Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On 06/15/2010 03:21 PM, Andrew Bowden wrote: We can argue around this one as much as we want but I'm afraid there's one simple truth. Most people don't care one bit and just want to watch their programme. They do. And they won't take long to work out that technology, content and services are cheaper and more convenient where the BBC hasn't betrayed their interests. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On 06/15/2010 02:08 PM, Andrew Bowden wrote: If the alternative was this system did not exist and rights holders told broadcasters (for this is not just a BBC issue) that the broadcaster could not broadcast their content in HD on the Freeview platform... They threatened something like this before and were rightly ignored. The result was...nothing happened. ...how would you explain to the average punter that the programme could not be broadcast on Freeview HD? And how would you justify it to them in such a way that they went Yes, you're right rather than Eh? See Virgin vs. Sky. Or: These guys want to make it more expensive and less convenient for you to just watch TV and they're trying to use the national institution of the BBC to do so. We're fighting this rather than selling you out to make life easier for us when we join them after leaving the BBC^D^D^D. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On 06/15/2010 10:11 PM, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: People won't miss something they never knew they had in the first place especially if they are able to do all the things they can now, which it appears they will be. They'll find out soon enough, they're not, and it doesn't. This is a problem. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] indefinitely live BBC archive?
On 01/03/10 10:09, Paul Rissen wrote: Rights are important, and should be respected - but shouldn't be used as a weapon to scare off questions/solutions... And we've known that we need to tackle rights on new work (the rats nest of pre-digital rights would probably require legislation to untangle) for some years now. But it's difficult to persuade the people we need to persuade of this. Their lawyers tend to try and talk them out of it at the last moment in my experience and succeed far too often. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] indefinitely live BBC archive?
On 01/03/10 11:22, Ian Forrester wrote: Your right about the lawyers. As default they suggest you would be a mug to give away any part of the rights. In my experience there are very, very few lawyers who can help work through more creative models. I've even been surprised by some of the lawyers working for organizatons/projects who should know better. Protecting against the risk of loss is deeply ingrained, opening up to opportunities for gain is an alien way of thinking. I know I'm slightly bias but can I suggest http://free-culture.cc/ the book to anyone interested in how complex rights can get. I'd also recommend Promises To Keep, which Lessig refers to in that book. It's a very detailed illustration of the precise flow of rights and values in the (US) music industry. This is what any new system would replace. When started RDTV, we took the stance of not using anything BBC pretty much, just in case there might be a contract or licence which held us from releasing the footage. Its like tip toeing in a live minefield. My mother wanted a DVD of The Rock and Roll Years for her birthday recently and I had to explain why it was incredibly unlikely that one would be available... I do wish we were more enlightened about remix/free culture but the fact remains to most of the rights holders that all this is hippy nonsense unless its proven that they can make more revenue from giving away part of the rights. I've worked on several projects devoted to doing just that. It's a struggle but we're learning more and more about both how to structure the project and how to keep all the stakeholders on board when their lawyers panic the day before the launch. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iPad
On 28/01/10 08:03, Brian Butterworth wrote: Underwhelming. It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD. Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard. As Mo points out it does. It can run iPhone apps so if it's not running the iPhone OS it's running another OSX variant. It has an on-screen keyboard and you can plug in a physical keyboard (they even provide a dock so you can configure it as a desktop system while doing so). But it also has DRM... http://www.defectivebydesign.org/ipad http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/27/defective_by_design/ - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iPad
On 28/01/10 09:56, Brian Butterworth wrote: Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system. It's a UNIX. It's a UNIX broken to remove your freedom, but it's still a multi-tasking* memory-protected kernel-based operating system. And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard. It's not a piano... ;-) - Rob. * - Unless you're an application author or a user. See the broken part. - 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] Freeview HD Content Management
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2010/01/freeview_hd_content_manag ement.html Overall, we believe the proposed system takes a highly pragmatic approach to content management Why do people always use pragmatic as a synonym for complicit? Indeed, the proposed Freeview HD content management approach is so 'light-touch' that some have argued that it is not worth having. So don't have it then. Problem solved I just hope that these communities can understand our position too; that we want to deliver the service which enables more viewers across the UK to enjoy high definition content as soon as possible. That isn't the BBC's position. The BBC's position is that they are going to ignore both history and public opinion and keep pushing for DRM until they get it. Holding a new service hostage is a convenient way of achieving this. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Defining Non-Commercial
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:33:18 +, Mo McRoberts m...@nevali.net wrote: Exactly the same problem exists with Creative Commons NC licenses - there isn't a solid definition of what non-commercial actually means. The CC actually ran a consultation on it, and were going to do... something, at some point. As far as I know, nothing's happened yet (beyond noting that if you think there's a possibility your usage might be considered 'commercial', you're best off just asking the licensor whether what they think of your proposed use, which does somewhat defeat the purpose of standardised licenses). CC have run a consultation on this - http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Websites to get Panic Buttons
On 07/12/09 17:54, Graeme Mulvaney wrote: Why should facebook need a panic button for children ? It's a *moral panic* button. It will be a very handy tool for cyberbullies to use against their victims. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Encryption of HD by the BBC - cont ...
