1) The OP has it backwards. The BBC wanted to use Microsoft DRM; The Trust's modifications are requiring them to provide a platform-agnostic approach, so support the Trust's modifications to the proposal. If you read the PDF it's quite clear.
2) Planet Earth is getting a simultaneous Blu-Ray & HD-DVD release in the US on April 24 in the original David Attenborough narrated format courtesy of Warner Home Video.
People seem to be forgetting that the BBC are greedy assholes who make a fortune and spend a great deal of it on crap at only five times the cost of Sky with 900 channels including UK Gold which is filled with British crap. Greedy assholes who take 3 weeks wage from me so that I can own a TV regardless of whether or not I watch BBC. (Spoiler: I don't)
People seem to be forgetting that the BBC are greedy assholes who make a fortune and spend a great deal of it on crap at only five times the cost of Sky with 900 channels including UK Gold which is filled with British crap. Greedy assholes who take 3 weeks wage from me so that I can own a TV regardless of whether or not I watch BBC. (Spoiler: I don't)
3 weeks wage? For a tv licence? You have a shit job.
BigDes on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
edited January 2007
Did any of you think that the reason the BBC is doing DRM is so that us Yanks and other internationals couldn't just grab a torrent of the thing after it has been downloaded by a license holder?
If they are offering it as a free download in exchange for it being locked to your computer with a British IP, it makes sense to me, as YOU paid for it already... not me, the guy would would DL it for free off of you.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Did any of you think that the reason the BBC is doing DRM is so that us Yanks and other internationals couldn't just grab a torrent of the thing after it has been downloaded by a license holder?
If they are offering it as a free download in exchange for it being locked to your computer with a British IP, it makes sense to me, as YOU paid for it already... not me, the guy would would DL it for free off of you.
They can do DRM all they want as long is it's a DRM system that is independant of manufacturer or platform. That's the whole issue with the BBC, they're supposed to be completely non commercial. Forcing use of Microsoft, or any single company's platform would break that.
Previously they were writing their own player. I don't know what happened to that.
1) The OP has it backwards. The BBC wanted to use Microsoft DRM; The Trust's modifications are requiring them to provide a platform-agnostic approach, so support the Trust's modifications to the proposal. If you read the PDF it's quite clear.
2) Planet Earth is getting a simultaneous Blu-Ray & HD-DVD release in the US on April 24 in the original David Attenborough narrated format courtesy of Warner Home Video.
WOW! This is a big deal. This means it's even more important TO FILL IN THE SURVEY!
Thanks!
Also DarkWarrior, thats Bollocks. For a start the beeb doesn;t make any profit. It all goes into the shows. It doesn't need to impress share holders. It's about as far from greedy as you get. It's clear you don't like British content, and don't need the BBC - and I'm sorry about that. But the country needs the BBC - as the other channels can't be relied on to make British content. And besides, three weeks wages means you earn £40 a week. I would cancel your sky mate.
But lets not make this another "I hate the license fee thread". It's a fair point that it doesn't work for everyone. Lets make it a "Lets make the BBC better by doing a survey" thread.
Did any of you think that the reason the BBC is doing DRM is so that us Yanks and other internationals couldn't just grab a torrent of the thing after it has been downloaded by a license holder?
If they are offering it as a free download in exchange for it being locked to your computer with a British IP, it makes sense to me, as YOU paid for it already... not me, the guy would would DL it for free off of you.
They can do DRM all they want as long is it's a DRM systam that is independant of manufacturer or platform. That's the whole issue with the BBC, they're supposed to be completely non commercial. Forcing use of Microsoft, or any single company's platform would break that.
Previously they were writing their own player. I don't know what happened to that.
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there. They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Did any of you think that the reason the BBC is doing DRM is so that us Yanks and other internationals couldn't just grab a torrent of the thing after it has been downloaded by a license holder?
If they are offering it as a free download in exchange for it being locked to your computer with a British IP, it makes sense to me, as YOU paid for it already... not me, the guy would would DL it for free off of you.
They can do DRM all they want as long is it's a DRM systam that is independant of manufacturer or platform. That's the whole issue with the BBC, they're supposed to be completely non commercial. Forcing use of Microsoft, or any single company's platform would break that.
Previously they were writing their own player. I don't know what happened to that.
