Re: [backstage] Full UK postcode location file turns up on Wikileaks: is that useful?
2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly st...@jollys.org On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote: What do people think? Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from well-meaning idiots. It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column names. In this case, there's only one legitimate source for the data, and they know who's licensed to use it and who isn't. Not only would you be stupid to offer a public service based on the leaked data (and who on this list would consider anything but a public service? ;-) ) but the people running *or using* reverse-engineered postcode geolocation databases will have to be on the lookout for those well-meaning idiots henceforth, if they don't want Royal Mail lawyers breathing down their necks. Personally I'm going to create myself some .kml files with the UK postcode regions in them, because I have always found these useful (you can link them to ACORN codes) and they are very expensive to buy... S - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] Full UK postcode location file turns up on Wikileaks: is that useful?
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:26:55 +0100, you wrote: 2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly st...@jollys.org On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote: What do people think? Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from well-meaning idiots. It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column names. Just because this is a zipped up csv file rather than a database does not seem to exempt it from Database Right http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm Where a database is defined as: Databases 3A. - (1) In this Part database means a collection of independent works, data or other materials which - (a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and (b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means. (2) For the purposes of this Part a literary work consisting of a database is original if, and only if, by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database constitutes the author's own intellectual creation.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right -- Rgds Paul Webster - 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] Full UK postcode location file turns up on Wikileaks: is that useful?
Paul, Yes, I suspect you are technically right. My feelings on the matter as they have always been. It would be good for the country as a whole for this data to be public, rather than being charged for. I have never heard a rational argument for data that is about the public domain not being in it. 2009/9/17 Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:26:55 +0100, you wrote: 2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly st...@jollys.org On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote: What do people think? Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from well-meaning idiots. It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column names. Just because this is a zipped up csv file rather than a database does not seem to exempt it from Database Right http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm Where a database is defined as: Databases 3A. - (1) In this Part database means a collection of independent works, data or other materials which - (a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and (b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means. (2) For the purposes of this Part a literary work consisting of a database is original if, and only if, by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database constitutes the author's own intellectual creation.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right -- Rgds Paul Webster - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] Full UK postcode location file turns up on Wikileaks: is that useful?
On 17/09/2009, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: Paul, Yes, I suspect you are technically right. My feelings on the matter as they have always been. It would be good for the country as a whole for this data to be public, rather than being charged for. I have never heard a rational argument for data that is about the public domain not being in it. I beleive the 'official' reason is it costs serious money for Royal Mail (and partners) to keep the database upto date (and of course the money (ie time/effort) to build the database in the first place. Even in the 'public domain' it would still cost money to keep it uptodate (it would be expected!) - and that money would have to come from somewhere. The the data is commercially managed to be able to cover the costs of making it. (not saying that is right or I agree with it! if 'opened' that the community could take over responisibly of maintaining it - and hence make the cost negliblie - not sure if that has occured to them* * But as the data is also used commerically, some businesses might not like to use community data, perfering commerical data with data quality contracts. ) - dual licencing? Dump a version in the public domain, but absolve itself of any responsiblity of maintainaince. And then maintain the commerical version for people who do want it (and can afford to pay!) 2009/9/17 Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:26:55 +0100, you wrote: 2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly st...@jollys.org On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote: What do people think? Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from well-meaning idiots. It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column names. Just because this is a zipped up csv file rather than a database does not seem to exempt it from Database Right http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm Where a database is defined as: Databases 3A. - (1) In this Part database means a collection of independent works, data or other materials which - (a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and (b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means. (2) For the purposes of this Part a literary work consisting of a database is original if, and only if, by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database constitutes the author's own intellectual creation.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right -- Rgds Paul Webster - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Barry - www.nearby.org.uk - www.geograph.org.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] Full UK postcode location file turns up on Wikileaks: is that useful?
