On 24/03/2008, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy wrote:
On 20/03/2008, hayfielddigitalparish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it looks like a CBC are now going to put DRM-free BitTorrent
distribution
for a major prime-time show
it turns out to be reality TV they are torrenting
Now
I spoke to John Wittingdale MP at the MGEITF last year (
http://www.ukfree.tv/fullstory.php?storyid=1107051282 ) and he gave me the
distinct impression that MPs have been convinced that DRM will protect the
jobs
He seemed quite open to the argument that it might be a CULTURAL imperative
(as in
Peter Bazelgette (ex-boss of Endymol) came out against DRM in a speech
to the Convergence Think Tank last week - he wants to allow and
encourages peopel to share TV, but be able to track who watches things
so revenue can be shared appropriately blah blah
In short, I think the light is beginning
I had some background discussions with PACT while preparing my
interview with Ashley and what I learned (unsurprisingly) is that
rights holders want to be compensated; the actual method is up for
discussion. They hear that DRM doesn't work or is ineffective, but
they don't see an alternative.
I'm glad to hear this. It would certainly would be worth a trail. As I
said before, I would much perfer BBC money going to British people who work
on the programmes (in PACT-companies and at the BBC too) than being spent on
Microsoft and DRM.
If the BBC published live stats about the viewing of
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...)
after all, it can hardly be *less* reliable than BARB, let alone RAJAR...
On 26/03/2008,
Tom Loosemore wrote:
Peter Bazelgette (ex-boss of Endymol) came out against DRM in a speech
to the Convergence Think Tank last week - he wants to allow and
encourages peopel to share TV, but be able to track who watches things
so revenue can be shared appropriately blah blah
I heard Ashley
Brian Butterworth wrote:
however it is important to recognise that the demography of people who
watch reality TV, are almost certainly *not* the same as those who grab
tv content (from what ever source) on their computer.
I presume you can justify this claim. I can't recall a
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
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
On 26/03/2008, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian Butterworth wrote:
however it is important to recognise that the demography of people
who
watch reality TV, are almost certainly *not* the same as those who
grab
tv content (from what ever source) on their computer.
On 26/03/2008, Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
Andy wrote:
On 20/03/2008, hayfielddigitalparish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it looks like a CBC are now going to put DRM-free BitTorrent distribution
for a major prime-time show
it turns out to be reality TV they are torrenting
Now apart from the age old question about why anyone would want
Michael wrote:
I thought it was utter tripe myself. Tried so hard it was unfunny. But then
humour is incredibly subjective.
What mainstream tv with a tech edge, do you find funny?
/me goes back to watching google tech talks
--
www.blog.tdobson.net
If each of us have one object, and we
On Mon, 2008-03-24 at 22:11 +, Tim Dobson wrote:
Michael wrote:
I thought it was utter tripe myself. Tried so hard it was unfunny. But then
humour is incredibly subjective.
What mainstream tv with a tech edge, do you find funny?
I think HHGTTG was the last, wasn't it?
- Richard
On 24 Mar 2008, at 23:07, Richard Smedley wrote:
I think HHGTTG was the last, wasn't it?
Nope that was Radio :-)
Well I didn't find the TV as amusing, but then maybe I am being a tad
old crusty ;-)
f
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 00:03 +, Fearghas McKay wrote:
On 24 Mar 2008, at 23:07, Richard Smedley wrote:
I think HHGTTG was the last, wasn't it?
Nope that was Radio :-)
:-)
Well I didn't find the TV as amusing, but then maybe I am being a tad
old crusty ;-)
Well, if we're speaking
On 21/03/2008, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And of course there are places (such as libraries and schools) that
actually
have the right to retain copies as long as they want, and the BBC is,
perhaps illegally, preventing this!
Just playing Devil's Advocaat for a moment,
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Brian Butterworth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/03/2008, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And of course there are places (such as libraries and schools) that
actually
have the right to retain copies as long as they want, and the BBC is,
From a Canadian colleague
it looks like a CBC are now going to put DRM-free BitTorrent
distribution for a major prime-time show see the post
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9897923-7.html?tag=nefd.lede
Phil
The --limit-rate parameter of curl is often used to simulate low or
variable bandwidth, e.g.:
curl --limit-rate 128 URL
On the subject of DRM, Adobe has just announced their DRM server availability:
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200803/031908FMRMS.html
Bizarrely, the
More here..
http://www.betanews.com/article/DRM_is_added_to_Flash_with_new_rights_management_server/1205935789
On 19/03/2008, Sean DALY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The --limit-rate parameter of curl is often used to simulate low or
variable bandwidth, e.g.:
curl --limit-rate 128 URL
On
To play devils advocate:
I don't think it's the politics. From what I understand through recent
discussions on and off list, it's more to do with (as always) keeping
rights' holders happy.