DRM is law, not code. (As code it's useless, an encryption system where you give the attacker the key...) - rob. On Oct 6, 2009 4:14 PM, Sean DALY sdaly...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, lots of FLOSS code produces supersecure encryption; GnuPG for example. Digital Restrictions Management of broadcast media is harder to do than text messages or filesystem volumes. Most commercial DRM developers don't give a hoot about GNU/Linux platforms since marketshare is so small though. Sean On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Scot McSweeney-Roberts bbc_backst...@mcsweeney-roberts.co.uk wrote: On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 15:00, Sean DALY sdaly...@gmail.com wrote: David, I'm curious, what... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage
Re: [backstage] Encryption of HD by the BBC - cont ...
On 06/10/09 19:07, David Tomlinson wrote: Frank Wales wrote: Do you mean the DMCA? Isn't that American? And what is a unilaterally imposed licence, when it's at home? How can someone force me to accept their permission to do something? I can not remember the relevant European legislation, IPRED, IPRES2? The EUCD. Which covers Technological Measures. And DRM does precisely force you to accept someone's (ability to grant you) permission to do something. That's its intended goal. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Encryption of HD by the BBC - cont ...
On 06/10/09 20:05, Brian Butterworth wrote: And let's not forget that EU Legislation has to be enacted by the UK Parliament. Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_and_Related_Rights_Regulations_2003#Technical_measures And while I'm at it - http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm ;-) - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 19:53, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.ukwrote: How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? History shows that this won't happen. And this time the BBC is in an even stronger position given the collapse of advertising revenue for commercial TV in the UK. The BBC is a nice big pot of easy money for content vendors. The threats of content vendors not to take that money shouldn't fool anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Next they'll be threatening to hold their breath until they get what they want. As usual it's a difficult balancing act. It is not. It's capitulation to special interests for no good reason. If it was a balancing act, how would just giving the side that is against the BBC and its audience everything they want balance things? - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
On 02/10/09 19:17, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html However our focus is not to champion causes - it's meeting our public service remit which means serving our many audiences as best, as fairly, and as openly as we can. Championing the cause of content vendors against those audiences is out of focus by that description. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
On 02/10/09 19:17, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: People on this list may be interested in this latest blog post: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html The first commenter is far more worth reading than the original post - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protection_a.html?ssorl=1254509384ssoc=rd For example - “With access to its technology, consumers will be able to share high definition content across home networks.” This isn’t something which DRM _enables_. It’s something that DRM _permits_ in a limited fashion. Re-stating this ad nauseum doesn’t make the reverse magically true. “We have consulted a wide range of stakeholders” Who? When? The BBC only made mention of it here -after- the Ofcom non-consultation got widespread coverage—that in itself was a miracle, as Ofcom didn’t actually publish it AS a consultation, merely a “letter of enquiry” with a minimal window for responses. If there’s a consultation still to come, when will it be? Please don’t forget that the license-fee paying public ARE stakeholders here. If discussions have been ongoing for months, why is it only now