David Woodhouse wrote:
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 18:41 +0100, vijay chopra wrote:
Sure I will, you can't copyright a number, and I'd like to see anyone
try and sue me for posing one.
We digress but I'm dubious about that argument. You can represent
_anything_ with 'just a number'. I could buy
On 19/06/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 18:41 +0100, vijay chopra wrote:
On 18/06/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ACSS decryption code? :)
You mean 13,256,278,887,989,457,651,018,865,901,401,704,640 ?
No, that's just a decryption
David Greaves wrote:
Sean Dillon wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
Besides, if there are meeja prima donnas and wannabe luvvies (on this
list or otherwise) that believe that DRM is a long term, workable
solution to this problem, then I couldn't care less if they get
their egos bruised a little, and
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 08:43 +0100, David Greaves wrote:
Incidentally, who thinks the law should allow protection of this type of
information beyond trade secret - if an organisation is dumb enough to
expose
it's PKI keys then they deserve no legal protection.
Dear all
Before we all get too stuck into DRMagain.
Can i just extend my thanks to Matt and Tom for the past weekend.
I sat Matt yesterday. He was exhausted. He didn't even mind me teasing him
about his appalling Djing.
Ian was so tired he was watching Jekyll to relax.
Hack Day was an
Jeremy Stone wrote:
Dear all
Can i just extend my thanks to Matt and Tom for the past weekend.
Hear hear
I really enjoyed it and thanks so much to Matt personally for lending us
his video camera for our Real Life/Second Life hack which was a lot of
fun and we just ran out of time. It was
Jeremy Stone wrote:
Dear all
Before we all get too stuck into DRMagain.
Jem (and other people who I've seen do the same thing on this list),
You created this message by replying to a message in the DRM thread and
changing the subject.
Unfortunately, this means that your mail still
It's probably worth pointing out that the OS symbols are the copyright and
intellectual property of the OS.
On 19/06/07, ~:'' ありがとうございました。 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ed,
such an extensive collection of symbols will not be needed.
could you expand on this as your meaning isn't clear?
currently
Sorry for the delay in replying but I've had a toothache!
Right...
You can divide the kind of material that is currently shown on television
into five broad types:
- True live, which a content that is actually live, or is non-archive
material introduced by live presentation. This would be the
vijay chopra wrote:
On 19/06/07, *David Woodhouse* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I totally agree, however seeing as I have no intention of breaking the
spirit of the law (I may be breaching a technicality) I have no qualms
in using any software to break copy protection to
On 19/06/07, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
On 19/06/07, *David Woodhouse* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I totally agree, however seeing as I have no intention of breaking the
spirit of the law (I may be breaching a technicality) I have no
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 12:50 +0100, David Greaves wrote:
DRM, being technological, cannot turn a blind eye to the law. The law
is supposed to be a bit fuzzy.
DRM doesn't even cope with the clear-cut cases without screwing the
consumer over, let alone the 'fuzz'.
My partner is a high school
On 19/06/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From DVB this is nice and easy -- I stream MPEG to a file and she can do
what she likes with it. (Well, I then do what she tells me she'd like.)
Actually, she can't do what she likes with it: she can do what the law
allows her to do
David,
The files transferred using iPlayer are just .AVI wrappers of MPEG-4 type
content. The DRM is inside the AVI wrapper, outside of the MPEG-4.
On 19/06/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 12:50 +0100, David Greaves wrote:
DRM, being technological,
I think the point is that the DRM screws with what people might *expect* to
be able to do with content in certain circumstances. ie I can record it with
my PVR - why not with my computer/iplayer combo?
Richard
On 19/06/07, Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/06/07, David Woodhouse
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Mr I Forrester wrote:
Go get your invites now and enjoy...
https://www.joost.com/presents/backstage/
Thanks to the Joost team for the special invites.
You're very welcome Ian and I'm glad Hackday went so well.
If anyone has any comments about any aspect of Joost,
On 19/06/07, Richard McMillan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the point is that the DRM screws with what people might *expect*
to be able to do with content in certain circumstances. ie I can record it
with my PVR - why not with my computer/iplayer combo?
Which means that all this talk of
I'd be happy to setup a mailing list for discussion about this.
It does seem a little unfair to Ian to habitually hijack his list for
dicussion of rights issues. It it supposed to be a techie list after
all.
If the owners want to contact me I'll gladly set them up on a list on
my list server.
Assuming you mean me, replying to other's comments is hardly hijacking.
On 19/06/07, Nic James Ferrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd be happy to setup a mailing list for discussion about this.
It does seem a little unfair to Ian to habitually hijack his list for
dicussion of rights issues. It
Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Assuming you mean me, replying to other's comments is hardly
hijacking.
I don't mean you (unless you are the owner of www.FreeTheBBC.info).
I don't mean to be rude either.
I simply mean that the discussions about how the BBC should be run are
really
You mean Ian Forrester?
On 19/06/07, Nic James Ferrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Assuming you mean me, replying to other's comments is hardly
hijacking.
I don't mean you (unless you are the owner of www.FreeTheBBC.info).
I don't mean to be rude
Gary Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You mean Ian Forrester?
I meant that backstage is Ian Forrester's list, yes. He runs it.
I'm not trying to say anything other than there's a lot of talk about
this and maybe it's time it had a separate discussion place and I'm
willing to spend my money
You all seen babelgum as well? It's kind of like a Joost competitor.
Get invites from here:
http://www.babelgum.com/download/invite_gateway.php?idUser=449747906466d56b7b2c76
On 6/19/07, Libby Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Mr I Forrester wrote:
Go get your invites
I'd be happy to contribute, and discuss, more about DRM in another
place, if you like.
RichE
On 19 Jun 2007, at 17:04, Nic James Ferrier wrote:
Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Assuming you mean me, replying to other's comments is hardly
hijacking.
I don't mean you (unless you
On 19/06/07, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
On 19/06/07, *David Woodhouse* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I totally agree, however seeing as I have no intention of breaking the
spirit of the law (I may be breaching a technicality) I have no
On Tuesday 19 June 2007 19:31, vijay chopra wrote:
And as such I' seeking clarity
on exactly what's legal, and what's not regarding the copyright of numbers.
You need to speak to a lawyer then.
And for what its worth, I believe the issue is not related to copyright -
I've not really looked
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 07:31:03PM +0100, vijay chopra wrote:
On 19/06/07, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
On 19/06/07, *David Woodhouse* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
legal ways. The only thing I have downloaded unlawfully is an out of
I can do [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a mailing list... it's there in 30 minutes if
people wish to use it.
On 19/06/07, Richard P Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd be happy to contribute, and discuss, more about DRM in another
place, if you like.
RichE
On 19 Jun 2007, at 17:04, Nic James Ferrier
Sorry, I'm a bit oldscool and still think of my wrappers being AVIs - being
a bit Visual Basic 3! I meant WMV.
As the iPlayer downloads the complete file before playback, there is no
requirement to stream.
Conceptually you have a file wrapped up like this:
({ [audio]+[video] ] VCodec }
On 19/06/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Backstage is intended, I thought, to be a
list for technical discussion of stuff from the BBC you can use for
building things. (ie stuff you can take and build things with, rather
than things you can't) It's not really the place (IMO) to ask
Whereas I had the advantage there, because all I had to do was dive into
C:\iPlayer Content ;)
nowt wrong with oldskool! :D
_
From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 June 2007 22:18
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
Sorry,
31 matches
Mail list logo
