Re: [backstage] API into iPlayer content
Not sure what you're looking for, but all the metadata that iPlayer pages uses to build a programme page is openly accessible http://beebhack.wikia.com/wiki/IPlayer_Metadata It can't not be otherwise the javascript on those pages wouldn't work. On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Anthony McKale anthony.mck...@bbc.co.uk wrote: it uses some of them, but iplayer it's self is created from them too -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk on behalf of Mo McRoberts Sent: Wed 9/29/2010 2:52 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] API into iPlayer content On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 14:23, Anthony McKale anthony.mck...@bbc.co.uk wrote: yah the feeds aren't https/firewall protected so i'm guessing no one should mind or at least it'll be a lesson to them if they didn't want folks accessing them If memory serves either the EMP SWF itself or the supporting JS makes use of them, which would require their visibility. I could be wrong, though -- I can't for the life of me recall how I came to believe this to be the case, so I could just be making things up. M. - 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/ - 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] API into iPlayer content
Unlikely. The BBC have gone out of their way to be hostile to open source attempts at using iPlayer content, however you will find working examples and programs for playing iPlayer stuff on pretty much anything on that same wiki. On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Alex Cockell a...@acockell.eclipse.co.uk wrote: I'm not personally looking for metadata, but it would be great if some of the open-source players were permitted back into the fold, meaning that VLC and the like could play BBC content... Especially for cpu architectures that Adobe don't support. Oh, and be able to distribute said player plugins in Linux distro repositories. And I want to be able to play content on my n900 again. - Original message - Not sure what you're looking for, but all the metadata that iPlayer pages uses to build a programme page is openly accessible http://beebhack.wikia.com/wiki/IPlayer_Metadata It can't not be otherwise the javascript on those pages wouldn't work. On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Anthony McKale anthony.mck...@bbc.co.uk wrote: it uses some of them, but iplayer it's self is created from them too -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk on behalf of Mo McRoberts Sent: Wed 9/29/2010 2:52 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] API into iPlayer content On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 14:23, Anthony McKale anthony.mck...@bbc.co.uk wrote: yah the feeds aren't https/firewall protected so i'm guessing no one should mind or at least it'll be a lesson to them if they didn't want folks accessing them If memory serves either the EMP SWF itself or the supporting JS makes use of them, which would require their visibility. I could be wrong, though -- I can't for the life of me recall how I came to believe this to be the case, so I could just be making things up. M. - 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/ - 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/ - 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] iPad and iPlayer
Was BeebPlayer actually banned by the BBC then? I was trying to get the story on why it suddenly vanished. What could the issue possibly be with it? On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: Mo, Dave got the beebPlayer app working OK on Android. Until the BBC reversed the stated position and got it banned. Shouldn't be too hard... On 26 May 2010 23:35, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: On 26-May-2010, at 23:11, Brian Butterworth wrote: Let's hope the same priority has been afforded to Android users. It was pointed out to me earlier today that Android has been “going to support Flash really soon” for quite a while now. While it should be a very simple change to serve up the iPhone version to Android phones alongside iPhones and iPod touches (it’s all WebKit, baseline H.264+AAC-LC, after all — though might be in a QuickTime container, can’t recall), I can’t help but wonder if it would complicate the BBC’s “strategic relationship” with Adobe if they were to do it. Not that I’m endorsing such a thing were it to be true, mind. Bloody stupid situation… M. - 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 - 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/
[backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: get_iplayer 2.77 release (was Re: [backstage] get_iplayer dr opped in response to BBC’s lack of support for open source )
You realise that Open Source isn't an organisation that designs software, right? You also realise we've had SWF verification software for quite a long time and we're happily using it to download video behind SWF verified flash apps? I really don't think user experience is the issue. My user experience with iPlayer is that I get home and all my favourite TV shows have magically been downloaded and are visible in Boxee, watchable in HD at a time when my ISP is normally dealing with a mass of traffic. get_iplayer has a pretty big user base without a shiny UI because most people want software to do what they want first and then have it looking cool doing it later. get_iplayer was better than BBC's effort because it enabled HD playback on Linux, which was not something they'd managed before. BeebPlayer was better than the BBC's efforts because it enabled playback on Android, which was something they hadn't managed before. On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Kieran Kunhya kie...@kunhya.com wrote: What actually needs to happen is that Open Source needs to call the BBCs bluff by actually implementing the SWF verification stuff and producing an application with a compelling user experience that matches or is better than anything else on offer. --- On *Thu, 27/5/10, Richard P Edwards re...@mac.com* wrote: From: Richard P Edwards re...@mac.com Subject: Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: get_iplayer 2.77 release (was Re: [backstage] get_iplayer dropped in response to BBC’s lack of support for open source) To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Date: Thursday, 27 May, 2010, 16:07 I thought this was an interesting summary http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/bbc_drm_and_demise_get_iplayer_what_hell_going I read some quite thought provoking stories of what the Publishers are up to . so once PACT and other old fashioned societies get involved, then the unintended consequences could be quite tragic. Rich On 27 May 2010, at 09:47, Brian Butterworth wrote: I think the people from PACT got it all banned. After all, they have their own interests to look after, you can't blame them. It's not as if the money is from the public or anything. On 26 May 2010 23:28, Alex Cockell a...@acockell.eclipse.co.ukhttp://mc/compose?to=a...@acockell.eclipse.co.uk wrote: Hi folks, Considering it's now being handled here - do we have anyone with any clout as to getting get_iplayer supported officially? Just thinking that there is precedent for a download/streaming engine separate to playback client - just look toward the EBU... :) Watching with interest... Alex -- Alex Cockell Reading, Berks, UK a...@acockell.eclipse.co.ukhttp://mc/compose?to=a...@acockell.eclipse.co.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
Re: [backstage] iPad and iPlayer
You must mean column inches On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: I thought a device had to have a reasonable UK market share before the BBC supported it? On 15 April 2010 12:33, Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com wrote: Ok - I admit it ... I have one. Any chance of adding iPad Safari user-agent to the list of things that look like an iPhone so that iPlayer works? Here are examples: iPad: Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B367 Safari/531.21.10 iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16 I realise that it could be optimised for the display characteristics - but right now it is useless because BBC site asks for Flash. 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 - 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] iPad and iPlayer
Personally, I would argue strongly against this on competition grounds. The BBC should not be in the business of promoting any one vendor who choses not to install flash on their platform for their own internal reasons. Iplayer 'works' on my platform. Well - to the extent of 3 frames a second with a following wind, and the video not keeping up with the audio. In a sane player - not flash - the content plays smoothly, and can output flawless video to a TV even. get_iplayer - and friends were very useful in the past. I think you're confused. When Linux people say they don't want Flash then that's crazy hippy talk and can safely be ignored. When Apple says they don't want Flash then that's a bold design statement about the quality of content delivery on their platform and should be applauded. I hope that clears it up for you. - 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/
[backstage] get_iplayer dropped in response to BBC’s lack of s upport for open source
http://linuxcentre.net/get_iplayer-dropped-in-response-to-bbcs-lack-of-support-for-open-source I'm sure the iPlayer team will be relieved, having shut down a similar app on the iPhone a few days ago (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/05/bbc_iphone/) this will be one less person to write a strongly worded letter to. Given that this is entirely open source (real open source, not Ian Hunter bizarro-land open source) and the number of users it has it seems unlikely that someone won't fork or maintain the code. If it does fall out of repair, it's back to torrents for TV catch up for me. Iain - 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/
[backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] get_iplayer dropped in response to BBC’s lack of support for open source
I have 2.76 - I run --update daily via cron. On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 15:41, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: INFO: Current version is 2.72 INFO: Checking for latest version from linuxcentre.net ERROR: Failed to connect to update site - Update aborted I'm almost feeling like we should take it over... Yeah, the update check will fail because the changelog/version files no longer exist on the server. I’ve got an older version; Debian unstable has 2.68. According to my friends on Twitter, there’s a 2.75 in the wild. M. - 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/ - 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/
[backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] Re: [backstage] get_iplayer drop ped in response to BBC’s lack of support for open source
Oops! On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 16:36, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: (Off-list, just to keep Ian Forrester’s job safe) Wow. That was an _epic_ fail. - 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/ - 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] Re: User Agent/Referrer Verification
Aside from that, the key really is the resource, which you'd somehow need to protect in order to stop invalid user agents just spoofing all this info. In that respect it's very similar to swf verify, which doesn't work. I should say: I deliberately didn’t ask for a cryptographic critique. this isn’t code I’m planning on deploying anywhere. however, some folk may (as you have) recognise it as being similar to something else, although my code is obviously pretty generic (it’s built on HTTP, but could just as easily be RTSP, or something else). For what it’s worth, SWF Verification _does_ work, if what you want to do is “prevent access to the media from people who don’t have access the SWF”. Assuming they can’t get it any other way. Which is, of course, a massive assumption to work. SWF Verification doesn’t work for anything else, of course, but it’s not really designed for it, either (the clue is in the name!). It's the access to the referrer part that I don't understand. Why is it any harder for an invalid client to access it than a valid one? This is locking the door and then putting the key under the mat. Once everyone realises where the key is it's all a bit trivial. You'd have to put completely different protection on the referrer file itself. On an _utterly_ unrelated note, isn’t it weird how Red5 can happily implement SWF Verification on the server side, but XBMC apparently can’t on the client? Quite. Padlocks are legal but lock picks are going equipped in British law, but only if you wander around with them. - 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] Re: User Agent/Referrer Verification
I'm trying to work out if this thread is a genuine idea being proposed or if it was simply to highlight the futility of SWF Verification. If it was the latter: Well demonstrated! ;) On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com wrote: And for practical purposes ... the UserAgent field changes with version updates. So - as software gets updated it would mean that the back-end would also have to go through the library and re-generate keys for old material (or recalculate it on the fly on access). Taking just an invariable sub-string of the UserAgent field (product up to the /) would remove the issue. But is this an attempt to determine if rogue-application1 using the UserAgent string of legal-application2 might be the basis of some sort of legal protection (copyright or DCMA-style infringement)? Sounds unlikely to me - given that changing UA field is routinely done and documented (e.g. Opera includes it in standard UI so that it can get into sites that include code for specific browsers but don't recognise standard Opera). (MS-IE identifying itself as Mozilla is an example of hackery in this area) Meanwhile - what happens when someone distributes one of more of the pairs of user-agent/key - in that case the rogue app will not need direct access to the original file. Personal view - I wish that the Flash verification had not been turned on - and I would like to see the impact analysis that BBC did before doing it. Paul - Original Message - From: Iain Wallace ikwall...@gmail.com To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 1:50 PM Subject: Re: [backstage] Re: User Agent/Referrer Verification I think I replied from an address which isn't registered with the list earlier, so here's what I said again: The fact that this is all presumably going to be sent in the clear as opposed to encrypted means this would be technically very easy to reverse engineer. Aside from that, the key really is the resource, which you'd somehow need to protect in order to stop invalid user agents just spoofing all this info. In that respect it's very similar to swf verify, which doesn't work. Whether this can be claimed to be a copyright mechanism is a legal rather than technical issue IMO. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: On 8-Mar-2010, at 22:55, Mo McRoberts wrote: Learned Backstage types, [snip] I’ve written it up here: http://nevali.net/post/435363058/user-agent-referrer-verification It’s been pointed out to me that the write-up would be better in the e-mail, so here it is: This is a snippet of code which verifies access to a given resource based upon a combination of access to a referring resource and a user-agent string. The client generates an sha256-hmac based on the contents of the referring resource (which the client must have access to) and its user-agent string. This HMAC is sent along with the request for a resource. Thus, given a list of referring resources and valid user agents, the server can generate a list of valid keys by performing the same sha256-hmac process on each combination. If a client sends a request which does not appear in this list of keys, the request is denied. I would be interested on an expert opinion as to whether this is considered an “effective” technological copyright-protection mechanism according to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended by The Copyright and Related Rights Regulation 2003), and whether implementing a third-party client which implements this protocol (for the purposes of interoperability) constitutes “any device, product or component which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures” as specified by section 296ZB of the Act. Cheers! M. -- mo mcroberts http://nevali.net iChat: mo.mcrobe...@me.com Jabber/GTalk: m...@ilaven.net Twitter: @nevali Run Leopard or Snow Leopard? Set Quick Look free with DropLook - http://labs.jazzio.com/DropLook/ - 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/ - 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/ - 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/ - 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
Re: [backstage] Re: User Agent/Referrer Verification
I think I replied from an address which isn't registered with the list earlier, so here's what I said again: The fact that this is all presumably going to be sent in the clear as opposed to encrypted means this would be technically very easy to reverse engineer. Aside from that, the key really is the resource, which you'd somehow need to protect in order to stop invalid user agents just spoofing all this info. In that respect it's very similar to swf verify, which doesn't work. Whether this can be claimed to be a copyright mechanism is a legal rather than technical issue IMO. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: On 8-Mar-2010, at 22:55, Mo McRoberts wrote: Learned Backstage types, [snip] I’ve written it up here: http://nevali.net/post/435363058/user-agent-referrer-verification It’s been pointed out to me that the write-up would be better in the e-mail, so here it is: This is a snippet of code which verifies access to a given resource based upon a combination of access to a referring resource and a user-agent string. The client generates an sha256-hmac based on the contents of the referring resource (which the client must have access to) and its user-agent string. This HMAC is sent along with the request for a resource. Thus, given a list of referring resources and valid user agents, the server can generate a list of valid keys by performing the same sha256-hmac process on each combination. If a client sends a request which does not appear in this list of keys, the request is denied. I would be interested on an expert opinion as to whether this is considered an “effective” technological copyright-protection mechanism according to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended by The Copyright and Related Rights Regulation 2003), and whether implementing a third-party client which implements this protocol (for the purposes of interoperability) constitutes “any device, product or component which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures” as specified by section 296ZB of the Act. Cheers! M. -- mo mcroberts http://nevali.net iChat: mo.mcrobe...@me.com Jabber/GTalk: m...@ilaven.net Twitter: @nevali Run Leopard or Snow Leopard? Set Quick Look free with DropLook - http://labs.jazzio.com/DropLook/ - 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/ - 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] XMBC iPlayer issues?
It's fair enough the BBC prioritising the most popular platforms for roll out of their iPlayer software and letting 3rd parties develop their own (XBMC, Android) but users don't consider third party apps as being outside of the BBC. The result of this is that when the BBC (intentionally or not) makes a change which breaks them, it's the license payers that feel wronged. The XBMC app was harmless but I expect all the people that now can't use it will be downloading nice HD copies of all the TV they're missing to their hard drives instead of streaming it, which I had assumed was something the BBC was trying to avoid. Some day the BBC will learn that they actually output a lot of good stuff and all people want to do is watch it. We've already paid for it - it's very difficult to see how it could be regarded as stealing, however it's acquired. Iain On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Glyn Wintle glynwin...@yahoo.com wrote: The streaming servers have enabled SWF Verification, which makes absolutely no sense The Register have also covered this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/24/iplayer_xbmc_adobe_swf_verification/ Technically easy to beat, but given that by passing copyright protection mechanisms is illegal in the EU and America it means it can not be rolled out to the general population. Bonkers idea BBC. - 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/ - 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] XMBC iPlayer issues?