I think that the actual BBC staff would love to hear the various hacks that
people here come up with (be
On 18/03/2008, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
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
On 18/03/2008, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm a BBC senior manager; but posting personally as a fan of Backstage.
Intersting assertion. Makes me think
It puts us (those that care about Backstage) in a really difficult position
if it's used to share information on ways to get
Iain Wallace wrote:
Aside from the Big Lebowski reference: What?
I believe it's an analogy.
S
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
On 18 Mar 2008, at 09:15, Iain Wallace wrote:
As you wish: http://beebhack.bluwiki.com/
I think I entirely misunderstood what the point of this mailing list
was. I was encouraged to come here to discuss running the iPlayer on
exotic platforms but now we're actually doing it it seems it's a
Quoting Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Iain Wallace wrote:
Aside from the Big Lebowski reference: What?
I believe it's an analogy.
To what? :-)
- Rob.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Iain Wallace wrote:
Aside from the Big Lebowski reference: What?
I believe it's an analogy.
I got that it was an analogy, thank you. I don't really understand what
] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Iain Wallace wrote:
Aside from the Big Lebowski reference: What?
I believe it's an analogy.
I got that it was an analogy, thank you. I don't really understand what
the point of it was.
I
Could you send me the link to the right post please.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Dobson
Sent: 18 March 2008 15:41
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Nick
cheers for the link
please do you
/bbc_iplayer_on_iphone_upd
ate_1.html
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iain Wallace
Sent: 18 March 2008 12:59
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Steve Jolly
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FTA:
In fact, more than most: the vast majority. Something like just one
twentieth of one percent have accessed a BBC iPlayer programme via a
hack.
The whole point about the recent update is that the server really
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 05:46:57PM +, Ian Partridge wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FTA:
In fact, more than most: the vast majority. Something like just one
twentieth of one percent have accessed a BBC iPlayer programme via a
hack.
On 13/03/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe everyone should just keep quiet and play along with this DRM charade?
That would be an awful idea; the whole point of the free software
movement is to be able to live an upright and honest life.
The only solution is for the
Unsure, I am not sure they are breaking the law. The BBC is a public
body and their are tight restrictions on what it can and can't do.
Thus it is more likely it is committing an offence under the law.
wrt content producers we should be less concerned with the law and more concerned with the
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pay £££ for a license to freely distributre individual bits of content.
Spend many months
dealing with each different holder of those rights... you've probably guessed
that there isn't one
mammoth, single rights
We only have the BBC's word that the content providers have forced
them to develop iPlayer this way.
There is a built-in detection mechanism. We can ask the content producers.
Or just read the evidence they gave to MP's as part of the All Party
Internet Group's inquiry into DRM
PACT*
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Iain Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
On 14/03/2008, Matthew Somerville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Section 296ZA is about circumvention of technological measures, and uses the
phrase effective technological measures, where technological measures
are any technology, device or component which is designed, in the normal
course of
On 14/03/2008, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm a BBC senior manager; but posting personally as a fan of Backstage.
I thought I recognised the name.
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
On so many levels, that's incredibly bizarre and effete.
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
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
Oh come on ! This is 100% flame bait. None of those things are being
advocated.
We have gone around the loop so many times having these same tired old
arguments trotted out, over and over again. I just think it's time to
move the debate forwards.
I think it's a great, positive step forwards
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:13 AM, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
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,
Indicative of BBC /management/. Erm.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dom Ramsey
Sent: 14 March 2008 12:50
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
On 14 Mar 2008, at 11:13, James Cridland wrote:
I don't
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.
Tom Loosemore wrote:
Why would he agree to talk to groklaw about DRM if that wasn't his
intention? It's not like him saying no to their interview request
would have been hard... and rights holders do know how to share
links...
You will find if you spider the backstage blog etc that I actually
Quoting Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think it's a great, positive step forwards that content can be
delivered to a device like the iPhone.
If the content was available unencumbered the iPhone would never have
been prevented from seeing it. If just iPhone users no longer being
But the BS about the biggest market first is... well, true. You must
serve your biggest audience first, but that's not at the exclusion of
others.
The point is that the biggest market, PCs running Windows, is captive
to a monopolist which chooses not to support open standards such as
MPEG-4
On 14/03/2008, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cos the start was in 2003/4, at which point in time the world looked
very different to both the BBC and to rights holders
Really? The world looked the same to me then, except that the other
media industries were yet to
On 08/03/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will the user agent DRM will be made stronger?
It *appears* that it has.
People are reporting 403 on any non-iPhone request. So even if you
have an MP4 capable phone you now need an iPhone.