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there. They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
And most importantly obviously the battle over DRM can be lost, but incomplaining in the survey there is no point comprimising for them. Let them comprimise. We should just state what we should have. And let them come as close to that as they can.
I really don't think they would expect many people to care. But if enough people did - then we would get good results.
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there.[/b] They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
But to the SUSE, Slackware, Mandriva and Ubuntu users, iTunes is roadblock, and it would also keep folks with non-Apple portable devices from having a copy on the road. It's just as exclusionary.
And I seriously doubt Apple will create an RPM for iTunes just because the BBC needs a universal DRM.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I will do this when I'm not so tired. Interestingly, I'm finding that -provided the service really is platform independent- I'm not that fussed if it has to be DRMed. Probably because I can envision using this as more of an "on-demand" style service than as a means to accumulate the entirety of the BBC archives on my fileserver.
I would, however, prefer it not to have DRM, because that would greatly restrict the use of portable or non-standard devices (like my Xbox running XBMC). Plus, almost anything the BBC produces that has significant appeal ends up on the P2P networks anyway as digital recordings.
Now that I think about it, the recording metaphor is probably the most apt. There have to be thousands of computers out there set up to record broadcast TV, so I don't see what is gained by applying DRM.
Hmm. I started typing this post on one side of the fence, now I find I'm on the other.
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there.[/b] They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
But to the SUSE, Slackware, Mandriva and Ubuntu users, iTunes is roadblock, and it would also keep folks with non-Apple portable devices from having a copy on the road. It's just as exclusionary.
And I seriously doubt Apple will create an RPM for iTunes just because the BBC needs a universal DRM.
no you don't get me. I'm saying iTunes uses DRM that works on multiple platforms as proof that it can be done. The BBC is currently developing opensource codecs for example:
It's not much more of a step to make it include platform independen drmt. Hell it already runs on mplayer. They are using sourceforge for fucks sake! This isn't Fox we are talking about.
But your totally right that it's a big thing to do. Thats why they need to know that we care about it!
The BBC's problem comes from trying to adapt to the digital age. In order to buy a TV, we (in the UK) are legally required to buy a license, the cost of which funds the BBC and lets them make programs. They can't say 'thanks for the cash, but now only people with Panasonic TV's can watch BBC2'.
So we're all paying for the content but they are proposing to discriminate who gets to watch it digitally based on a proprietary solution, that has to not happen. It's just about how that doesn;t happen now. They could still use the Windows Media 10 system for windows users, a proprietary Mac system for Maccies and sone Mplayer solution for Linux as long as they provide *all* solutions, not just one and that's it.
El Viento on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there.[/b] They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
But to the SUSE, Slackware, Mandriva and Ubuntu users, iTunes is roadblock, and it would also keep folks with non-Apple portable devices from having a copy on the road. It's just as exclusionary.
And I seriously doubt Apple will create an RPM for iTunes just because the BBC needs a universal DRM.
no you don't get me. I'm saying iTunes uses DRM that works on multiple platforms as proof that it can be done. The BBC is currently developing opensource codecs for example:
It's not much more of a step to make it include platform independen drmt. Hell it already runs on mplayer. They are using sourceforge for fucks sake! This isn't Fox we are talking about.
But your totally right that it's a big thing to do. Thats why they need to know that we care about it!
Oh, I have no doubt it CAN be done at all; it's the matter of WILL it be done for the sake of the BBC.
And if a platform agnostic, universal DRM does get accepted, I hope it goes a hell of a lot farther than just the BBC; I want all consumer devices that feel the need to use DRM to accept it.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I will do this when I'm not so tired. Interestingly, I'm finding that -provided the service really is platform independent- I'm not that fussed if it has to be DRMed. Probably because I can envision using this as more of an "on-demand" style service than as a means to accumulate the entirety of the BBC archives on my fileserver.
I would, however, prefer it not to have DRM, because that would greatly restrict the use of portable or non-standard devices (like my Xbox running XBMC). Plus, almost anything the BBC produces that has significant appeal ends up on the P2P networks anyway as digital recordings.
Now that I think about it, the recording metaphor is probably the most apt. There have to be thousands of computers out there set up to record broadcast TV, so I don't see what is gained by applying DRM.
Hmm. I started typing this post on one side of the fence, now I find I'm on the other.
TBH, I'd almost rather they just streamed it. Anything I want to watch multiple times, I'll get on DVD. If it's a one-off watch, a platform-agnostic streaming solution would be fine by me, in the same way you can get all of BBC radio's stuff for a week after broadcast.