2009/9/17 Barry Hunter ba...@barryhunter.co.uk On 17/09/2009, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: Paul, Yes, I suspect you are technically right. My feelings on the matter as they have always been. It would be good for the country as a whole for this data to be public, rather than being charged for. I have never heard a rational argument for data that is about the public domain not being in it. I beleive the 'official' reason is it costs serious money for Royal Mail (and partners) to keep the database upto date (and of course the money (ie time/effort) to build the database in the first place. It's a bit like paying extra for room service in a hotel. I always think if you didn't bring me my meal, I'm hardly going to pay for it. Firstly, it is the Post Office that insist you stick postcodes on things they are to deliver. Secondly, the Post Office would have to maintain the list of addresses that it forces on everyone else whatever. It matters not if they sell it or post it for free on the net. The list should be transferred to a public body, funded by the Post Office and made downloadable by everyone. Last time I looked, the Post Office wasn't privatized yet. Even in the 'public domain' it would still cost money to keep it uptodate (it would be expected!) - and that money would have to come from somewhere. The the data is commercially managed to be able to cover the costs of making it. (not saying that is right or I agree with it! if 'opened' that the community could take over responisibly of maintaining it - and hence make the cost negliblie - not sure if that has occured to them* * But as the data is also used commerically, some businesses might not like to use community data, perfering commerical data with data quality contracts. ) - dual licencing? Dump a version in the public domain, but absolve itself of any responsiblity of maintainaince. And then maintain the commerical version for people who do want it (and can afford to pay!) 2009/9/17 Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:26:55 +0100, you wrote: 2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly st...@jollys.org On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote: What do people think? Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from well-meaning idiots. It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column names. Just because this is a zipped up csv file rather than a database does not seem to exempt it from Database Right http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm Where a database is defined as: Databases 3A. - (1) In this Part database means a collection of independent works, data or other materials which - (a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and (b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means. (2) For the purposes of this Part a literary work consisting of a database is original if, and only if, by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database constitutes the author's own intellectual creation.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right -- Rgds Paul Webster - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Barry - www.nearby.org.uk - www.geograph.org.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/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
[backstage] Pure Sensia
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2009/09/17/pure-sensia-digital-radio-first-look/ Linux-based radio with touchscreen and app support. Not sure I like the styling and it's a bit pricey, but it's an interesting product, certainly... Since it has Twitter support, no doubt certain members of this list will love it ;-) S - 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] Pure Sensia
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:42:20 +0100, you wrote: http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2009/09/17/pure-sensia-digital-radio-first-look/ Linux-based radio with touchscreen and app support. Not sure I like the styling and it's a bit pricey, but it's an interesting product, certainly... Since it has Twitter support, no doubt certain members of this list will love it ;-) I blogged about it here http://dabdig.blogspot.com/2009/09/touchscreens-are-in-fashion-pure-sensia.html The bit that should be interesting to folks here is that this will probably be the first device released with RadioDNS RadioVIS support. -- Rgds Paul.Webster - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
2009/9/16 Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/15/bbc-wants-to-put-drm.html BBC wants to put DRM on the TV Brits are forced to pay for It's worth noting that this applies ONLY to HD DTV (Freeview), which barely even exists yet. So don't throw away your Freeview boxes just yet. I can't see a switchover from Freeview to Freeview HD happening any time soon... Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
2009/9/17 Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com It's worth noting that this applies ONLY to HD DTV (Freeview), which barely even exists yet. So don't throw away your Freeview boxes just yet. I can't see a switchover from Freeview to Freeview HD happening any time soon... This is some interesting speculation: *It’s not the BBC asking for this. They’re being held over a barrel by third-party rightsholders, from whom they’re obligated under their charter to obtain a substantial proportion of their programming!* *I suspect the best thing that could happen would be for OFCOM to unambiguously refuse that permission. Doing so would substantially strengthen the BBC’s negotiating position with rightsholders; “Well, we would do as you ask, but we think it’s would be a violation of long-standing principle and contrary to the public interest. More to the point, our regulator agrees with us.”* *Indeed, I suspect this is exactly the response that the BBC is privately hoping for. They don’t want to do this.* http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/09/personal-video-recorders-ofcom-consultation-indicates-that-the-bbc-want-to-make-yours-obsolete/#comment-84732 Wonder if that is indeed that case... Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. The Beeb should be pointing to what happened with the Broadcast Flag in the States as the perfect case study! The US TV industry hasn't imploded as a result of the Broadcast Flag requirement being dropped, and the world continues to turn in a regular fashion. Why are rightsholders so scared of fully engaging with technology? Metaphor of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted and subsequently gone on to win the Grand National comes to mind. Further reading http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/06/dtv-era-no-broadcast