It could be that MP4 has now broken (I don't have
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
On 13/03/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/03/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will the user agent DRM will be made stronger?
It *appears* that it has.
People are reporting 403 on any non-iPhone request. So even if you
have an MP4 capable phone you now need an
On 13/03/2008, 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
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?
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,
OK, so the BBC has decided to use something more involved than a simple user
agent check to determine whether it will serve up standards compliant and non
DRM encumbered media to a client.
Fair enough. What I still find rather confusing is that, short of using
whatever DRM capabilities the
OK, here's my guess:
I'm reasonably sure this has in fact now been hacked, but with the BBC most likely facing
a cat and mouse game with hackers intent on circumventing copy protection. is it worth
our exposing how it's done?
Phil
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To
On Thursday 13 March 2008 13:55:50 Iain Wallace wrote:
... User Agent ... cookies. ... Wireshark, ... BBC-UID cookie ... large
hex number ... Quicktime version (including OS identifier). ... MP4 URL ...
cookie contains some kind of hash ... client data ... agent sends over. ...
upload a
Wilson
Sent: 13 March 2008 14:05
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
OK, here's my guess:
I'm reasonably sure this has in fact now been hacked, but with the BBC most
likely facing
a cat and mouse game with hackers intent on circumventing copy protection
]
work: +44 (0)2080083965
mob: +44 (0)7711913293
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 March 2008 14:25
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Maybe the BBC is only paying lip-service
On 13/03/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've released a fix to prevent unrestricted downloading of streamed TV
programmes
on BBC iPlayer.
It's official! The BBC are that stupid. I doubt your new system is as
secure as you think so yelling We've fixed it nah nah nah is going
--- We've released a fix to prevent unrestricted downloading of streamed TV
programmes
on BBC iPlayer. Like other broadcasters, the security of rights-protected
content
online is an issue we take very seriously. It's an ongoing, constant process
and one
which we will continue to monitor. ---
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 March 2008 14:25
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Maybe the BBC is only paying lip-service to the notion of DRM knowing that
anything it puts in place can and will be broken.
Maybe everyone should just
On Thursday 13 March 2008 15:44:56 Phil Wilson wrote:
--- We've released a fix to prevent unrestricted downloading of streamed
TV programmes on BBC iPlayer. Like other broadcasters, the security of
rights-protected content online is an issue we take very seriously. It's
an ongoing,
Fair enough. What I still find rather confusing is that,
short of using whatever DRM capabilities the iPhone has, they
will still be streaming DRM free content to a single
platform, something that is likely to be circumventable by
other clients soon. Not only that, but the BBC
We've released a fix to prevent unrestricted downloading of streamed TV
programmes
on BBC iPlayer.
It's official! The BBC are that stupid. I doubt your new system is as
secure as you think so yelling We've fixed it nah nah nah is going
to make some people crack it just to show you up.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13/03/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe everyone should just keep quiet and play along with this DRM
charade?
That would be an awful idea; the whole point of the free software
movement is to
On 13/03/2008, Ivan Pope [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BBC reads the Guardian.
lol :-)
I CC'd Mark since I mentioned him, and this is reproduced with permission:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13 Mar 2008 14:24
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM
Ian Partridge wrote:
One thing I've always found unconvincing is the way the BBC bleats
but the production companies won't let us distribute the content
DRM-free!. The BBC has major clout - it could say from now on, all
production contracts we sign HAVE to allow DRM-free redistribution.
It could
On 13 Mar 2008, at 16:03, Thomas Leitch wrote:
You can force your way into my house should you really want to, but
that doesn't mean my front door is broken.
That's a flawed analogy. In this case, your front door is simply not
locked. Opening the door requires no force whatsoever.
(And
On 13 Mar 2008, at 16:03, Thomas Leitch wrote:
You can force your way into my house should you really want to, but
that doesn't mean my front door is broken.
That's a flawed analogy. In this case, your front door is
simply not locked. Opening the door requires no force
On Thursday 13 March 2008 16:03:26 Thomas Leitch wrote:
Fair enough. What I still find rather confusing is that,
short of using whatever DRM capabilities the iPhone has, they
will still be streaming DRM free content to a single
platform, something that is likely to be circumventable by
On 13/03/2008, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BBC also makes iPlayer content available in formats Windows
can understand, oh and Adobe Flash.
Both of which are proprietary! Not even open standards!
You can download on an iPhone or iPod Touch made by
Apple, or Microsoft Windows.
Care to take a stab at the relative amount of UK Linux users compared with
the number of iPhone users? I rest my case.