being made public? Moreover, if introducing this is critical to the launch schedule of Freeview HD services, why is it only being discussed now (at what can only charitably be called the eleventh hour)? Have rights-holders been told they can expect it to be in place in time for launch, despite it being contingent upon Ofcom’s (and presumably, the Trust’s) approval? If not, then what do the contracts for BBC HD on Freesat say? (broad terms, we don’t need to breach “commercial confidentiality”) Alternatively, is it the case that the content licensing agreements for BBC HD currently ONLY cover Freesat, despite everybody knowing perfectly well when Freesat was launched that Freeview HD was due to launch late 2009/early 2010? - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
On 30/09/09 17:37, Kieran Kunhya wrote: If anything the open source community will be the first to find a workaround. It will be both impractical and illegal to do so. From the article - DTLA requires that all devices be made to resist end-user modification. That is, DTLA devices can't use open-source software, lest the pesky licence-fee payer alter the restrictions in the code. And the novel feature of the proposed system is that it is a way of abusing the database right to exclude free software developers in the absence of software patents. The important point isn't the technical details, though - These rightsholder groups have a long history of trying to arm-twist the BBC into imposing restrictions on the TV that you and I are obliged to pay for. For years, the BBC broadcast its satellite feed in encrypted form, paying an additional £20m a year to run this scheme. When the BBC decided that it was unseemly and wasteful to go on paying for encrypted satellite signals, the major studios promised a boycott of the corporation. The boycott was short-lived: as soon as the quarterly results came in with a massive BBC-shaped hole in the studios' income, they recanted. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Taking advantage of the Publicity clause
It's a great idea, but beware the opinions of unions stung in the past by attempted exploits on the publicity clause. The materials would have to be by-sa to be used in wikipedia (which is good). Charging for the service would therefore guarantee only timeliness, not exclusivity. On Jul 28, 2009 11:14 AM, Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk wrote: http://ideas.welcomebackstage.com/ideatorrent/ideas_in_preparation/ Interesting idea came through the ideas system, not sure if its true or not. What do you guys think? Cheers, Ian Forrester This e-mail is: []secret; []private; [x]public Senior Producer, BBC Backstage, BBC RD Room 1044, BBC Manchester BH, Oxford Road, M60 1SJ email: ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk work: +44 (0)1612444063 | 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/
Re: [backstage] Ogg Theora/Vorbis and HTML5
2009/6/18 Phil Lewis backst...@linuxcentre.net The same rights holders probably didn't like VCRs either - or digital terrestrial tv broadcasting. They didn't. They also didn't like cable TV, MP3 and just about any other cash cow you can mention. You have to force them to get rich each time. It's really quite embarrassing. - Rob.
Re: [backstage] The Final Digital Britain report
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote: 2009/6/16 Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk: The Final Digital Britain Report http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/broadcasting/6216.aspx So what do people think? Time to leave the country or dig a hole and stick our heads into it? Maybe just time to get a https://www.relakks.com/?lang=engcid=gb account, Not sure about relakks - http://digg.com/security/Is_Relakks_Piratpartiet_s_anonymizer_really_anonymous and possibly switch to a smaller ISP if your current one messes with your quality of service too much. Can anyone recommend an alternative to Virmin in Peterborough? - Rob.
Re: [backstage] The Final Digital Britain report
2009/6/17 Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk I got to say I'm also with ukfsn.org and not really had any major problems Thanks guys. I'll take a look. - Rob.