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
2009/9/17 Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. By the sounds of it, the main 'enforcement' mechanism of the metadata compression/encryption isn't so much technological, as the fact that you won't be able to use the Freeview HD logo, or be listed on the Freeview website, without signing for a free licence (which requires you to implement some as-yet-unspecified restrictions). Which won't really stop free software from existing - but may stop it from being a commercial success. That said, I wonder how many people will really bother to upgrade from Freeview to Freeview HD anyway - standard definition Freeview seems good enough for most people (especially those with non-enormous tellies). So the migration to Freeview HD will happen slowly, as people upgrade their televisions as part of their natural lifecycle. (Assuming that the signal doesn't get switched off). Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Will we ever see HD freeview though? The bandwidth requirement would be enormous. On 17 Sep 2009, at 16:53, Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com wrote: 2009/9/17 Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. By the sounds of it, the main 'enforcement' mechanism of the metadata compression/encryption isn't so much technological, as the fact that you won't be able to use the Freeview HD logo, or be listed on the Freeview website, without signing for a free licence (which requires you to implement some as-yet-unspecified restrictions). Which won't really stop free software from existing - but may stop it from being a commercial success. That said, I wonder how many people will really bother to upgrade from Freeview to Freeview HD anyway - standard definition Freeview seems good enough for most people (especially those with non- enormous tellies). So the migration to Freeview HD will happen slowly, as people upgrade their televisions as part of their natural lifecycle. (Assuming that the signal doesn't get switched off). Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error- free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Alun Rowe Pentangle Internet Limited 2 Buttermarket Thame Oxfordshire OX9 3EW Tel: +44 8700 339905 Fax: +44 8700 339906 Please direct all support requests to mailto:it-supp...@pentangle.co.uk Pentangle Internet Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 3960918. Registered office: 1 Lauras Close, Great Staughton, Cambridgeshire PE19 5DP
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Freeview and freeview+ (as the DVB-T2 carried HD mux is to be called) will exist in parallel- the number of muxes will drop from 6 to 5, one will go to DVB-t2, the other 4 will up their capacity with a little tweak and reshuffled channels from the flipped mux will be shared around them. The New mux will be a part of the main digital switch over process from the Granada switch onwards, with advance broadcasts in enough areas to make HD a possible service for a decent majority of the population by the time of the World Cup. Yes, by the middle of next year, a very large part of the UK TV audience will have the option to buy kit that will let them watch HD over terrestrial digital broadcast at home using their existing TV ariel. The bandwidth is moderate- improvements in carrier (256 QAM) and video compression (h.264) have given the broadcasters about 50% more capacity for a given bit of spectrum. Keeping audiences happy as DSO happens and Freeview+ rolls out is a critical task, and one that a phenomenal amount of effort is going onto- in fact the whole DVB-T2 story is one of incredibly good AND quick research, development and engineering, driven along by frighteningly tight regulatory deadlines. To be honest, slotting additional DRM requirements at this stage looks like adding a horrid additional complication to an already mind bending engineering challenge, and perhaps more importantly, could break the delicate public trust the roll-out depends upon. All of the above is based on my personnal opinion and understanding based on public domain discussions, especially from the IBC conference last week. It is not the BBC's official possition. a On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com wrote: 2009/9/17 Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. By the sounds of it, the main 'enforcement' mechanism of the metadata compression/encryption isn't so much technological, as the fact that you won't be able to use the Freeview HD logo, or be listed on the Freeview website, without signing for a free licence (which requires you to implement some as-yet-unspecified restrictions). Which won't really stop free software from existing - but may stop it from being a commercial success. That said, I wonder how many people will really bother to upgrade from Freeview to Freeview HD anyway - standard definition Freeview seems good enough for most people (especially those with non-enormous tellies). So the migration to Freeview HD will happen slowly, as people upgrade their televisions as part of their natural lifecycle. (Assuming that the signal doesn't get switched off). Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: ant.mil...@gmail.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/
