-se is now tending towards zero, digital tech having
removed scarcity from much of the value chain.
The business models which recognise this will thrive
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File sharing between friends is essential for friendship
???
I'll try again:
File sharing is an definitive part of friendship in the 21st century,
in parts of the world with high density access to computers.
Do you mean this ?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb
Sent: 31 October 2007 13:33
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield on iPlayer - 26min Interview
I'm unsure how this bussiness model
Sorry I mean this
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,,2200816,00.html
From: Jeremy Stone
Sent: 31 October 2007 13:47
To: 'backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk'
Subject: RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield on iPlayer - 26min Interview
Do you mean
On 31/10/2007, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have yet to recieve an answer to the BBC's false claims, why is this?
Possibly because the man who made those claims isn't on this list. And
of those BBC folks that are, none is empowered to speak on behalf of
their boss^n.
Of course, you already
On 10/31/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have yet to recieve an answer to the BBC's false claims, why is this?
The BBC claimed:
There is no open source digital right managment
All I have to do to prove this false, is to demonstrate that 1 Open
Source DRM solution exists.
You must
PROTECTED]
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 3:17:56 PM
Subject: Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield on iPlayer - 26min Interview
On 10/31/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have yet to recieve an answer to the BBC's false claims, why is this?
The BBC claimed
on iPlayer - 26min Interview
Sorry I mean this
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,,2200816,00.html
From: Jeremy Stone
Sent: 31 October 2007 13:47
To: 'backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk'
Subject: RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield on iPlayer - 26min Interview
Do you
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
work: +44 (0)2080083965
mob: +44 (0)7711913293
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 31 October 2007 14:19
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield on iPlayer - 26min Interview
I have yet
On 31/10/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for example, you could / can perform the above social discourse with
something Joost-esque,
What happens when Joost discontinues that service or goes bust? This
has already happened with one online DRM video service, Google Video.
I first
On 31/10/2007, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes there is Open source DRM, but if we choose some open
source DRM, honestly would we all be happy? Remember DRM is
DRM in any form.
I'd be happy with DRM licensed under the GPLv3, because of part 3:
--- 8 ---
3. Protecting Users' Legal
Not it isn't.
You failed to show either of the only 2 things needed:
1) That the software is not Open Source.
2) That the software is not DRM.
What was stated was that there is no open source digital rights
management.
Your points about completion, grammar, usability are irrelevant in
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not it isn't.
You failed to show either of the only 2 things needed:
1) That the software is not Open Source.
2) That the software is not DRM.
What was stated was that there is no open source digital rights
management.
Your
FWIW I think it's a more powerful argument to state that the value of
a recording per-se is now tending towards zero, digital tech having
removed scarcity from much of the value chain.
The business models which recognise this will thrive in the long term.
Redressing things in the
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely is fit for purpose and actually works now is a requirement. And
all three fail dismally.
A requirement of what?
To disprove the statement there is no Open Source DRM then all that
is needed is one open source drm, Mr Highland
Hi Tom!
On 31/10/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW I think it's a more powerful argument to state that the value of
a recording per-se is now tending towards zero, digital tech having
removed scarcity from much of the value chain.
The business models which recognise
On 31/10/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I'm on a public mailing list, chatting away about something
on-topic. I don't see
how the additional claim invalidates the first one. (oops)
--
Regards,
Dave
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
On 10/31/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and that the original
creators have no moral right to deny you that. You then try and
make it
sound warm and fluffy by going on to state, with no justifiation,
that
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/31/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sharing artistic works between friends is one of the central tenets of
friendship. Ask anyone under 20 if they've got a laptop, and if they
do, if they have copies of music from
Andy wrote:
Has anyone here heard of something called email? Oh you have have you?
Well that works cross platform, guess how that was made cross
platform? well the IETF did something exceptionally simple they posted
the spec on a web site.
That's rather odd, given that the specs. for email of
On 30/10/2007, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However it's nowhere near as simple as just copying the files and
burning them to DVD
...
My point? it's not always as easy to take an off air broadcast and put it
online.
I see you've never tried Myth TV, my box is in the process
My point? it's not always as easy to take an off air broadcast and put it
online.
I see you've never tried Myth TV
I have, briefly. I especially liked seeing it run the BBCi service on it :)
However that's following the simple matter of installing the thing. Last time
I tried Myth TV
I'll reverse these comments :)
Andrew Bowden wrote:
I have a PVR which has a USB port on it - which is great cos I can take
files off the PVR if I want to and keep a copy of them.
However it's nowhere near as simple as just copying the files and
burning them to DVD thanks to the fact that
I think the point made is a philosophical one or approach -
incremental rollout is obviously one way - but a decision to design
something for the main 3 platforms at the start is another way - as
was said, using Java and open APIs - even a layman would think that
the BBC approach is eccentric, I
Andrew Bowden wrote:
I'd like to, cos my TV capture card might get some Linuxy usage then.
But I haven't got the time or desire to try and set it up.
If you find the desire then I'll try and help.
David
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
On 10/29/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 29 October 2007 18:47, Dave Crossland wrote:
...
Asking people to agree not share with friends and betray their
community is evil :-(
No, it's not.
Yes it is. Not sharing is a bad thing. If I had a bag of sweets, and
In the BBCs case - as they are using public funds they need to include
everyone as an upfront design decision
Believe me, people in the BBC do - across the organisation and on a variety of
projects. Sometimes things are done for everyone at once, but sometimes you
have to stagger launches.