If I remember rightly, Sun Microsystems were pushing an open source DRM system called DReaM, and I think Realplayer works across all platforms.
Logistically, it would be better for them to go for a single solution, since providing two solutions will double the resources required to run the service. Also, the BBC doesn't really have to worry about new formats being an obstacle to adoption quite as much as a commercial service would.
Lastly, DVD sales aren't as big a deal to the BBC as a lot of people think. The profits from DVD sales for 2005/2006 were £27.3million, compared to £3,100.6million collected in license fees.
You paid for the creation, but you also paid only enough to cover the costs once the BBC has raked in the DVD sales.
If you want on-demand like that, you'd see a fairly large increase in the license fee to cover the bandwidth and loss of sales.
The post directly above yours suggests a 1% increase in the license fee if we assume that the service would kill all DVD sales (30/3000). Which it wouldn't.
So no. we wouldn't need to do that.
I think the BBC want to use bittorrent to keep the costs down, they don't have huge quantites of venture capital to burn like youtube. But they do have enough to make this multiplatform. Hell if they keep it open source the Linux geeks will do it for them.
If I remember rightly, Sun Microsystems were pushing an open source DRM system called DReaM, and I think Realplayer works across all platforms.
Logistically, it would be better for them to go for a single solution, since providing two solutions will double the resources required to run the service. Also, the BBC doesn't really have to worry about new formats being an obstacle to adoption quite as much as a commercial service would.
Lastly, DVD sales aren't as big a deal to the BBC as a lot of people think. The profits from DVD sales for 2005/2006 were £27.3million, compared to £3,100.6million collected in license fees.
IIRC commercial sales are handled by a separate arm to the main content creation/delivery body. I'm not sure how the finances work though
People seem to be forgetting that the BBC are greedy assholes who make a fortune and spend a great deal of it on crap at only five times the cost of Sky with 900 channels including UK Gold which is filled with British crap. Greedy assholes who take 3 weeks wage from me so that I can own a TV regardless of whether or not I watch BBC. (Spoiler: I don't)
3 weeks wage? For a tv licence? You have a shit job.
Unemployment benefits would be a pay rise compared to those wages
BBC: Hey, here's our stuff for you to download.
Me: Oh, cool. I can't wait to use thi -- err, it's Windows only.
BBC: We know. We know it sucks, but we can't be bothered to do anything about it.
Me: [click]
BBC: What was that?
Me: My BitTorrent client.
BBC: Oh.
The BBC is to open up its vast archive of video and audio in an on-demand trial involving more than 20,000 people in the UK. Full-length programmes, as well as scripts and notes, will be available for download from the BBC's website. The pilot is part of the BBC's plans to eventually offer more than a million hours of TV and radio from its archive.
The BBC's Future Media boss Ashley Highfield made the announcement at an industry conference in Cannes. "Our audience increasingly want and expect to dictate how, when and where they get our services," he told the conference. Mr Highfield, director of Future Media and Technology, said the BBC was starting to deliver content in a "hybrid environment", in which digital TV, radio, the web, set-top boxes and personal video recorders were combining to offer interactive services. He said the corporation's end ambition was "one day enabling any viewer to access any BBC programme ever broadcast via their television", and highlighted the need to bridge the divide between TV and content with online connections.
Broadcasters around the world are grappling with the shift to on-demand media, with many firms now offering content online or via mobile devices. Channel 4 in the UK has launched its on-demand service via the net and cable services, while networks in the US are shifting content to platforms such as iTunes and the web.
At the Cannes event Mr Highfield announced:
# The BBC's proposed iPlayer service, offering catch-up TV via the web and cable TV, would be re-engineered to work with Apple Macs and would eventually roll out to digital terrestrial TV (DTT) and set-top boxes.
# A trial of hybrid set-top boxes which are connected to the net and can record TV to access BBC archive material.
# The desire to "future-proof Freeview with additional advanced interactive and digital functionality" so it could offer catch-up TV and access archive material.
The archive trial will make available 1,000 hours of content drawn from a mix of genres to a closed number of people. About 50 hours - of both TV and radio programmes - will be available in an open environment for general access. Mr Highfield said: "It will test what old programmes people really want to see, from Man Alive to The Liver Birds, how they want to see them - full length or clip compilations, and when they want them - in 'lean-forward' exploratory mode similar to web surfing, or as a scheduled experience more akin to TV viewing."