BTW RTMPE was already reverse-engineered and circumvented a while back. After (the mplayer guys I think) reverse engineered RTMP it was a small inconvenience bypassing the protection in RTMPE. However Adobe slapped the rtmpdump project with a DMCA and had it taken off Sourceforge (apparently, prompted by Channel 4). http://linuxcentre.net/rtmpdump-can-be-used-to-download-copyrighted-works-like-a-web-browser It is daft. There is more sophisticated crypto in the puzzle pages of Closer magazine. On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Iain Wallace ikwall...@gmail.com wrote: It's fair enough the BBC prioritising the most popular platforms for roll out of their iPlayer software and letting 3rd parties develop their own (XBMC, Android) but users don't consider third party apps as being outside of the BBC. The result of this is that when the BBC (intentionally or not) makes a change which breaks them, it's the license payers that feel wronged. The XBMC app was harmless but I expect all the people that now can't use it will be downloading nice HD copies of all the TV they're missing to their hard drives instead of streaming it, which I had assumed was something the BBC was trying to avoid. Some day the BBC will learn that they actually output a lot of good stuff and all people want to do is watch it. We've already paid for it - it's very difficult to see how it could be regarded as stealing, however it's acquired. Iain On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Glyn Wintle glynwin...@yahoo.com wrote: The streaming servers have enabled SWF Verification, which makes absolutely no sense The Register have also covered this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/24/iplayer_xbmc_adobe_swf_verification/ Technically easy to beat, but given that by passing copyright protection mechanisms is illegal in the EU and America it means it can not be rolled out to the general population. Bonkers idea BBC. - 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/ - 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] BBC iPlayer for Apple TV
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote: On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Dave Addey listma...@addey.com wrote: As another alternative to Boxee and XBMC, you can always use Plex (http://www.plexapp.com/) and my Plex iPlayer plugin (downloadable from Plex's in-app plugin list). I'm using this on a Mac Mini hooked up to a projector, and it works great. I used to use a hacked AppleTV as a media centre, but its closed approach eventually led to my move over to the Mini. Would probably have stuck with the AppleTV if I'd had Tweed's iPlayer plugin at the time :) Plex gives a lot more plugin flexibility - definitely worth a look if you're considering a Mac-based media centre. Plex/Boxee/XBMC are nicely hackable, that's for sure. And Boxee on the AppleTV is nice to try too, though I found it super sluggish to be honest. But what with http://jonathan.tweed.name/2010/02/09/bbc-iplayer-for-apple-tv-an-update/ ... it seems these kinds of hacks aren't approved of. Jonathan reports in that post that one of the reasons he was asked to take it down was: ... 'The plugin was also playing content rights cleared for PC, but not set top box, usage.' Can anyone shed more light on this distinction? With the likes of Boxee on the rise, it's hard to understand where PCs stop and 'set top boxes' start. So if there are big legal/contractual distinctions defined using these terms that affect future possibilities for iPlayer embedding, it'd be nice to have some sense of where the limits might be. That seems really arbitrary. I'm running Boxee on a desktop OS but it only acts as a set top box. Is it a set top box because it's attached to my TV or is my TV merely a very large LCD monitor with a (largely unused TV tuner)? Boxee has an iPlayer app and AFAIK it works just by pretending to be one of the various games consoles that iPlayer works with and invoking the games console UI. Presumably this is OK as no one has said anything about that plugin. Even weirder, no one ever told us not to write scripts to download video off iPlayer, even unofficially. I'd have thought that was the first place they'd start if they were going to close down projects. Oh well. - 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] Good news for mashups - Ordnance Survey maps to go free online
I would love OS maps to be a view in Google Maps. OS maps are far superior to Google's. On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Ian Stirling backstage...@mauve.plus.com wrote: Brian Butterworth wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/17/ordnance-survey-maps-online The online maps would be free to all, including commercial users who, previously, had to acquire expensive and restrictive licences at £5,000 per usage, a fee many entrepreneurs felt was too high. About time too. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/17/ordnance-survey-maps-online Questions remain. For example - freely available data that can be used commercially can mean a lot of things - some of which are a lot more useful than others. Is this freely distributable vector data, with a license like cc-by-sa? Or is it a virtual map, like google, where you only get to see tiles, and cannot legally derive data from them, or copy them for use in other situations. The first allows more or less any use. The second might not allow for example: Taking the data, and rendering a cycling map deemphasiseing motorways, and emphasising cyclepaths. Crowdsourcing traffic data, and using it in a free routing application. Adding housenumbers to a copy of the map. ... The OS already claims that you cannot draw a line on an OS map, without that line being derived from the OS map, and requiring a license to show that line to others. - 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/ - 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] Fixing the iPlayer support in Plex
I think I replied to this on a non-list-registered address last night. Discussions around iPlayer seem to hit a taboo around about the point where you try and build something which displays the video outside of its original enclosure. When the iPhone version launched there was a lot of excited discussion about that and we got told to keep it quiet on here, so I set up a wiki so developers building unofficial iPlayer clients could share notes: http://beebhack.wikia.com/ Hopefully there should be some useful info on there for you, and once you publish your app you can add it to our list of unofficial clients. If you want to borrow code from apps already out there using metadata, get_iplayer consumes just about any audio and video data and metadata you'd care to mention: http://linuxcentre.net/getiplayer/ Please add to the wiki if you dig up anything we've missed. Cheers, Iain On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Dave Addey listma...@addey.com wrote: Hi Backstage, I’ve been working on fixing the iPlayer plugin for the Mac OS X media centre app “Plex”. The updated plugin seems to be working pretty well by reading the BBC RSS feeds and JSON feeds, but I have a few questions: 1) Are there any issues with integrating iPlayer into an app like Plex? (I’m not trying to work around the geographical restrictions on iPlayer access, I should add – I’m just providing a wrapper for the iPlayer flash player from within Plex.) I’m aware that doing so could be likely to break at any time if the iPlayer site were to change. (You can view Plex here: http://www.plexapp.com/) 2) Assuming this isn’t a problem legally, is there anywhere I can find a list of all of the potential subcategories / subgenres used by iPlayer? I can see a list of those with at least one current programme assigned to them, but I don’t know if this list is complete. For example, Children’s Activities, Children’s Animation, etc. 3) Is there a feed (RSS / JSON / something else) which can be used for searching? Thanks in advance for any help! - Dave. - 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] Site check
http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.welcomebackstage.com ;) On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Phil Lewisbackst...@linuxcentre.net wrote: Down for me too. On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 16:06 +0100, Ant Miller wrote: is www.welcomebackstage.com down for all you guys too? a - 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/ - 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] Mobile sites - how wide
Forgot to actually look at this. Looks fine on my G1. One minor interesting thing I have noticed though is I think due to the G1's browser and how it treats caching. I accessed the page in portrait and it looked fine, then rotated to landscape without reloading, which made a few things in the layout go vaguely wrong, then I refreshed in landscape mode and it still reported portrait mode at the bottom. Not sure if that's relevant but I thought I'd mention it. Love the graphical representation of resolutions - very interesting. On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Brian Butterworthbriant...@freeview.tv wrote: Right. After some considerable messing around, I have created a version of the WURFL system that works on the LAMP server I use. Well, I hope it does. If you have a mobile browser and a few seconds of time, can you point it to http://m.ukfree.tv to verify if your device gets recognised please? Thanks in advance... - 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] Mobile sites - how wide
Trying to match the style/layout of a site to the expected resolution of the device that you think is displaying it is going about it the wrong way - this is why CSS has percentage widths for doing layouts. Or is the question more about what you can send back to the server in order to choose an image size? If you want an example of something that does this quite well, visit the iPhone/Android optimised interface for Google Reader using a user agent switcher. This will load up images in atom feeds and then instantly resize them in javascript to fit the page width. On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Brian Butterworthbriant...@freeview.tv wrote: Hi, I've been looking at adapting some sites to work better on mobile devices. I can do the stripping down everything to text and minimal graphics and so on, that's the easy bit. Does anyone know of anything reliable that can tell me the width in pixels of the device? I was hoping that Glow would cover this, but it does't. -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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] Mobile sites - how wide