This is an interesting point. I am all for open standards and software, but
also feel I should consider all aspects - including ones out of the control
of the immediate want to
Quoting Ian Partridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
One thing I've always found unconvincing is the way the BBC bleats
but the production companies won't let us distribute the content
DRM-free!. The BBC has major clout - it could say from now on, all
production contracts we sign HAVE to allow DRM-free
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Leitch
Sent: 13 March 2008 16:46
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
On 13 Mar 2008, at 16:03, Thomas Leitch wrote:
You can force your way into my house should you really want to, but
that doesn't
Quoting Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Oh, and don't forget Real, Adobe... and Microsoft - gosh how on earth
could we forget that one...
Which specific Real, Adobe and Microsoft hardware devices are the BBC
supporting to the exclusion of competing hardware devices?
- Rob.
-
Sent via
... but it could
at least ensure that its offerings are as portable as possible.
Requirements:
- Windows XP and Vista(?)
- Adobe Flash player 8(?)
- iPod or iPhone.
Market share: lots.
That's the definition of portable as possible.
Unless you mean portable as in portable mobile
into broadcasting.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 March 2008 17:00
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
Quoting Ian Partridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
One thing I've always found
Wrong - the door is open with a welcome sign because all the progs are
broadcast first of all on TV without DRM. Adding DRM later on is just a
meaningless waste of money. If people want to get content online, they can
and they will.
This is irrelevant really because we're after a legal, long
One could speculate that the BBC definition of platform agnostic is
time-bombed DRM for every platform in the UK, the universe
elsewhere, on a platform-by-platform basis, starting with Windows,
then Apple, then...
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13/03/2008,
On 13/03/2008, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the definition of portable as possible.
NO IT ISN'T.
Binary compiled code is NOT PORTABLE!
Yes C source code is classified as Portable. But only if it is written
in a portable manor.
I.e. a C program that assumes chars are unsigned
On 13/03/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The BBC are giving illegal state aid to a handful of companies -
Adobe. Microsoft. Apple. Real. - and trampling hundreds of others.
If you have the time and the evidence I suggest you contact the EU
Commission about it[1].
The form
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(probably the BBC) and give them a chance to respond. Then you may
want to consider making a formal complaint to a higher authority).
Higher Authority? God?
Andy
--
Computers are like air conditioners. Both stop working,
Ofcom: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/complain/
please don't ...my inbox is full enough alread
(Ofcom does not regulate the BBC - that's the job of the BBC Trust)
Your MP: (via) http://www.writetothem.com/
Your MEP: (via) http://www.writetothem.com/
now there's an accessible, standards-based
If you have the time and the evidence I suggest you contact the EU
Commission about it[1].
Has anyone complained direct to the content providers?
i.e. have you found a BBC programme you'd like to watch which includes the property of a
third-party and written to that third party petitioning
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
On 13/03/2008, Sean DALY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One could speculate that the BBC definition of platform agnostic is
time-bombed DRM for every platform in the UK, the universe
elsewhere, on a platform-by-platform basis, starting with Windows,
then Apple, then...
I did try find a
On 13/03/2008, Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wrong - the door is open with a welcome sign because all the progs are
broadcast first of all on TV without DRM. Adding DRM later on is just a
meaningless waste of money. If people want to get content online, they can
and they will.
This
On 13/03/2008, Phil Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone complained direct to the content providers?
Unsure, I am not sure they are breaking the law. The BBC is a public
body and their are tight restrictions on what it can and can't do.
Thus it is more likely it is committing an offence
Ivan Pope wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(probably the BBC) and give them a chance to respond. Then you may
want to consider making a formal complaint to a higher authority).
Higher Authority? God?
Ashley
: [backstage] iPlayer DRM is over?
On 13/03/2008, Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wrong - the door is open with a welcome sign because all the progs
are broadcast first of all on TV without DRM. Adding DRM later on is
just a meaningless waste of money. If people want to get content
On 13/03/2008, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... but it could
at least ensure that its offerings are as portable as possible.
Requirements:
- Windows XP and Vista(?)
- Adobe Flash player 8(?)
- iPod or iPhone.
Market share: lots.
You are sadly totally mistaken about
On 13/03/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13/03/2008, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the definition of portable as possible.
NO IT ISN'T.
Binary compiled code is NOT PORTABLE!
That's not the meaning of portable that was originally intended -
which was 'copy the
On 13/03/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13/03/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The BBC are giving illegal state aid to a handful of companies -
Adobe. Microsoft. Apple. Real. - and trampling hundreds of others.
If you have the time and the evidence I suggest you
On 13/03/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remember we're in it for the long run... not the short hike.
Because the BBC is committed to DRM, this is scary.
--
Regards,
Dave
Personal opinon only.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