Re: [backstage] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
European Newspapers Find Creative Ways to Thrive in the Internet Age PARIS — As the death toll in the American newspaper industry mounted this month, the German publisher Axel Springer, which owns Bild, the biggest newspaper in Europe, reported the highest profit in its 62-year history. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/business/media/30paper.html?_r=1 - 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] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
Dave Crossland wrote: 2009/3/29 James Ockenden james.ocken...@gmail.com: I think this is a false dilemma. Guys in my office have phones with 8MP cameras. My 18-month old phone has a 5MP camera. I suspect a good lens and skill with photoshop is vastly more important than the photographer being professional. Sure, some kid with a 10MP phone can take a 300dpi front-page-sized picture of a UFO crashing down into the village green – but when the alien crawls out and asks to speak to Gordon Brown for the first time, do you, as a news editor, send the kid with the phone, or perhaps someone who has a bagfull of experience, a ladder, good elbows, and a record of never ever fg up? This also seems like a false dilemma, Or a good example of a scarcity that can be exploited economically. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
Fearghas McKay wrote: On 29 Mar 2009, at 19:48, Dave Crossland wrote: Photography did in portrait painters. Same story, different century. It did ? There really are no portrait painters left? I think the effect of photography was that portraiture as a market increased, the affluent could still ( and did ) get a painter but the masses could either take their own or get a professional in who only needed 10 mins in the shopping centre temporary studio. Yes the history of publication in the livejournal era is a good parallel to the history of portraiture in the box brownie era. What is true in the case of both portraiture and publishing is that the barriers to entry were greatly lowered. The market *expands* rather than being wiped out. What is destroyed is the *exclusivity* of the profession, not the value of the professionals. I think that professional investigative journalism and professional news photography will continue to command a premium because they represent scarce, valuable, differentiating skills. If I want to really have something exponentially different to wrap adverts around I want Edison Carter or Magnum, not some random happy slapper. ;-) - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] [Fwd: [ORG-discuss] iPlayer on Gnash Later In The Year]
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Tim Dobson li...@tdobson.net wrote: Seeing is believing but this sounds very encouraging... I do wonder if more could be done to help them though. Large quantities of cash would be good. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Sean DALY sdaly...@gmail.com wrote: A key characteristic of a newspaper is that you can fold it up. Foldable or rollable screens may yet arrive in the next few years, I vaguely recall Samsung and Sony showing proof-of-concept and prototypes the last year. If I get my fish chips wrapped in a Kindle I will be really annoyed. ;-) I like e-reading on the OLPC XO-1 which is small, light, and ruggedized (it's for kids), twists and folds flat screen out, and in direct sunlight switches to very high resolution black and white (you have to read on it outside to believe it). Navigation is by the joystick buttons although it does take a little getting used to. I own an EeePC and an Aspire One and they are clunky in comparison (I don't even consider classic laptops). I'd gladly buy one as an ebook reader to help get those economics of scale working for OLPC, but... - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote: My hope with the change is that we'll get an answer to the questions MediaLens raise about the integrity of the profession. My hope is that with the change MediaLens will find something better to do. ;-P - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Clay Shirky: Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
Kevin Charman-Anderson wrote: But Dave, taking a swing from the barricades at the profiteering publishers sounds lovely but it comes close to ignoring the pain and economic dislocation that journalists are going through at the moment. We're not the only ones hurting in this recession, but reporters are going to have difficulty replacing their income in this recession from their previously full-time jobs with a totally digital model that is still in the making. Stockholm syndrome for the people who didn't pay journalists on time or for the submitted word count under the old model won't help with these facts. If we have to live in capitalist society then we have to listen to the market. And the market says that some writers can make a living from a dedicated readership, advertising, sponsorship, merchandise and subscriptions. Pretty much the same as for the newspapers that town criers and local gossips couldn't compete with... - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] BBC becomes the British Botnet Corporation
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Steve Jolly st...@jollys.org wrote: Not sure I'm convinced - all operating systems have their vulnerabilities; All machines have their *theoretical* vulnerabilities. Only Windows has vast botnets built on them, or any effective malware threats exploiting them in the wild. Unless you are a BBC reporter who has only ever used Windows, you're on a deadline, and you don't want your report to look like it lacks balance. In which case suddenly every OS is as good as Windows for a change. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC becomes the British Botnet Corporation
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Peter Bowyer pe...@bowyer.org wrote: 2009/3/13 Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org: On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Steve Jolly st...@jollys.org wrote: Not sure I'm convinced - all operating systems have their vulnerabilities; All machines have their *theoretical* vulnerabilities. Only Windows has vast botnets built on them, or any effective malware threats exploiting them in the wild. And a great way to change that is to allow users of other OSs to believe and act as if they're not vulnerable. If forewarned is forearmed, this applies to knowing which platform is the greater theoretical and practical security risk. It does not justify hiding that information with a false equivalency - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC becomes the British Botnet Corporation
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Gordon McMullan gordon.mcmul...@bbc.co.uk wrote: It may not be *vast* but here's a report of a Mac OS X Trojan enrolling a Mac into a DDoS attack http://notahat.com/posts/28 it seems that he was originally infected by running a compromised installer infected with the OSX.iWorkServices.A trojan see: http://www.sophos.com/security/analyses/viruses-and-spyware/osxiworksa.html Thanks. I must confess I was ignorant of that. :-( - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Slightly bias view maybe?