The trial would also be used for the BBC to understand just how much content should be offered free to viewers and "where we should draw the line between a licence fee funded service and a commercial service," said the BBC executive. The BBC hopes that the archive would one day be available online, and on TVs via set-top boxes, either future Freeview players or via Internet Protocol TV.
"Getting our BBC iPlayer seven day, catch-up TV service and our archive pilot out on to the web is one thing, but clearly the biggest available audience is sat in front of the television," explained Mr Highfield. The BBC iPlayer is expected to be launched later this year but is still subject to approval from the BBC Trust. If launched, it is designed to offer a seven-day catch-up service for viewers who can download content onto their computers.
The BBC said it planped to offer the service first on computers running the Windows operating system and then on cable TV and other platforms such as Apple Macs, media centre PCs and smart handheld devices, such as mobiles or PDAs. "Once we've done all that, we'll turn to the really tricky platforms: DTT via either PVRs or IP hybrid boxes."
The BBC's plans for the iPlayer were put on hold earlier this year after its regulators, the BBC Trust, asked the corporation to look at whether the iPlayer should be platform agnostic. Mr Highfield said Apple's "proprietary and closed framework for digital rights management gives us headaches," but, "it is one of our top priorities to re-engineer our proposed BBC iPlayer service to work on Macs".
Of Freeview's future, Mr Highfield said: "It's critical that Freeview evolves as a compelling and competitive alternative to cable and satellite." Mr Highfield said the BBC would be lobbying regulator Ofcom for allocation of spectrum to develop free high definition services for Freeview. "New, hybrid set-top boxes, that combine broadcast TV with an IP connection, give us additional opportunities to deliver on-demand services via Freeview," he said. "Hybrid boxes are a part of the future, as important - if not more so - than standard PVRs," he added.
People who are interested in participating in the trial should register at bbc.co.uk/archive.
People seem to be forgetting that the BBC are greedy assholes who make a fortune and spend a great deal of it on crap at only five times the cost of Sky with 900 channels including UK Gold which is filled with British crap. Greedy assholes who take 3 weeks wage from me so that I can own a TV regardless of whether or not I watch BBC. (Spoiler: I don't)
3 weeks wage? For a tv licence? You have a shit job.
Seriously, it's more like 3 days work, if even that. And whilst I don't really watch tv myself I don't begrudge paying it. And it's per household, not per person, if you're sharing with someone that's only £60 a year.
And if you're REALLY that bothered, there are ways around it.
Last I checked though, there wasn't a really good, truly platform agnostic DRM scheme for video out there.[/b] They would have to roll their own... and that strikes me as unlikely. iTMS has 2/3 of the major players on board, but I don't know if they would let them use that channel for free with their DRM, and it still ends up excluding linux users.
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
But to the SUSE, Slackware, Mandriva and Ubuntu users, iTunes is roadblock, and it would also keep folks with non-Apple portable devices from having a copy on the road. It's just as exclusionary.
And I seriously doubt Apple will create an RPM for iTunes just because the BBC needs a universal DRM.
no you don't get me. I'm saying iTunes uses DRM that works on multiple platforms as proof that it can be done. The BBC is currently developing opensource codecs for example:
It's not much more of a step to make it include platform independen drmt. Hell it already runs on mplayer. They are using sourceforge for fucks sake! This isn't Fox we are talking about.
But your totally right that it's a big thing to do. Thats why they need to know that we care about it!
Open source + DRM = no DRM. This is blindingly obvious, really.
And Linux users as a general rule don't use closed-source software unless it's unavoidable.
People seem to be forgetting that the BBC are greedy assholes who make a fortune and spend a great deal of it on crap at only five times the cost of Sky with 900 channels including UK Gold which is filled with British crap. Greedy assholes who take 3 weeks wage from me so that I can own a TV regardless of whether or not I watch BBC. (Spoiler: I don't)
Are you aware that half the content on UK Gold wouldn't exist without the BBC?
THE whole of the UKTV network is actually owned by the BBC as well the last time I heard, which is why so much of their programming comes from the BBC. This makes me irrate as the BBC charge a license fee then whore the same content out on channels that are paid for by advertising.