If this is specifically designed for mobile, e.g. m.facebook.com or x.facebook.com and you've already determined if the user is on a mobile device or not, there's not much more on the server you can reliably do to determine the screen size. For more recent smart phones running something Webkit based (Android, iPhone) or Opera mobile you should be able to get away with interrogating the window property in JS to determine a maximum width, which you can then use to either resize images on the fly that are already there (which is what google reader does) or to write image tags with a size of your choice in the actual image request, e.g.: http://strawp.net/img/daynight/mariosnow/100x100.png compared with: http://strawp.net/img/daynight/mariosnow/300x100.png which are generated on the fly using PHP (with caching on the server) you're still then left with devices that can't handle JS at all, to which I would say the safest bet is not to use images directly in the layout, rather have them as background images which won't break the page width. This also has the advantage that if a device can't handle proper CSS you should hopefully just get reasonably plain HTML. From mobile devices I've owned (Winmo, Sony Ericsson, Android) the user will often have the image either resized for them or have the ability to zoom out if it's too big. In summary, I maintain that separation of layout into CSS from content in HTML and letting the page deteriorate gracefully with the capabilities of the browser is the sane path forward. Try doing clever things to make it fit the width if you want, but you probably don't need to if you have the CSS nailed. Cheers, Iain On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Brian Butterworthbriant...@freeview.tv wrote: Ian, Yes, I agree. The width and height is of the maximum picture size. I'm going to use percentages in the CSS for the textual layout, but the images need to be the right size for the device, in particular the site header. And then there is the question of the phone supporting CSS! I was just trying to figure out the phone capabilities first. 2009/7/20 Iain Wallace ikwall...@gmail.com Trying to match the style/layout of a site to the expected resolution of the device that you think is displaying it is going about it the wrong way - this is why CSS has percentage widths for doing layouts. Or is the question more about what you can send back to the server in order to choose an image size? If you want an example of something that does this quite well, visit the iPhone/Android optimised interface for Google Reader using a user agent switcher. This will load up images in atom feeds and then instantly resize them in javascript to fit the page width. On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Brian Butterworthbriant...@freeview.tv wrote: Hi, I've been looking at adapting some sites to work better on mobile devices. I can do the stripping down everything to text and minimal graphics and so on, that's the easy bit. Does anyone know of anything reliable that can tell me the width in pixels of the device? I was hoping that Glow would cover this, but it does't. -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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 - 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] RDTV launched
It worked for me but something weird is going on - the audio from the Kevin Rose section was loud and clear and then it suddenly sounds very quiet distant. This is a great direction that the BBC is trying out. I'd like smaller file sizes available and RSS though. The sizes available for this first episode are ludicrous! On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Nico Morrison microni...@gmail.com wrote: No sound on RDTV_ep1_5mins.ogg until 2:21 when the Beeb micro talk starts?? Also video in wrong aspect ratio had to be set manually to wide-screen. Tried on several players - please advise. Good first effort though. Pity - as .ogg is a better container, shorter download than the .flv or .mov I wanted the 5 min version. This one: http://ftp.kw.bbc.co.uk/backstage/rdtv/RDTV_ep1_5mins.ogg Can anyone confirm which of the others works OK? Regards, Nico Morrison __ microni...@gmail.com Mob: 07875 596 316 Skype: nicomorrison http://nicomorrison.com __ 2009/4/10 Mr I Forrester mail...@cubicgarden.com: On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 01:08 +0100, Nick Morrott wrote: On 09/04/2009, Mr I Forrester mail...@cubicgarden.com wrote: The Theora version is already online, along with Flash and Quicktime versions. I doubt you'd need both MPEG4 and Xvid versions, unless you intend to have a lower quality MPEG-4 part 2 version (e.g. Xvid) and a higher quality MPEG-4 part 10 version (e.g. x264) available. MP3 and/or Vorbis audio-only options might also be desirable for those on the move/commute. Yes we were planning to do a Mpeg4 layer 10 aka a H.264 video/AAC+ audio version. Then a Xvid version which will play nicely on lower cpu devices like my phone and xbmc on a xbox. WMV should keep windows and xbox360 users happy. - 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/ - 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/
[backstage] Norwegian State TV Launches BitTorrent Tracker
http://torrentfreak.com/norwegian-tv-launches-bittorrent-tracker-090308/ In terms of practicality, what stops the BBC from doing this? If it's a problem with rights holders, would the BBC create a tracker if that wasn't an issue? Iain - 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] Programatic searching of /programmes
The last time I needed to do something like this I tried Search first, but ended up using the A-Z on /programmes as the results were much more what I was after. The HTML on /programmes is also easy to parse. I don't call using an XML parser and XPath screen scraping :) It's screen scraping if the output wasn't designed to be read by a machine. Change the format and you've got a broken screen scraper. If the output was XML any changes to the output would either be non-destructive to the existing format or would explicitly use a different version of the API on a different URL or with different arguments (like the difference between RSS and Atom). You could use a parser like Beautiful Soup to turn whatever rubbish you're looking at into perfectly traversable XML but it doesn't change the fact that the entire thing would break if the page author decided to juggle the layout around a bit. That's my rule of thumb about what constitutes screen scraping anyway. Iain - 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] BBC iPlayer download on Linux and Mac using AIR
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:57 PM, David Greaves da...@dgreaves.com wrote: Mr I Forrester wrote: No one seems to have picked up on the launch of the iPlayer download AIR application for Windows, Linux, OSX. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/12/introducing_iplayer_deskto.html I wonder why? maybe I should save it for a personal blog post... We can't make it work /me ducks It wouldn't work for me either when you made your post in the other thread. I've since updated my version of AIR (these silly apps with no package management auto-update, how quaint) and had another go and it's working. I'm not sure it's doing anything that get_iplayer (http://linuxcentre.net/getiplayer/) hasn't been doing for months other than putting pointless DRM on my machine meaning I can only play it back on this from within the app. I expect it ticks some box somewhere about supporting platforms though so that's nice I guess. - 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] BBC iPlayer on a map
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello again, Bereft of any real ideas I asked myself if you took all the BBC TV shows that are currently on iPlayer and plotted them on a map would it be any use what so ever? The result.. http://iplayerlist.mibly.com/map/ Now, I should explain what's going on with this mashup. First of all, from my old iPlayerlist project I scrape bbc.co.uk/iplayer for all the current TV shows (a-z atom feeds help). Then I extract the synopsis from /programmes for each episode. I then throw the episode synopsis at the Beta Open Calais API. This API will extract a ton of concepts, including some geographical information that it thinks the synopsis relates to (don't ask me how, I assume some sort of magic elf reads it). This geographical information (states, countries, towns etc) now includes longitudes and latitude info thanks to Open Calais chatting to Freebase. It works best with the larger synopsis I'm told. Have a look along the east coast of the US to see Stephen Fry (of twitter fame) making his way through each state. Later tonight we should see some more of his journey. I'm still questioning if this is any use to an non techy user. Would my dad like to see a map showing TV shows which relate to them? Anyway, in the future I might add a bit of colour coding on the markers for program type (childrens, factual, comedy etc). Regards, Andy Nice work! If a series has a different location for each episode, would you be able to draw lines between each one in episode order? There've quite a few series in the past which are filmed in the form of a sort of tour. Iain - 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] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I note that Stephen Fry has posted this, which seems to cover it quite well.. 'I have opened myself to charges of the most monstrous hypocrisy by championing open source and free software while simultaneously using proprietary systems here and there, hither and yon. I hold my hand up to the sin of being inconsistent – hypocrisy is going a bit far I think. I am no purist or fanatic when it comes to computing, software and the internet, or when it comes to anything, come to that: I like the idea of open source and free software, but I can't honestly find it in my heart to boycott any individual, company or consortium that patents its routines, algorithms, codes or protocols and chooses to make money from of its research, innovation and ingenuity. As in all things I'm a muddled, hand-wringing liberal who believes in a mixed economy. I don't think freedom is indivisible. I can contemplate regulation and entrepreneurialism, cooperatives and corporations, open source and proprietary systems all coexisting. In the end I like structures that are human-shaped, not idea-shaped and humans are great heaps of inconsistency, ambiguity and complexity. All I'm saying is that if you expect this to be a kind of Open Source madrassah you will be disappointed.' Which you can take also as an ad for http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=61 Great, but absolutely nothing to do with DRM. The post is in reference to his newly launched site which unlike the old one will be set up in order to generate revenue. If we all paid Stephen Fry a license fee and he'd suddenly started publishing his Podgrammes in DRM'd WMA then it would be a relevant comparison. Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM. On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am I the only person in the world who finds Stephen Fry an unutterable bore? That's entirely likely. He joined Twitter last week BTW and has been posting some great tweets from Africa so far, including a few pics of Rhinos etc. http://twitter.com/stephenfry Cheers, Iain - 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] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Scot McSweeney-Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Similarly, if Channel 4 want to DRM all their media then it's entirely their choice because they don't have my money and they aren't funded by what amounts to a tax. If I was a Channel 4 shareholder I might raise the same issues of DRM at an AGM I don't think C4 have shareholders, they're a public broadcaster like the BBC (just advertising funded, not tax funded). IIRC, they were originally funded by what amounted to a tax on the ITV companies. This page http://www.channel4.com/about4/overview.html has this - The Corporation's board is appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. So it looks like C4 is shareholder-free. Wow, every day is a school day. I never realised that. Even so, none of my money is going towards Channel 4 so I don't feel like it's any of my business how they digitally distribute their programming. This is entirely aside from the fact that DRM as a technology is moribund and I think it's very foolish for any company to invest seriously in it, especially one that is already broadcasting its content in a better format unencrypted and in a manner which is a lot harder to track than over IP. We already linked to XKCD in this thread didn't we? Oh yes, I see that we did :) - 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/
[backstage] Political Animal podcast
Hi, Just seeking clarification on some odd wording on the page for Political Animal: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/politicalanimal.shtml In the right hand column it says: Friday Night Comedy from BBC Radio 4 Download or subscribe to this programme's podcast But the programme isn't part of Friday Night Comedy - it's on a Tuesday for a start. The podcast link ends up at the Friday Night Comedy podcast subscription page. So two points really: 1. Does Political Animal have a podcast? 2. Could that page be a bit less misleading? Cheers, Iain - 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] Too much iPhone already!
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/06/mad_about_mac.html Hey, that thing looks pretty good! Someone should make an iPlayer interface for it! I doubt the BBC would want to be seen as giving preference to one specific device by locking down an entire streaming interface to it though ;) Iain - 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] iPlayer - turning it up to 11
My sentiments exactly. It's little things like this that remind me that I love the Beeb :) On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Chris Riley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Some of you may have already noticed this, but I'd just like to pass on my thanks to whoever it was that made the volume in the iPlayer (and associated BBC .flv players) go up to 11. A small touch, but one that makes me smile every time I turn it up to 11 :o) Chris - 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] iPlayer download client for the Mac
Yes, I saw this pop up on the wiki (http://beebhack.bluwiki.com) last month - great stuff. On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Graeme West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Apologies if this is a dupe, or old news. Someone (Paul Battley, I think, possibly others) has made a rather nice download client for the streaming iPlayer for the Mac. http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3565-enterprising-soul-creates-bbc-iplayer-download-app-for-mac.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/iplayerdownload It uses a ruby script (iplayer-dl) to spoof the iPhone's browser user-agent string, get the secret token and then it grabs the MP4 from the iPhone iPlayer. I've always had trouble with the argument - made somewhat often on this list - that the content protection on services like the iPlayer just had to be 'good enough' to keep the majority from downloading the content (to keep), rather than super-secure in order to keep the tech savvy. This is the proof that that argument is wrong. Obviously the streaming iPlayer doesn't use DRM in a strict sense but the video URLs are obfuscated. You only need one smart person to figure it out and package it into something like this, and everyone can then take advantage, regardless of their level of skill. As long as a user can copy and paste, they can use this programme. See also installing LibDeCSS on Ubuntu - dead simple. So perhaps a download button on the streaming iPlayer (to grab MP4s) isn't such a radical idea? I realise that the BBC is in a very difficult position with regard to third party rights on content, and that it has to make an effort to 'protect' content on rights-holders' behalf. Perhaps it should also point out to rights-holders that technical protection measures are never going to work. Of course, that would make negotiations on further content distribution deals might be a little awkward, but these are the realities. Thoughts? Graeme West --Personal opinion only BTW... - 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/ - 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] Thinking Digital conference
What does it take to get an email address delisted around here? On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please STOP IT WITH THE SHOUTING it is very rude. 2008/5/23 TRYPHENA BRADE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thank you for a DECENT reply. We AIM to: host videos on BBC the Thinking Digital site Thanking you in advance Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 14:20:08 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Thinking Digital conference Tryphena, if you could perhaps reword your initial post, so as we could understand what you are actually trying to acheive, we might be able to help. Are you talking about hosting your videos on BBC or the Thinking Digital site? Clarity and brevity will get you everywhere. - 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/ Get Started! -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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] Thinking Digital conference
I only wish I worked for someone who'd be willing to pay for me to go to this. I'm enjoying seeing the live commentary by various people drift by on twitter though, so keep it up! :) Have you been playing buzzword bingo at all? http://www.senokian.com/barking/2008/05/22/thinking-digital-buzzword-bingo/ On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Mr I Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, Backstage is sponsoring a few a events around the thinking digital conference, if your up in the North East of England and want to hang out (lobbycom), chat with some great speakers. Drop into the Sage in Gateshead. We're running a geekdinner on Friday night which leads nicely into the BarCampNorthEast which is this weekend. For you guys who can't make it, we're putting the videos up online very fast. Actually I've put up the first session videos already. http://blip.tv/topics/view/thinkingdigital Enjoy and hope to see you in Gateshead soon Cheers - 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/ - 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] US TV on iPlayer
Yes, that wasn't really my question though. On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you want to watch them on the iPlayer when you could have downloaded them as torrents from the US a whole year before? Allegedly. 2008/4/28 Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Just wondering if there's a rule on which TV shows that have been bought in from the US by the BBC (Heroes, Mad Men, Damages) end up on iPlayer. Out of those 3, Mad Men is the only one that is available. Is Mad Men a joint BBC production or are rights to put external content on iPlayer negotiated on a show-by-show basis? Cheers, Iain - 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/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 - 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] b00b3zjr
Looking at the neighbouring PIDs, that looks like a complete coincidence, which just makes it funnier :) Nice find! On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Dan Brickley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b00b3zjr.shtml?src=ip_mp [[ Page Three Teens Duration: 60 minutes Documentary following Chelsea White, a teenager considering a career as a Page 3 girl, as she learns about the glamour industry for the two months leading up her 18th birthday. (Available for 6 more days) ]] Whose cool URI is that? We are not worthy :) Dan -- http://danbri.org/ - 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/ - 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] b00b3zjr
Jonathan Tweed wrote: But the right thing to do in this example. A resource shouldn't have different URLs depending on where you click from, so if you can't track the outgoing link for some reason then a query parameter seems correct to me. Logging HTTP_REFERER isn't an option? Bummer-ouch. I'd have guessed it'd be well worth capturing that information... HTTP referrer information is browser optional and therefore not guaranteed to be there on all requests. Indeed it's one option to turn it off completely in Firefox. - 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] iPlayer mashup