Dave Crossland wrote: Some of them have no pensions and need this money, he said. A large enough cut of zero must be worth *something*. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Slightly bias view maybe?
In fact technically changing all copyright durations to be 1 year would also harmonise everything.=20 Berne means copyrights have to be at least 50 years. There is no logical reason why you can only harmonise upwards and not downwards. Governments don't want to strip people of their property, however worthless it may be. I agree with you in principle though. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Make the primary OS used in state schools FOSS
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Alun Rowe alun.r...@pentangle.co.uk wrote: //personal rant coming up... For any open source software (Linux for example) to really work on the network en mass we need to about user experience. Currently I've yet to see an attractive/user friendly piece of FOSS. Anecdotally, I find that Inkscape is much better usability wise than Illustrator, and that Firefox is much less awful than IE's menu bar idiocy. The free desktop experience has become more unified as the Mac one has become more fragmented. Whilst the software (once you've worked out how to use it) is extremely effective IMO user experience is a big part of the software which usually gets overlooked in FOSS scenarios. I think FOSS can have a huge future but the community need to think about user experience then it will be taken more seriously. Be careful what you wish for: the current KDE 4 train wreck came from the developers focussing on user experience. It's an interface so godawful that everyone I have seen use it has been personally offended by it. ;-) The desktop user experience with Free Software is getting much better. For me personally it's become a non issue over the last two years (before then I might have agreed with you more). But for many people, usability equals familiarity; making it work as badly as Windows. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Make the primary operating system used in state schools free and open source
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk Transforming a Windows school to an Ubuntu school is nigh on impossible to achieve unless you provide a year's warning, gradually phase out use of all Windows-only software over the course of the year, implement the massive overhaul and platform transition during the holidays and then spend the next six months to a year supporting users when stuff goes wrong. Most schools simply cannot afford to provision those kinds of resources, so they stay put with what they have, and that's why FOSS will never make significant inroads into those establishments. It would take something like Governmental intervention to impose FOSS and OSes on schools as a mandatory element of their funding in order for them to make the change, but it would be so disruptive that it would probably be ignored or sidelined by many schools. And yet they will end up on a newer Microsoft operating system at some point. ;-) I am not trying to scaremonger or FUD here, it is just my view as someone who has gone through the system and grown up alongside the maturation of a typical educational IT setup, and who also had the advantage of talking to the person who helped to implement a lot of it (and still talks to the person who now helps implement policy and infrastructure for an entire county's worth of education!) Although perhaps flawed or coloured, I feel it's a pragmatic, realistic view. It's very informative. Thanks. I've encountered similar stories from people working with charities for example. One thing I'd say is that nothing will stimulate companies that can support schools (and other institutions) using GNU/Linux like the prospect of there being a sudden increase in the number of schools using GNU/Linux to support. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Twittering on
Ian Forrester wrote: The really cool kids are on both right? I refer the honourable gentleman to the smiley I appended at the conclusion of my previous statement. ;-) I think Twitter has the more famous people on it. Surely it's the same as when Radio presenters couldn't help but chat about there Myspace pages all the time? Every bar I go into now a days, there's talk about Youtube, Facebook and sometimes Twitter anyway. Twitter is breaking through to the mainstream. It's a big enough phenomenon that ignoring it would be the extraordinary thing. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Make the primary operating system used in state schools free and open source
Who cares if MS is de facto in the school setting if it serves its purpose?=20 Its purpose (as someone else pointed out quite eloquently) is to teach kids. I don't know how well MS software teaches anything other than how to use the previous version of MS software, a skill that at best devalued by the time you get into the workplace. Even if on the face of it FOSS could replace it, all that existing knowledge is go= ne because people have to relearn how to work the computers to a standard = they were at before.=20 For the average computer user this is their experience of upgrades to new versions of MS software. There is a bogus upgrade bait and switch cycle that keeps people upgrading their intel hardware, MS OS, and MS software to prevent them losing their investment in each when the next one is declared outmoded by the company that sells it. GNU/Linux can break the OS part of this cycle, and Dave has mentioned WINE. A phased migration is the only workable solution, and even that becomes harder and harder when you have outsourced service and sup= port from third parties as Neil mentioned. These third parties must remain competitive if they wish to continue to receive tax money. I allege that the advantages of switching to Free Software *can* outweigh the costs (sic) of support, teaching, and third party staff upgrading their skills to more open, flexible and studiable systems. ;-) - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Twittering on