THE whole of the UKTV network is actually owned by the BBC as well the last time I heard, which is why so much of their programming comes from the BBC. This makes me irrate as the BBC charge a license fee then whore the same content out on channels that are paid for by advertising.
It's a joint venture between Virgin and BBC Worldwide. Worldwide is the commercial side of the BBC.
The way the BBC works, BBC Worldwide still has to 'purchase' these shows for broadcast from the arm of the BBC that is run by our license fees. It's just because they're the same company, yes, they do get a better 'deal' on buying the shows than say, Sky would.
This is evident in Doctor Who's broadcasting abroad. BBC America, also run by BBC Worldwide, wanted it, but they were outbid by CBC, who also offered extra funding to extra series. So CBC got Doctor Who, with BBC America getting a deal to broadcast it a year later (BBC America is just Broadcasting Series 1 and the start of Series 2 now)
Open source + DRM = no DRM. This is blindingly obvious, really.
:?:
There's no technical reason why DRM can't be open source. Hell, the AACS DRM is a completely open standard which can be re-implemented by anyone with a copy of the spec.
And Linux users as a general rule don't use closed-source software unless it's unavoidable.
That's starting to change as Linux becomes more mainstream, though. I use things like the Adobe flash plugin and the official nvidia drivers, neither of which are open source. There's growing pressure being applied to distro maintainers to allow more closed source stuff into releases. Witness, for example, Ubuntu's decision to produce two versions of each release, one which is pure OSS, and one mainstream release which contains things like closed-source binary drivers, the flash plugin, etc.
So who else is in on the limited trial / beta at the moment? I am, and it seems pretty okay so far. A half-an-hour programme clocks in at 147MB, which is around the sweet-stop for download time vs. quality. Downloads are pretty fast too. I have been having problems with the DRM though - Windows Media Player tries to acquire the license, then a BBC popup tells me I don't have the rights. I've been having to re-save the files to load them.
Posts
2) Planet Earth is getting a simultaneous Blu-Ray & HD-DVD release in the US on April 24 in the original David Attenborough narrated format courtesy of Warner Home Video.
If they are offering it as a free download in exchange for it being locked to your computer with a British IP, it makes sense to me, as YOU paid for it already... not me, the guy would would DL it for free off of you.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They can do DRM all they want as long is it's a DRM system that is independant of manufacturer or platform. That's the whole issue with the BBC, they're supposed to be completely non commercial. Forcing use of Microsoft, or any single company's platform would break that.
Previously they were writing their own player. I don't know what happened to that.
WOW! This is a big deal. This means it's even more important TO FILL IN THE SURVEY!
Thanks!
Also DarkWarrior, thats Bollocks. For a start the beeb doesn;t make any profit. It all goes into the shows. It doesn't need to impress share holders. It's about as far from greedy as you get. It's clear you don't like British content, and don't need the BBC - and I'm sorry about that. But the country needs the BBC - as the other channels can't be relied on to make British content. And besides, three weeks wages means you earn £40 a week. I would cancel your sky mate.
But lets not make this another "I hate the license fee thread". It's a fair point that it doesn't work for everyone. Lets make it a "Lets make the BBC better by doing a survey" thread.
Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
Look guys; I know that it goes against the grain of public television philosophy to distribute it this way... but I seriously doubt the BBC will release it without any DRM, and having them force an option such as crafting a multi-platform DRM scheme that everyone can suse will tie this up to the point where it won't happen.
That said, a universal DRM that every OS/Device can use or become "trusted" to would be the best thing for consumer electronics in a long time. Zune Pass on an iPod, anyone?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
With respect to the bold you answered it yourself. iTunes? Multiplatform Windows and Mac DRM'd up to the eyeballs. Linux isn't that different to OS X. It's not a problem.
And most importantly obviously the battle over DRM can be lost, but incomplaining in the survey there is no point comprimising for them. Let them comprimise. We should just state what we should have. And let them come as close to that as they can.
I really don't think they would expect many people to care. But if enough people did - then we would get good results.
Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
And I seriously doubt Apple will create an RPM for iTunes just because the BBC needs a universal DRM.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I would, however, prefer it not to have DRM, because that would greatly restrict the use of portable or non-standard devices (like my Xbox running XBMC). Plus, almost anything the BBC produces that has significant appeal ends up on the P2P networks anyway as digital recordings.