I saw this linked off the wiki - very cool. There are features on that such as RSS subscription that really should be on the official iPlayer. Great work! On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Andrew Shearer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm a lurker on this list but thought I would de-lurk to show you all what I've been up to with the stuff found around bbc.co.uk. Over a few days hacking with ruby I built a lighter version of the flash based iPlayer with series grouping, some rss feeds and related content from blogs and youtube. http://iplayerlist.mibly.com Its rough and ready but I'm happy with the results. If you are interested, a little more info about what is holding it altogether is available over here. http://mibly.com/2008/3/4/a-little-about-bbc-iplayer-youtube-and-playing Regards, Andy - 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/ - 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] XBox Media Center iPlayer Plugin
Wow. that looks really interesting. This looks to be one of the most innovative examples of DRM-free media. I suppose getting something similar to work on the Wii, wouldn't require much work. I would be really intersetd to see a MythTV extension to do this and even a Windows MCE plugin. DRM-free media is important to the users of all operating systems. :) This looks good, also the xbox360 supports UPnP, would this script be portable to an existing UPnP server to make this platform available also? The reason this was developed so quickly (and it appeared within days of the iPhone version being released) is that XBMC has its own really powerful python scripting framework which hooks into its existing media playback capabilities. This makes it really easy for developers to knock out client scripts for various streaming media sources all over the web. Media playback on Wii has so far been limited to video being transcoded to Flash Video (ironically, in this case) and streamed from a dedicated server machine within your own network to the Opera browser on it. I'm not sure what UPnP has to do with any of this... Iain - 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] XBox Media Center iPlayer Plugin
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The reason this was developed so quickly (and it appeared within days of the iPhone version being released) is that XBMC has its own really powerful python scripting framework which hooks into its existing media playback capabilities. This makes it really easy for developers to knock out client scripts for various streaming media sources all over the web. Media playback on Wii has so far been limited to video being transcoded to Flash Video (ironically, in this case) and streamed from a dedicated server machine within your own network to the Opera browser on it. I'm not sure what UPnP has to do with any of this... Iain Just saying that if you have a script or framework for pulling MPEG4 streams from the iPlayer servers, it could be used by a uPnP capable server running on a machine that the 360 can connect to, enabling iPlayer on the 360. Just a thought... Possibly, the development scene for getting things running under 360 isn't nearly as lively as the XBMC one though due to it being so pointlessly locked down to MS technologies (it won't even let you connect to SAMBA shares). You could probably write some kind of service under windows for the 360 to connect to on the network but you'd never get a standalone client running like XBMC unless it was an MS / BBC co-op (which, let's face it isn't out of the question given projects both have worked on in recent past). Also, the 360 is a lot louder than the old XBox :P Iain - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
Two scenarios: Scenario 1: Guy knocks on your door, walks in past you, urinates on your best rug on the floor, then hands you a note saying your house smells of piss and walks out. Scenario 2: Guy knocks on your door, walks in past you, hands you a note saying go this website to read a report on how someone urinating on your best rug can make your house smells of piss and walks out. Question: which scenario appeals to you? Note - remembering that the rug really tied the room together. Aside from the Big Lebowski reference: What? - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
You basically have to send the exact same headers that an iPhone does, along with the BBC-UID. Fortunately someone emailed me a plain-text log of successful requests sniffed from his iPhone. I've used curl instead of wget this time as it gives you finer granularity of control over headers. [snip] Hello. I'm a BBC senior manager; but posting personally as a fan of Backstage. It puts us (those that care about Backstage) in a really difficult position if it's used to share information on ways to get around content-restrictions on a BBC service. I don't want to see the end of the Backstage unmoderated mailing list. Posting this type of information threatens its future. Please don't. Anywhere else. Just not here. Righto. I'd have to admit to being a little bit unsure about where the line is between hacking BBC content for the purposes of mashups etc, which is encouraged (and there are commercial sites using BBC content in this manner) and hacking BBC content just to display it on a device other than the one that it was specifically (and let's not forget, charter-breakingly) designed to run on. Where is the line here? What's special about the iPlayer? I don't see anyone being warned for aggregating BBC radio podcasts or pulling in weather data to their own sites. Why is it OK for me to watch a non-DRM'd BBC programme on a 3.5 inch iPhone screen but not a 32 inch TV screen off my XBox? Call me a crusty old traditionalist but all this is about as far as I'm concerned is watching TV shows on an actual TV in my living room, not on a phone in Starbucks or on a monitor in my office. Is that really crazy talk? Does the brave new world of content streaming mean I don't get to sit on my sofa any more? Cheers, Iain - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Matthew Somerville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: James Cridland wrote: It puts us (those that care about Backstage) in a really difficult position if it's used to share information on ways to get around content-restrictions on a BBC service. Please don't. Anywhere else. Just not here. Like BBC News? :) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6944830.stm The tool can be used to strip DRM from programmes with the BBC iPlayer. So it's okay for BBC journalists to share information, on a BBC service itself, on how to get around content restrictions; left hand, right hand? I love a good car crash :D - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 13/03/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It *appears* that it has. Confirmed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7293988.stm Anyone know Nokia's head of legals phone number? Or Google's? Or Samsung? Or LG? Or Sony? Or any other mobile phone vendor? Can the BBC really hope to survive the potential legal onslaught these vendors could bring? The trust have already ruled iPlayer must be made platform agnostic, the BBC have not only failed to do this but they have now acted directly against it (scanning for and blocking products not from approved vendors even if they posses the technical capabilities needed). Andy Agreeing with Andy shocker! Not sure I've got time to poke around with this today, but does anyone know what they're doing? Are they just sending a cookie over? I notice there's now an ID in the MP4 URL. Iain - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
Not sure I've got time to poke around with this today, but does anyone know what they're doing? Are they just sending a cookie over? I notice there's now an ID in the MP4 URL. OK, here's my guess: It's another combination of User Agent and cookies. Just having a quick look at Wireshark, there's an incredibly conspicuous BBC-UID cookie which contains a large hex number followed by the Quicktime version (including OS identifier). I don't believe that the MP4 URL served on the page is actually any different to the one that working iPhone users will see, I think it just looks at that cookie. I imagine the cookie contains some kind of hash of whatever client data the agent sends over. Anyone want to upload a packet trace from an iPhone or Touch? ;) - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
Well, I now have a working download script for the updated MP4 over HTTP service. Anyone else been playing with this this evening? Far too many messages to this thread for me to keep up with. You basically have to send the exact same headers that an iPhone does, along with the BBC-UID. Fortunately someone emailed me a plain-text log of successful requests sniffed from his iPhone. I've used curl instead of wget this time as it gives you finer granularity of control over headers. The only way the BBC could keep media over HTTP and not have trivial scripts download files from them is to put some kind of user authentication system into the iPlayer. They should do it anyway and tie it to a valid TV license. Iain - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
There's a Ruby based script as well, does the exact same thing as my PHP one: http://po-ru.com/diary/bbc-iplayer-fix-hacked-again/ linked from http://www.flickr.com/photos/twindx/2316284105/ - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Crossland wrote: On 12/03/2008, Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW I still can't get the mp4 to stream rather than download. Anyone? My guess is that the proprietary player on the iPhone just buffers part of the HTTP GET data and starts playing away? :-) That's how the iPhone is doing it (and the Flash player, and all the other network media players that support progressive downloads), yes. Obviously progressive downloads and streaming are very different things, but in the domain of Internet video, the former seem to be meeting a lot of users' requirements at the moment. The Flash player wasn't - it was using RTMP, which enables the client to feed back about bandwidth to maintain a stream quality that the client can handle and also to skip to any point without downloading the preceding file contents. I'm sure you knew this - just clarifying. Iain - 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/
[backstage] Own up now, who was this?