Duncan Barclay wrote: I have to admit that I generally don't see the point of twitter. You could have fitted that into a twitter message and reached a much wider audience. ;-) - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Make the primary operating system used in state schools free and open source
Richard Lockwood wrote: I allege that the advantages of switching to Free Software *can* outweigh the costs (sic) of support, teaching, and third party staff upgrading their skills to more open, flexible and studiable systems. ;-) I like the use of the word allege. Can you demonstrate it? Sure. Give me control of the state budget for school IT... ;-) - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Nice CC-ND-ish DVD
Dave Crossland wrote: 2009/2/2 Frank Wales fr...@limov.com: Dave Crossland wrote: A nice example of someone running a business, with streaming and torrent downloads and verbatim commercial redistribution permitted: http://www.chrismartenson.com/make-your-own-crash-course-dvds Er, you sure? Quite sure. http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chrismartenson.com%2Fmake-your-own-crash-course-dvds I can see it. But it's ND so... ;-P - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] If you had a ton of content to freely distribute
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Michael Walsh michael.wa...@digitalrightsmanifesto.com wrote: If you have digital material you can release for remixing purpose - then I would contend that along with distributing it via some channel or another, you should also consider hosting the content on a BBC server and make tools available which would (1) allow people to remix online and (2) facilitate them in publishing this new content to any other platform(s). In effect this would allow the BBC to be a Online Public Service Developer, Producer and Publisher/Broadcaster. And ensuring that the results can be used by commercial organizations (by not making it NC) would help defuse any competition concerns. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] If you had a ton of content to freely distribute
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote: 2009/1/21 Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org: And ensuring that the results can be used by commercial organizations (by not making it NC) would help defuse any competition concerns. And boost Wikipedia et al :-) Yes, and then Wikipedia and Flickr etc. can provide exposure for the BBC content and blahblahblah network effects blahblahblah leverage blahblahblah. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update Ugh. Dual licencing. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] If you had a ton of content to freely distribute
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Ian Forrester ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk wrote: Licensing, I think we'll use something like CC-BY-NC (although I totally understand the arguments against NC, Dave) CC-BY-NC-SA is tempting due to the nature of the content. Could you explain the nature of the content and why NC is tempting for it? BY(-SA) includes non-endorsement now, like the Creative Archive licence, and explicitly asserts the moral rights of paternity and integrity. SA can be a sufficient disincentive to economic exploitation of work. So depending on what the concerns are these may be addressable without resorting to NC. I do wonder how we keep the licence in tack even when the assets are broken up and reused? Maybe we should be looking into watermarking or some adobe xmp type system? This would also be useful for figuring out reach. Yes use XMP. CC have done a lot of work on metadata and have tools for working with it. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] The Apple Wheel: Apple's new keyboard-free laptop
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Gavin Johnson gavin.john...@bbc.co.uk wrote: Should you decide to get one it's gonna be a while before you say anything. On 06/01/2009 13:22, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote: http://ping.fm/GqIbk http://ping.fm/GqIbk What can I say? t -- Sent from my Wheel. - 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 caching
Andy wrote: To say AIR supports Linux is very misleading. AIR undermines GNU/Linux, it doesn't support it. ;-) [also ducks] - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] Microsoft says it 'has always preferred' DRM-free content
Aleem B wrote: (why is it so surpising that microsoft would prefer DRM-free content). Their prior actions, corporate culture, general technological strategies, partnerships and regulatory environment. And you have stripped the emphasis of the original. There is no evidence that MS *have always* preferred drm-free content. Quite the opposite in fact. For any Microsoftie to now claim that the corporation has always preferred drm-free content is at best wishful thinking on their part. When followed of promises of yet more DRM, that isn't alarming, it's risible. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [backstage] BNP mashups