Its a bit like saying we'll design a transport system for able-bodied
people first (as they are the majority) - and gradually roll out to
others - this is also thought to be morally wrong, as well as a poor
design decision.
No - it's like designing a transport system, then later on
On Tuesday 30 October 2007 11:24, dantes inferno wrote:
Its a bit like saying we'll design a transport system for able-bodied
people first (as they are the majority) - and gradually roll out to
others
That's _exactly_ what we have with public transport.
Michael.
-
Sent via the
On Tuesday 30 October 2007 10:35, Richard Lockwood wrote:
..
Not sharing is a bad thing. If I had a bag of sweets, and didn't hand them
round my friends, that would be wrong
Dave said:
Asking people to agree not share with friends ... is evil
Sharing is axiomatically good in our society at
My point? it's not always as easy to take an off air broadcast and put
it online.
I see you've never tried Myth TV, my box is in the process of being built,
the only thing stopping me is cash for my ridiculesly over-specced box; not
difficulty. Plucking signals straight out of the air and
On Tuesday 30 October 2007 13:04, Tom Loosemore wrote:
I've commissioned several generations of such multi-channel DVB - Web
systems both inside and outside the BBC.
http://kamaelia.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/kamaelia/trunk/Code/Python/Kamaelia/Examples/DVB_Systems/Macro.py?view=markup
On 30/10/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/29/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 29 October 2007 18:47, Dave Crossland wrote:
...
Asking people to agree not share with friends and betray
On 10/30/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 30 October 2007 10:35, Richard Lockwood wrote:
..
Not sharing is a bad thing. If I had a bag of sweets, and didn't hand
them
round my friends, that would be wrong
Dave said:
Asking people to agree not share with friends
Dave doesn't mean sharing. Dave means stealing and redistributing
for free. When he says sharing, Dave always means stealing. Dave wants
everything for nothing.
This is simply untrue: non-commercial redistribution allow a lot of
scope for business, without trampling friendship,
On 30/10/2007, Matthew Somerville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, you'll be glad to hear that Windows DRM uses the non-proprietary
elliptic curve, DES, RC4 and SHA1, then?
Can you point me to the open standard for Windows DRM then, so that I
might perform a security analysis? As we all know
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was making the point that copying someone
else's work when they've specifically asked you not to, and giving it away
is theft - it is NOT sharing.
That's odd, the theft act states:
A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
copying someone else's work when they've specifically asked you not to,
and giving it away is theft - it is NOT sharing.
Rich.
Actually, that's copyright infringement, not theft; big difference, one's a
criminal act, the other is a
Andy wrote:
Copyright Infringement is NOT theft, theft is theft, copyright
infringement is copyright infringement. They are covered by entirely
separate laws, they are described differently in the law, and the
actions themselves differ greatly.
How can educated people confuse the two?
I
On 10/30/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 30 October 2007 14:07, Richard Lockwood wrote:
It should also be made clear that that quote from me has been
usedcompletely out of context -
I didn't mean to quote you out of context - my apologies. I thought they
were
two
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's rubbish. Utter, utter rubbish. You copy a CD and give it to
your mate, that's all about money - or rather it's all about not wanting to
pay money. Your friend may think that CD's overpriced and so wouldn't pay
the (say)
As I said in a previous email, as well as the legal differences, there is a
big ethical difference; with one I don't deprive the original owner of use
of their property the other is theft.
Vijay.
On 30/10/2007, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy wrote:
Copyright Infringement is NOT
That's rubbish. Utter, utter rubbish. You copy a CD and give it to
your mate, that's all about money - or rather it's all about not wanting to
pay money. Your friend may think that CD's overpriced and so wouldn't pay
the (say) ten quid asking price, but he wants it badly enough to
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Morally, I have no problem with people knocking up mix tapes, samplers etc
to give to their mates.
...
Unless the creator of a work specifically grants you the right to copy that
work, you don't have that right.
End of.
This is
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave doesn't mean sharing. Dave means stealing and redistributing
for free. When he says sharing, Dave always means stealing. Dave wants
everything for nothing.
This is simply untrue: non-commercial redistribution allow
I forgot the link - silly me
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/news/archives/2007/10/iplayer_drm_and.html
Ian Forrester
This e-mail is: [x] private; [] ask first; [] bloggable
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC5 C3, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TP
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
work: +44
Hi,
A very interesting interview - many thanks to Backstage and Ashley. A few
thoughts:
* It seems clear that all of the portability issues currently affecting the
iPlayer beta are a direct result of the requirement for DRM specified at the
design stage.
If the DRM constraint _were_ relaxed,
On 29/10/2007, David McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* From the interview, it is clear that the reason that the current DRM
requirements exist is because rights-holders did not want the end-user the to
be
able to redistribute content to others
Asking people to agree not share with friends
* One question I have is: why Kontiki? Given that the files being distributed
are DRM-wrapped anyway, why not use something more mainstream such as
Bittorrent?
Cos at the design stage the very word 'Bittorrent' was capable of
sending rights holders running for the hills, regardless of
Tom Loosemore wrote:
First, the BBC are _already_ broadcasting all of their content, digitally
and in
the clear, in the form of RealPlayer streams, terrestrial radio and (HD)
television broadcasts and also via internet multicast.
all above are geographically bounded.
So is access to the
On Monday 29 October 2007 18:47, Dave Crossland wrote:
...
Asking people to agree not share with friends and betray their
community is evil :-(
No, it's not.
Michael.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
73 matches
Mail list logo