http://dumpedimage.com/?image=843 :D - 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] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 07/03/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED]: It is bizarre that the BBC won't negotiate with 3rd party rights holders to secure non-DRM internet distribution. I doubt that the BBC won't. It is possible to negotiate such a deal (see Where Are The Joneses). But 3rd party rightsholders usually think that it is not in their interests to do so, and so they don't. Well, it turns out that in fact they just have :-) http://www.flickr.com/photos/twindx/2316284105/ Oh my goodness! That's made my day, that has :) If I wasn't at Centerparcs right now you'd be looking at some kind of download script to pull down video automatically. I reckon that pretty much fills the protocol problem we were having with XBMC... Iain - 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] Fwd: [Gnash-dev] EFF: Adobe Pushes DRM for Flash
I think this is blurring the line between what constitutes DRM and what constitutes a proprietary streaming protocol. The article doesn't really go into any technical detail about what they're referring to, but I take it they're referring to RTMP. This isn't DRM as the files inside the protocol are the same video formats that would be streamed over the web. DRM tends to be applied to the files directly. To assert that RTMP is a DRM scheme would imply that it's primary purpose is to lock out unauthorised users. From what I gather, this isn't its primary purpose at all - it's just supposed to make streaming objects over the web to flash more flexible and efficient. From what I've read of the protocol written up in OS Flash, it's pretty obtuse but there doesn't seem to be any great effort made in it to lock out unauthorised users. Therefore RTMP is not DRM and that article is reactionary guff. Iain On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :-) -- Forwarded message -- From: John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 29 Feb 2008 03:31 Subject: [Gnash-dev] EFF: Adobe Pushes DRM for Flash To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/02/adobe-pushes-drm-flash ... most sites that use these [Flash and FLV] formats simply serve standalone, unencrypted files via ordinary web servers. Now Adobe, which controls Flash and Flash Video, is trying to change that with the introduction of DRM restrictions in version 9 of its Flash Player and version 3 of its Flash Media Server software. Instead of an ordinary web download, these programs can use a proprietary, secret Adobe protocol to talk to each other, encrypting the communication and locking out non-Adobe software players and video tools. We imagine that Adobe has no illusions that this will stop copyright infringement -- any more than dozens of other DRM systems have done so -- but the introduction of encryption does give Adobe and its customers a powerful new legal weapon against competitors and ordinary users through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Recall that the DMCA sets out a blanket ban on tools that help circumvent any DRM system (as well as the act of circumvention itself). When Flash Video files are simply hosted on a web site with no encryption, it's unlikely that tools to download, edit, or remix them are illegal. But when encryption enters the picture, entertainment companies argue that fair use is no excuse; Adobe, or customers using Flash Media Server 3, can try to shut down users who break the encryption without having to prove that the users are doing anything copyright-infringing. Even if users aren't targeted directly, technology developers may be threatened and the technologies the users need driven underground. Users may also have to upgrade their Flash Player software (and open source alternatives like Gnash, which has been making rapid progress, may be unable to play the encrypted streams at all). ... ___ Gnash-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev -- Regards, Dave - 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/ - 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] GNU+Linux on the Wii as of this week
Search for Johnny Chung Lee - he's done a few really cool projects using the wiimote. On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sounds interesting does anyone have a link for that video which used the wiimote etc to create a 3d environment which changed perspective from where one was. someone showed me a video of it on youtube - it looked pretty cool. pity i can't afford a wii, though by the time development has got to a stable and fully fledged level i imagine the price will drop further On 27/02/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We can now boot GNU+Linux on Wii computers: And last but not least, we have finally run natively Linux on the Nintendo Wii through Team Tweezers' twilight-hack (http://wiibrew.org/index.php?title=Twilight_Hack). We have released a small usbgecko-enabled Proof of Concept (http://downloads.sourceforge.net/gc-linux/wii-linux-PoC-0.1.tgz) mini-distro to prove it. - http://www.gc-linux.org/wiki/Main_Page -- Regards, Dave - 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/ -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw - 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/ - 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] Adobe fuses on and offline worlds
Google Gears for Flash? Seemed inevitable to me. On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7254436.stm Adobe Air allows developers to build tools that still have some functionality even when a computer is no longer connected to the net. A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this year, Linux machines to run any Air applications. The BBC is also building prototype applications with AIR. The nice thing about it is that it works on all the different platforms - Mac, PC and eventually Linux, said John O'Donovan, chief architect in the BBC's Future Media and Technology Journalism division. So what do people think? 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 (0)2080083965 mob: +44 (0)7711913293 - 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/ - 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] HD-DVD / Blu Ray
What I /heart/ about the pre-2K bit of plastic is the way it takes control over your TV/DVD and insists that you watch the copyright notices and it tries to thrust the 'don't copy videos' advert on to you. Why should any company have the right to stop you using your own DVD controls and force you to watch the messages it demands that you watch. It 'steals' your electricity and screen time to display its messages and if you tot up all the hours people waste waiting to have control over their DVDs then you realise that it wastes a lot of energy and is anything but green. Wonder why this imposition hasn't been challenged in the courts. It is a small but very annoying thing. Useful tip: Turns out that pirated videos don't have these annoying warnings on them, allowing you to go straight to the film after you pop it in the player and offering a far more pleasant viewing experience because of it. Now you'll know for next time ;) In all seriousness, who those messages are intended for is entirely beyond me. I even know the guy who cut together the original Pirated videos are low quality infomercial and the message I got is that it was no ones idea - it's just one of these things that got passed on and agreed by committee without any kind of sanity checking. It was originally a zero-budget one-off clip to be shown before (I think) LotR. As far as Blu Ray is concerned, it's pretty apparent to me that the manufacturers think the lack of uptake was down to the Blu Ray/HD DVD spat and not because people clearly have no need for either at present unless they have a full size cinema screen in their living rooms (which, granted, I'm sure some people do). The uptake of DVD was so rapid because people hated VHS. It was bad quality, it degraded over time, plus you had to rewind/fast forward on it, which was just annoying. DVD was a technology that was an obvious progression after the popularity of CD and is still of more than reasonable quality even for today's high spec TVs. There are no gaps in the market that Blu Ray is bridging. Iain - 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] fully accessible???
2008/2/1 Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 01/02/2008, ~:'' ありがとうございました。 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: is it just me? or is that yellow text on white background all but impossible to read? If you are referring to the text at the top it appears to be on a black background on my computer. I think it was changed in the last couple of hours. It was unreadable at around 9 when I read the original email. - 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/
[backstage] iPlayer email updates, RSS
I've just gotten an iPlayer email update, which is a nice enough service. Why isn't there some kind of mechanism for subscribing via RSS or Atom though? Seems like a no-brainer to me. Is this something that's already being worked on? Cheers, Iain - 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] Hack Day 2008, let's all get Mashed...