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Ofcom is going to use Multiplex B (vacated by the BBC) to provide DVB-T2 HD services. First region on air is Granada later this year. 2009/9/17 Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk Will we ever see HD freeview though? The bandwidth requirement would be enormous. On 17 Sep 2009, at 16:53, Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com wrote: 2009/9/17 Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk chris...@infinitus.co.uk Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. By the sounds of it, the main 'enforcement' mechanism of the metadata compression/encryption isn't so much technological, as the fact that you won't be able to use the Freeview HD logo, or be listed on the Freeview website, without signing for a free licence (which requires you to implement some as-yet-unspecified restrictions). Which won't really stop free software from existing - but may stop it from being a commercial success. That said, I wonder how many people will really bother to upgrade from Freeview to Freeview HD anyway - standard definition Freeview seems good enough for most people (especially those with non-enormous tellies). So the migration to Freeview HD will happen slowly, as people upgrade their televisions as part of their natural lifecycle. (Assuming that the signal doesn't get switched off). Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.comhttp://www.rattlecentral.com This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. *Alun Rowe* *Pentangle Internet Limited* 2 Buttermarket Thame Oxfordshire OX9 3EW Tel: +44 8700 339905 Fax: +44 8700 339906 *Please direct all support requests to **it-supp...@pentangle.co.uk*it-supp...@pentangle.co.uk Pentangle Internet Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 3960918. Registered office: 1 Lauras Close, Great Staughton, Cambridgeshire PE19 5DP -- Simon Thompson GMAIL Account
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Ant Miller wrote: Freeview and freeview+ (as the DVB-T2 carried HD mux is to be called) will exist in parallel- the number of muxes will drop from 6 to 5, one will go to DVB-t2, the other 4 will up their capacity with a little tweak and reshuffled channels from the flipped mux will be shared around them. And the shuffling starts at the end of this month. Everyone will need to rescan their Freeview STBs and IDTVs on the 30th September. More details here: http://www.freeview.co.uk/freeview/Resolutions/About-Channels/Retuning/F reeview-national-retune-30-September-2009 ... which also suggests Freeview HD in London from December this year. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 500NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
You'll need to retune, but the services you currently get on Freeview should still be available. Think of Freeview + as an optional upgrade. a On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk wrote: I assume my topfield HD will be out of date with these proposed changes? -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: ant.mil...@gmail.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/
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
I meant in terms of the HD element if they are changing the spec? If there is a decryption requirement I doubt the Topfield will have it? On 17 Sep 2009, at 17:52, Ant Miller ant.mil...@gmail.com wrote: You'll need to retune, but the services you currently get on Freeview should still be available. Think of Freeview + as an optional upgrade. a On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk wrote: I assume my topfield HD will be out of date with these proposed changes? -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: ant.mil...@gmail.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/ This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error- free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Alun Rowe Pentangle Internet Limited 2 Buttermarket Thame Oxfordshire OX9 3EW Tel: +44 8700 339905 Fax: +44 8700 339906 Please direct all support requests to mailto:it-supp...@pentangle.co.uk Pentangle Internet Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 3960918. Registered office: 1 Lauras Close, Great Staughton, Cambridgeshire PE19 5DP - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
I don't know the topfield box, but it's unlikely it can decode the new carrier mode. h.264 it might be able to handle, but it would be a surprise. So no, the HD will need a new box. Optional upgrade, not a free upgrade! Though the broadcast service will remain free to air. a On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk wrote: I meant in terms of the HD element if they are changing the spec? If there is a decryption requirement I doubt the Topfield will have it? On 17 Sep 2009, at 17:52, Ant Miller ant.mil...@gmail.com wrote: You'll need to retune, but the services you currently get on Freeview should still be available. Think of Freeview + as an optional upgrade. a On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk wrote: I assume my topfield HD will be out of date with these proposed changes? -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: ant.mil...@gmail.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/ This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Alun Rowe Pentangle Internet Limited 2 Buttermarket Thame Oxfordshire OX9 3EW Tel: +44 8700 339905 Fax: +44 8700 339906 Please direct all support requests to mailto:it-supp...@pentangle.co.ukpentangle Internet Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 3960918. Registered office: 1 Lauras Close, Great Staughton, Cambridgeshire PE19 5DP - 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/ -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: ant.mil...@gmail.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/
Freeview HD vs existing HDMI upscaling freeview boxes (was RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?)
