RE: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
i do get this strange sense of deja vu From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Jeremy Stone Sent: 02 October 2009 20:19 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door Oh its just like the old days :) Jem Stone Communities Executive | BBC Audio and Music O7966 551242 | twitter: @jemstone | jem.stone [at] bbc.co.uk. - Original Message - From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Sent: Fri Oct 02 20:12:04 2009 Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door Rob Myers wrote: On 02/10/09 19:17, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: People on this list may be interested in this latest blog post: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html The first commenter is far more worth reading than the original post - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html?ssorl=1254509384ssoc=rd http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html 2. The DTV is not serving the public if it introduces unnecessary controls and complexity into the standards process. Requiring secret codes to decompress the data stream is excluding free and open source software (just like the content scrambling system excluded open source DVD players). The ability to revoke or otherwise impose sanctions on the consumer electronics industry, including retrospective disabling of products and impose restrictions on functionality. After all that is it's intent. 3. To whom ever the DTLA is responding it is not the public. As indicated above, it is about giving the content industries control. 4. It will apply to HD devices without a HDMI output, another overly complex standard that will raise the cost to consumers due to the addition of encryption etc, which restricts the devices it will 'trust'. 5. The BBC's cosy negotiation with rightholders and secretive consultations amounts to us neglecting our responsibilities and a desire to slip this process through quietly This point we take most seriously. Above all else, we are a public organisation funded by the Licence Fee and have committed ourselves to greater transparency and openness because we believe that this is an obligation we have to our audience And yet you are looking to sophistry and an abuse of language to subvert the legal requirement to broadcast an unencrypted signal. It is clear that if you need a secret key to uncompress the broadcast stream rather than using a public standard which anyone can implement, then you are de facto engaged in encryption just like the Content Scrambling System. In my view this is a breach of the legal requirement to broadcast an un-encrypted signal. Any collusion by Ofcom's part, would not void the intention and letter of the law. nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? As usual it's a difficult balancing act. No it is a blatent breach of the law - 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 Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 19:53, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.ukwrote: How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? As usual it's a difficult balancing act. But the content providers are trying to sell stuff to the BBC. You would think the BBC would be in much the same position as Tesco is allegedly in with regards to farmers and be able to exert some pressure on your suppliers. Are all the content providers suicidal enough to not sell content to the BBC if you refuse to use DRM on HD? Even with multichannel, there aren't that many buyers of content inthe UK and most of them aren't as big as the BBC, so I'm surprised that the BBC is in such a difficult bargaining position.
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 19:53, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.ukwrote: How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? History shows that this won't happen. And this time the BBC is in an even stronger position given the collapse of advertising revenue for commercial TV in the UK. The BBC is a nice big pot of easy money for content vendors. The threats of content vendors not to take that money shouldn't fool anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Next they'll be threatening to hold their breath until they get what they want. As usual it's a difficult balancing act. It is not. It's capitulation to special interests for no good reason. If it was a balancing act, how would just giving the side that is against the BBC and its audience everything they want balance things? - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
Rob - you forget that the BBC is also a content vendor. Also content vendors do want their content to be shown to licence fee payers. They just want some compensation in return. And it's an exaggeration to say that the content venedors are getting everything they want. -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Rob Myers Sent: 03 October 2009 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 19:53, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.ukwrote: How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? History shows that this won't happen. And this time the BBC is in an even stronger position given the collapse of advertising revenue for commercial TV in the UK. The BBC is a nice big pot of easy money for content vendors. The threats of content vendors not to take that money shouldn't fool anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Next they'll be threatening to hold their breath until they get what they want. As usual it's a difficult balancing act. It is not. It's capitulation to special interests for no good reason. If it was a balancing act, how would just giving the side that is against the BBC and its audience everything they want balance things? - Rob. - 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
Well I'm not party to the negotiations so I've no idea how strong or how weak the BBC's bargaining position is. But don't forget that the BBC is a content vendor too. From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Scot McSweeney-Roberts Sent: 03 October 2009 14:43 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 19:53, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? As usual it's a difficult balancing act. But the content providers are trying to sell stuff to the BBC. You would think the BBC would be in much the same position as Tesco is allegedly in with regards to farmers and be able to exert some pressure on your suppliers. Are all the content providers suicidal enough to not sell content to the BBC if you refuse to use DRM on HD? Even with multichannel, there aren't that many buyers of content inthe UK and most of them aren't as big as the BBC, so I'm surprised that the BBC is in such a difficult bargaining position.
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: Well I'm not party to the negotiations so I've no idea how strong or how weak the BBC's bargaining position is. But don't forget that the BBC is a content vendor too. I see my past has caught up with me ! (the references to the past, deja vu, my reputation has been earned). The BBC can not break the law, or it's own charter, this is a show stopper. Semantics will not be enough to avoid this fact. I am just in the process of polishing my arguments :) What they (content vendors, or special interests) want is control. That is the route to monopoly rents. This is about technical control over consumer electronics and the public. The BBC charter is on the side of the public, and the BBC should not making policy in this area. I assume my views on copyright are known (to some), I am prepared to join the debate, on the anti-copyright side. - 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/