On Jan 24, 2008 8:25 AM, Premasagar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great stuff! I'm looking forward to it already... Last year's Hack Day was absolutely one of the highlights of the year. Clickety-clacking all night long to create something new and exciting... How come the name change? Won't that confuse things? Although Yahoo first coined the term, other organisations also run Hack Days (e.g. IBM). Calling it Hack Day might make it clearer what it actually is - and add to the global Hack Day momentum. Use the Hollywood solution - call it Mashed: Hack Day 2008 - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Jan 24, 2008 9:11 AM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23/01/2008, Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Without looking it up, the previous reply (from a Gnash dev IIRC) was that the BBC are using the latest version of Adobe Flash Streaming Server, and this has dropped support for streaming over HTTP. I remembered it being described as deprecated. My interpretation of deprecated is that it isn't recommended to use it but it still can be used. Normally it means it will be removed sometime in the future. For instance I can use a Deprecated Method in Java and it will still wok but I will get a warning and it may be removed from Java in the future. I therefore assumed that RTMP could still be used but wasn't the recommended approach. I may have been wrong though. (Why would anyone remove something useful from a software application anyway? More importantly why would anyone trust a vendor that did that with their Mission Critical software applications?). I honestly can't tell whether you're being deliberately obtuse or not. HTTP streaming is deprecated, not RTMP. HTTP = The old way RTMP = The new way While I don't actually see the point either, I'm sure Adobe has its reasons and since no one has any more suitable suggestions for how to stream A/V content easily over the web then that's what's being used. - 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] Lol
On Jan 23, 2008 11:06 PM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23/01/2008, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Probably posted before - http://lol.ianloic.com/bbc Don't think so - that is the best backstage mashup evar :-) That's great! Needs translating to LOLcats speak though :P - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Jan 21, 2008 10:59 AM, Peter Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20/01/2008, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe we need a discussion on the pros and cons of the various OSS licenses. Recommend me one! Did you not see the sign next to the button you just pressed? I'm sorry? - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
At 12:05 + 21/1/08, Iain Wallace wrote: I'm finding this thread quite useful and interesting. Sorry if you don't. You could always just filter it out in your mail client. If I was objecting to the thread I would have used words like 'ad nauseam' rather than 'ad infinitum' - I was just suggesting a scenario for what Peter was saying regarding the button. Licencing threads do come up here quite frequently and are a passionate subject for some list members. When you first asked for the discussion I thought you were being tongue in cheek as we had a big round of discussions last month. Next time I will put a smiley or something similar. Ah, thought that might be it :P No, I've only been on the list a few weeks. Back to RTMP. I was looking at the documentation and some of the code for RTMP with a view to maybe porting it into this script. It's really quite nasty! I think it'll be a while before I'm bored enough to attempt that. Any extensions to this script from me are likely going to be calls to apps importing the rtmp.c written for Gnash. Iain - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
The one that says Don't push this button .cf Licencing discussions ad infinitum... Cheers Maybe he pressed it to see what happens... Aren't License flame wars fun? ;p If this is a flame war then it's the most polite flame war I've ever seen! You guys can't have ever posted in videogame forums. No one has even had their sexual leanings questioned yet ;) It seems like the controversy around GPLv3 is centred around an anti-DRM clause, which is fine by me. GPLv3 will be included later today :) - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Jan 21, 2008 1:49 PM, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 01:34:14PM +, Fearghas McKay wrote: [0] #insert smiley.h You mean #include, surely? Jeez, such a n00b. ;) OK, that's much more familiar territory :D - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
Maybe we need a discussion on the pros and cons of the various OSS licenses. Recommend me one! - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Jan 20, 2008 9:10 PM, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 20 January 2008 15:35:12 Iain Wallace wrote: Maybe we need a discussion on the pros and cons of the various OSS licenses. Recommend me one! Summary: snip That's really useful, thanks! I think I'll go for a GPL license. I can't really imagine why someone wouldn't want reciprocity in their license. If someone makes something cool from my code I want to read the source and see how they did it. I'll read up on GPLv3 and AGPLv3. Iain - 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/
[backstage] RTMP stream URL resolving script
Apologies if this is the second time this has hit the list... This is a slightly better version of the script that I posted in the XBMC forums thread that was linked in the exotic devices thread. There are a number of people on here writing code to work out the RTMP stream URL who might benefit from not having to do all the working out themselves and just porting/improving this script. http://strawp.net/files/download/iplayer_url.zip It's written for PHP5 to be run from the command line under linux, e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ iplayer_url b008s272 Getting meta data from http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/metafiles/episode/b008s272.xml... Setting PID as b008s26r, based on versions available title: Never Mind the Buzzcocks: Series 21 subtitle: Episode 9 Getting media selector from http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/3/stream/check/iplayer?pid=b008s26r... Stream URL: rtmp://217.243.192.45:1935/ondemand?_fcs_vhost=cp41752.edgefcs.netauth=daEd3aVavd8bZcDcQcyb.a.cjdrdJbYcWcb-bhKin0-b4-GnsDBqwoGDwGpyGaifp=v001slist=secure/b0008s26r-streaming68716188 Windows users might have to tweak it a little. I don't have anything to test these in currently, but they appear to match the URLs that the flash client produces. Secondly, based on the replies that people post way after I post to the thread, there's either a really big delay in my messages getting through or they're not getting through at all. Could someone reply to this when they get it. Due to the way gmail lays out the inbox you can't really tell when the list server re-sends messages. It's getting quite annoying having someone post the exact same thing I just posted... Cheers, Iain - 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] RTMP stream URL resolving script
I'll do that, but for now it's for anyone to use. If you make something amazing from it, credit me in the readme ;) I don't want to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of GPL v3 but I would much prefer to see an MIT or BSD style licence. Can I put in a plea for dual licensing to keep everybody happy? Well I have to say that Iain's licence seems so much more simple, understandable and easy to use :-) Yes, the previous discussion is an example of why I don't automatically stick licenses on my code. Maybe everyone else has read the relevant open source licenses in detail and weighed up the pros and cons of each, but I haven't and it's unlikely I'll ever be bored enough to do so. At the end of the day, aren't we all just trying to advance each other's understanding? And maybe get a mention on El Reg ;) I'm not going to sue anyone for using a code snippet I wrote one evening. Iain - 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] Identity/trust/reputation project savingtheinternetwithhate.com
On Jan 9, 2008 4:11 PM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 09/01/2008, Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He sounds like he'd be a hoot to have around, as long as you're not one of those cheeseburger-eating, IDE-loving, PHP douchebags, as he might call them. (Which I'm not, by the way, if you're reading this, Zed. I'm more your coffee-drinking, emacs-loving, meta-programming geezer.) State of Ajax * HTTP sucks * Needs to be a reset * Semantic Web: Einsteins brain on a crack whores body isn't going to happen * I'm waiting for someone to blind-side the entire Web stack Silverlight take-up has been poor; Flash seems widespread but limited by its proprietary nature; XUL+etc is free but uptake also poor. Could Gnash blind-side the entire Web stack? Surely Gnash is just sitting on top of the existing web stack? - 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] BBC iplayer on exotic devices
On Jan 9, 2008 9:42 AM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 06/01/2008, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this list (and this thread in particular) is precisely because we -do- want people knowing how as much of this works as possible: Them tell me how it works! The HTML looks like it was designed to be hard to read, was this the case? On many other sites all you have to do is view source, Ctrl-F, .flv and you find the URL needed for the stream. The BBC version is split across multiple config files loaded through large amounts of badly formatted javascript (including one long section that has had all the line breaks removed!) I tried the XBox forums but it was rather confusing. Confusing how? I don't believe this email made it to the list first time round: I posted in that thread as Strawp. I wrote the proof of concept script to get the RTMP URL from a programme ID. Here is the exact post: http://www.xboxmediacenter.com/forum/showpost.php?p=162482postcount=70 I worked this out with help from people on there (and here) like Phil Wilson and from the flash player. I'm a developer myself and what I saw on the iPlayer page to get the URL is not what I would consider obfuscated. Sites like RapidShare do obfuscation - this is just quite heavy duty - as it should be, but I didn't see anything on there which looked like a deliberate attempt to make it hard to read. There is a small amount of javascript on the page and some flash variables which set up the flash player and that's it. The flash iPlayer itself does most of the logic, which can be read easily with any number of freely available flash decompilers. I agree that: A. There should be an API for the iPlayer B. The iPlayer should stream over an open, not a proprietary protocol However, this is pretty new still and at this stage there's going to be a lot of pretty frustrating hacking around and ideas from all corners. I think the BBC people in this thread are trying to do the right thing, it just takes a while - as anyone who's ever worked for a large organisation can attest. Iain - 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/