Alan wrote: I assume my topfield HD will be out of date with these proposed changes? Ant replied: You'll need to retune, but the services you currently get on Freeview should still be available. Think of Freeview + as an optional upgrade. To which Alun wrote: I meant in terms of the HD element if they are changing the spec? If there is a decryption requirement I doubt the Topfield will have it? I would say you're right, your box wont' receive HD freeview signals. But that's not (only) because of any encryption, it's because the spec for encoding HD over freeview [1] was only agreed last week and the first box was announced five days ago, to be released in the first half of 2010: http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2009/09/12/pace-unveils-dvb-t2-freeview-h d-box/ I guess you have this box [2]: http://www.topfield.co.uk/index.php?option=com_contentview=articleid=1 0catid=2Itemid=3 It uses HDMI upscaling to work with your HD TV. But it's not actually processing the real freeview HD signal and never can -- your box needs different chips to be able to do that. So to actually see Freeview HD in HD, you will need to buy a new box :-( HTH, Brendan. [1] known as DVB-T2. The DVB are the standards committee for most TV standards in Europe, India, Australia etc. The BBC is a member. DVB-T was the standard for regular freeview, so DVB-T2 is the standard for next-gen freeview: the T is for terrestrial. You can guess that DVB-C is for cable and DVB-S is for satellite... They also have C2 and S2 standards for HD over those platforms. [2] URL edited for brevity -- yes it was much longer than that before -- but it seems to work... - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 17:29, Ant Miller ant.mil...@gmail.com wrote: Keeping audiences happy as DSO happens and Freeview+ rolls out is a critical task, I think that there's going to be a lot of unhappy freeview HDTV owners wondering why the TV they have recently bought isn't picking up the new HD channels when they're launched (especially as the TV was probably sold as HD Ready).
Re: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 22:04 +0100, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote: I think that there's going to be a lot of unhappy freeview HDTV owners wondering why the TV they have recently bought isn't picking up the new HD channels when they're launched (especially as the TV was probably sold as HD Ready). But to be fair, whos's fault is that? Ian - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
I think that there's going to be a lot of unhappy freeview HDTV owners wondering why the TV they have recently bought isn't picking up the new HD channels when they're launched (especially as the TV was probably sold as HD Ready). Prime opportunity to flog another STB / CAM to correctly display broadcast flagged content on pre-BCF-compatible displays? Do I hear the usual suspects (Panny, Alba, Sony, Humax etc) getting in line for tender as I speak? ;)
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 15:50 +0100, Christopher Woods wrote: Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. The Beeb should be pointing to what happened with the Broadcast Flag in the States as the perfect case study! The US TV industry hasn't imploded as a result of the Broadcast Flag requirement being dropped, and the world continues to turn in a regular fashion. Why are rightsholders so scared of fully engaging with technology? Metaphor of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted and subsequently gone on to win the Grand National comes to mind. Further reading http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/06/dtv-era-no-broadcast I actually think your on to something with that case study! - 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] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
On 18/09/2009, Mr I Forrester mail...@cubicgarden.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 22:04 +0100, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote: I think that there's going to be a lot of unhappy freeview HDTV owners wondering why the TV they have recently bought isn't picking up the new HD channels when they're launched (especially as the TV was probably sold as HD Ready). But to be fair, whos's fault is that? Cynically, who wants to guess what proportion of HD Ready TV owners a) think they're already watching HD content on Freeview, b) understand what HD Ready means, and c) bought from those clever DSG staff who could answer b)? A small gripe, even back in 2005, but the older HD Ready standard didn't require the TV to be able to display even a native 720p frame without horizontal scaling. More importantly for the content producers, it did have to support HDCP... Cheers, Nick -- Nick Morrott MythTV Official wiki: http://mythtv.org/wiki/ MythTV users list archive: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest. - Benjamin Franklin - 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/