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Certainly. Dave is forever banging on about how if information can be copied it *should* be copied and shared - not just free software, but anything; music, films etc, regardless of the wishes of the original creator of that information - all in the name of freedom and friendship. So I find it ironic that he's so pleased that the Google mashup using BNP data has been taken down. I'm intrigued to know what he believes is more important - his beloved freedom, or personal privacy (especially as that information is now in the public domain). That confuses means with ends. What you do with information isn't excused by the fact that you are using information in doing it. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BNP mashups
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't see any confusion at all. It's simply a question of where does Dave draw the line between you must share and copy this and you must not share and copy this. He's previously given the very strong impression that there was no line, and you must share and copy everything. I don't think that's practical. None of us has the time to copy absolutely everything. And even if we did, the fact that we did copy everything would have no impact on the ethics of what we *do* with it. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] [ORG-discuss] DRM Free BBC Content on GNU/Linux (Ubuntu)
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Vladimir Harman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hmmm...nice and positive news for the ubuntu friends, and me of course :) thanks to canonical for spreading the word :) the plugin works with totem only, or it works with other gnu/linux video applications? My next action was going to be to ask backstage if anyone can provide more information on this project. :-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] [ORG-discuss] DRM Free BBC Content on GNU/Linux (Ubuntu)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ian Forrester wrote: I'm trying to get the guys behind this to do a full piece on backstage about it. That would be brilliant! - - Rob. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkKJc4ACgkQCZbRMCZZBfZGDwCggyJV4vo3nVf1xhDEYzyCdzK5 lNYAn1NR/DkUP+H+djo0GaMhXlvFss6Y =e0Mx -END PGP SIGNATURE- - 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] Brandon on Redux on BBC Internet Blog
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/10/history_of_the_bbc_redux_ proje.html In the summer of 2007, freetards (me too), the OSC and others were calling for the BBC to make iPlayer cross-platform ... Cross-platform support has always been a source of grief The BBC's insistence that this is the problem rather than their use of licence-fee-payers money to lock people in to proprietary standards and exclude free platforms is getting more and more shrill. Breaking your public's devices one platform at a time really is not an achievement, no matter how interesting a technical problem it is for the Beeb's geeks or how strong their new leader's RDF is. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC DRM iplayer mobiles etc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Phil Wilson wrote: Yes, the fact that this will run on all the Linux PCs in both my houseand office is a shockingly pro-Microsoft move and must be stopped! My Linux box is PowerPC. But it is a great comfort to know that you can run it. - - Rob. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkj2Jg4ACgkQCZbRMCZZBfYM+ACgiuuTV9bih3imR2wRv00XKwJt 56IAoIHramhGZj8Tn1FF4hXI6T4N85Ib =7i8y -END PGP SIGNATURE- - 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] Questions so for FOWA so far...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ian Forrester wrote: Facebook --- 1. Given that your business is worth nothing without the trust of your community, why have you just hired someone who worked for the former US Attorney General who approved warrantless wiretapping, torture, helping to blow a CIA agent's cover and firing non-political appointees for political reasons as your general counsel? 2. No really, why? - - Rob. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkjjv+gACgkQCZbRMCZZBfbIwACfY6NGjDSy7absTgebR1tvhri3 v4wAniNTjHt2sfdhLIX6QGT8Yflplshs =mx4m -END PGP SIGNATURE- - 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] Internet TV without streaming is like
Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/7/18 Oeztunali, Sebnem (CT) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ...It will also let users buy a TV show or movie without actually downloading the video file to the PC's hard drive... This statement is either misguided or lying. :-) Why should it be either? It's possible to buy something without having to take physical possession of it. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is apparently unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article which readers are not free to share and modify? If he's using his standard licence then you are free to copy it verbatim and share it. Stallman believes that works of opinion are different from pieces of software. He is concerned that arbitrary modifications of a work of opinion could lead to misrepresentation, and he's not alone in that. Software doesn't really have that problem, so he's right that they are different. I don't agree with his conclusions on this particular issue, I'm just trying to explain that his position is coherent. - Rob.
Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It uses CC-ND which only allows sharing with attribution, it does not allow commercial reuse or you to 'alter, transform or build upon this work' ND does allow commercial use. NC-ND would prevent commercial use. He doesn't mention BY or the version. He should. Only the old 1.0 CC licences had a standalone ND. ND is equivalent to the old one-line verbatim distribution licence he used to use, and his reasons for doing so have to do with the difference between source code and works of opinion. - Rob.
Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
The ND licence is restrictive compared to copyleft but it is less restrictive than normal copyright, because it allows commercial copying of the work. That said I do see where you're coming from, and I personally would much rather Stallman just copylefted his writings. BY-SA and moral rights should prevent misattribution of derivatives. - Rob. On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stallman believes that works of opinion are different from pieces of software. He is concerned that arbitrary modifications of a work of opinion could lead to misrepresentation, and he's not alone in that. Software doesn't really have that problem, so he's right that they are different. I don't agree with his conclusions on this particular issue, I'm just trying to explain that his position is coherent. Personally I don't agree with the conclusions either, but everyone is entitled to their opinions. I've no knowledge on Stallman philosophy on anything other than software. It just jumped out the screen at me, that after the big long article on freedom, you then get restrictions put on what you can do with the article. I wouldn't have even considered it if the CC licence had not been mentioned and the article was posted under the usual site copyright terms. -- *Gareth Davis* | Production Systems Specialist **
Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just following the CC link posted in the news article, it states no commercial use. Has the wrong version been linked? Yes, it looks like it. Is that an error from the author or the publisher? Just so I know who to email. :-) - Rob.
Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
I agree that twisting people's words isn't good but the copyleft licences such as BY-SA or the FDL do prevent mis-attribution of modified versions to the original author. - Rob. On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Sean DALY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure I understand why one should have more freedom to twist Mr. Stallman's words than the protection under copyright to reuse and change traditional BBC articles. Mr. Stallman can be demanding (I have interviewed him twice, a daunting experience) but I think his message is very important. For my part I'm very pleased the BBC has seen fit to publish that commentary. Sean. On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stallman believes that works of opinion are different from pieces of software. He is concerned that arbitrary modifications of a work of opinion could lead to misrepresentation, and he's not alone in that. Software doesn't really have that problem, so he's right that they are different. I don't agree with his conclusions on this particular issue, I'm just trying to explain that his position is coherent. Personally I don't agree with the conclusions either, but everyone is entitled to their opinions. I've no knowledge on Stallman philosophy on anything other than software. It just jumped out the screen at me, that after the big long article on freedom, you then get restrictions put on what you can do with the article. I wouldn't have even considered it if the CC licence had not been mentioned and the article was posted under the usual site copyright terms. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist - 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] Ashley Highfield leaves BBC (almost)
Brian Butterworth wrote: Cool. Can I apply for his post please? That depends. What work experience do you have at Microsoft? - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Tom Loosemore wrote: I tell you, there's a big pot of money awaiting someone who develops a trusted-enough tracker for usage of online video (a big recruited online panel running background tracking software might even do...) *cough* data protection *cough*. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Tim Dobson wrote: Media players don't all have a function which sends a unique ID to server. Hash the file or check the first 256 bytes. Or check the filename or url. Or the metadata. Tracking files doesn't require a clever system, just an intrusive one. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] The LSE's freetard fiasco
Tim Dobson wrote: its a pity that Andrew Orlowski couldn't have written up a unbiased version of the events, He can't, he needs the clicks. El Reg's advertising-and-merchandise business model model will fail unless he constantly gets attention by arguing against it. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Thomas Leitch wrote: Wrong. It is locked. Good luck if you lose your last front door key. As another example, I can sell you a car and refuse to give you the keys after you give me the money. If you hire a locksmith and drive off anyway and I take you to court over this then my insistence that breaking locks is wrong won't get me very far. - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
