Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote: On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 19:07, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk mailto:nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: that's why there's a public consultation Where? There doesn't seem to be anything related on ofcom's site http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/?open=Yessector=Broadcasting%20-%20TV http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/?open=Yessector=Broadcasting%20-%20TV You'd think they'd be the ones doing the consulting. They were, you've missed the consultation cut-off date. The outcome will be posted in due course. -- *Simon Thompson MEng MIET*
[backstage] Compatibility challenges for Broadcast Networks and White Space Devices
A Colleagues paper from the recent IBC conference has been made available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/09/compatability_challenges_for_b.html Interested to see what people think. -- *Simon Thompson MEng MIET* Research and Development Engineer mailto:simon.thomp...@rd.bbc.co.uk
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
2009/9/30 Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk Cory's piece is inaccurate in many respects - see this http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/09/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_up.htmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/09/freeview_hd_copy_protecti%0Aon_up.html I wasn't entirely impressed with the Open Rights Group's response, either. See my comment on http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2009/bbc-seeks-tv-encryption-through-the-back-door There seems to be a lot of FUD-spreading about breaking existing Freeview boxes. That said, I'm no fan of the proposal either, but I can at least see where it's coming from. Does anyone know how the lookup tables compression/encryption (as proposed by the BBC) compares to the encryption of the actual TV signal (which seems to be what all the commercial channels are going to do)? ie will the BBC's broadcasts be more or less open/accessible than the commercial ones? Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
Ofcom's letter to DTT industry stakeholders inviting comments To me, that's not the quite the same thing as a public debate on the issue. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 09:27, Andrew Bowden andrew.bow...@bbc.co.uk wrote: From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Scot McSweeney-Roberts On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 19:07, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: that's why there's a public consultation Where? There doesn't seem to be anything related on ofcom's site http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/?open=Yessector=Broadcasting%20 -%20TVhttp://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/?open=Yessector=Broadcasting%20%0A-%20TV You'd think they'd be the ones doing the consulting. This is from an Ofcom email sent on their updates mailing list: Ofcom has today published a letter from BBC Free to View Ltd concerning its licence for DTT Multiplex B. A modification to the licence would allow Ofcom and the BBC to agree the BBC's proposal to compress service information text on the Multiplex. The BBC's letter, alongside Ofcom's letter to DTT industry stakeholders inviting comments by 16 September 2009, can be found here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/ifi/tvlicensing/enquiry/; - 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] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
--- On Thu, 1/10/09, Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com wrote: From: Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Date: Thursday, 1 October, 2009, 11:39 AM 2009/9/30 Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk Cory's piece is inaccurate in many respects - see this http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/09/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_up.html I wasn't entirely impressed with the Open Rights Group's response, either. See my comment on http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2009/bbc-seeks-tv-encryption-through-the-back-door There seems to be a lot of FUD-spreading about breaking existing Freeview boxes. That said, I'm no fan of the proposal either, but I can at least see where it's coming from. Does anyone know how the lookup tables compression/encryption (as proposed by the BBC) compares to the encryption of the actual TV signal (which seems to be what all the commercial channels are going to do)? ie will the BBC's broadcasts be more or less open/accessible than the commercial ones? The interesting twist is that they intend to protect the look up tables using the European database right, so you will not be able to use them in your own hardware unless you are licensed to do so. - 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] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/09/freeview_hd_copy_protection_up.html We've said before that we are specifically avoiding encryption of the broadcast signal to ensure that the public service content remains free to air. Content protection gives content producers comfort to give consumers early and free access to more content, without jeopardising future revenue streams. Stop the rationalisation and sophistry. If you can't decode the compression, then it is effectively encrypted. And making it available as FOSS (Free, Open Source Software), would effectively make the codes public. Therefore this will be restricted (outlawed) by licence agreements. Content Protection, DRM, call it what you will, this is selling the public down the river, once established the intention will be to maintain the system when HD becomes the standard. And it seems the BBC needs all the friends it can get. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/how-cameron-cosied-up-to-murdoch--son-1795742.html Curb the BBC Its income is guaranteed through the licence system, while the profitability of Sky television and the Murdoch newspapers depend on the state of the market. Mr Cameron is sympathetic. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/01/murdoch-labour-bbc-brown A Murdoch-Cameron alliance could be formidably threatening to the BBC. As William Shawcross wrote of the elder Murdoch: The power he has accumulated on the part of his allies is awesome to his enemies. The BBC often does its best to lose friends and generally annoy and irritate people. But, in the coming months and years, it is going to need all the friends it can get. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/04/welcome_to_some_new_initials_d.html This is clearly not a fully open and connected world - but we are absolutely committed to continuing to find ways to allow you to enjoy our programmes as you choose. More sophistry, fully open and connected world is what we require of the BBC. There is a case against copyright (Intellectual Monopoly), and DRM witch extends the copyright monopolist control to consumer electronics and consumers. The BBC needs to be aware that people will be outraged at the restrictions placed on their use of content they have paid for. I for one, have an interest in this topic, and will act accordingly, now and in the future. The BBC can not afford to alienate the public. Stand on principle, no encryption, no DRM, by any name or form. This is the legal requirement and what the public expect. - 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/