Now that I think about it, the recording metaphor is probably the most apt. There have to be thousands of computers out there set up to record broadcast TV, so I don't see what is gained by applying DRM.
Hmm. I started typing this post on one side of the fence, now I find I'm on the other.
no you don't get me. I'm saying iTunes uses DRM that works on multiple platforms as proof that it can be done. The BBC is currently developing opensource codecs for example:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/projects/dirac/
It's not much more of a step to make it include platform independen drmt. Hell it already runs on mplayer. They are using sourceforge for fucks sake! This isn't Fox we are talking about.
But your totally right that it's a big thing to do. Thats why they need to know that we care about it!
Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
So we're all paying for the content but they are proposing to discriminate who gets to watch it digitally based on a proprietary solution, that has to not happen. It's just about how that doesn;t happen now. They could still use the Windows Media 10 system for windows users, a proprietary Mac system for Maccies and sone Mplayer solution for Linux as long as they provide *all* solutions, not just one and that's it.
And if a platform agnostic, universal DRM does get accepted, I hope it goes a hell of a lot farther than just the BBC; I want all consumer devices that feel the need to use DRM to accept it.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
syndalis, if anyone can, the BBC can. as El Viento says - they basically have to do it.
All we have to do is fill in the survey saying we want it.
Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
TBH, I'd almost rather they just streamed it. Anything I want to watch multiple times, I'll get on DVD. If it's a one-off watch, a platform-agnostic streaming solution would be fine by me, in the same way you can get all of BBC radio's stuff for a week after broadcast.
Logistically, it would be better for them to go for a single solution, since providing two solutions will double the resources required to run the service. Also, the BBC doesn't really have to worry about new formats being an obstacle to adoption quite as much as a commercial service would.
Lastly, DVD sales aren't as big a deal to the BBC as a lot of people think. The profits from DVD sales for 2005/2006 were £27.3million, compared to £3,100.6million collected in license fees.
You paid for the creation, but you also paid only enough to cover the costs once the BBC has raked in the DVD sales.
If you want on-demand like that, you'd see a fairly large increase in the license fee to cover the bandwidth and loss of sales.
The post directly above yours suggests a 1% increase in the license fee if we assume that the service would kill all DVD sales (30/3000). Which it wouldn't.
So no. we wouldn't need to do that.
I think the BBC want to use bittorrent to keep the costs down, they don't have huge quantites of venture capital to burn like youtube. But they do have enough to make this multiplatform. Hell if they keep it open source the Linux geeks will do it for them.
EDIT: Anyhow - gotta go now. DO THE SURVEY!
Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
IIRC commercial sales are handled by a separate arm to the main content creation/delivery body. I'm not sure how the finances work though
Channel 4 news > BBC News
Lies, plus BBC News Website > *.
Hmmm.
Although I like the BBC News website, I find the quality of the journalism to be pretty horrendous.
I filled it in to help out you lousy british bastards.
I only say that because it took forever and actually made me type responses. Plus i had to find a london address to use.
Check out my band, click the banner.
To save the thread, have there been any developments on this? I missed the whole thing first time around, was in foreign lands at the time.
My other sig sucks as well...
Me: Oh, cool. I can't wait to use thi -- err, it's Windows only.
BBC: We know. We know it sucks, but we can't be bothered to do anything about it.
Me: [click]
BBC: What was that?
Me: My BitTorrent client.
BBC: Oh.
Also, USA peeps? can you sign up?
Seriously, it's more like 3 days work, if even that. And whilst I don't really watch tv myself I don't begrudge paying it. And it's per household, not per person, if you're sharing with someone that's only £60 a year.
And if you're REALLY that bothered, there are ways around it.
PSN: SirGrinchX
Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
Open source + DRM = no DRM. This is blindingly obvious, really.
And Linux users as a general rule don't use closed-source software unless it's unavoidable.
Are you aware that half the content on UK Gold wouldn't exist without the BBC?
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
Where Madness and the Fantasical Come to Play
It's a joint venture between Virgin and BBC Worldwide. Worldwide is the commercial side of the BBC.
The way the BBC works, BBC Worldwide still has to 'purchase' these shows for broadcast from the arm of the BBC that is run by our license fees. It's just because they're the same company, yes, they do get a better 'deal' on buying the shows than say, Sky would.
This is evident in Doctor Who's broadcasting abroad. BBC America, also run by BBC Worldwide, wanted it, but they were outbid by CBC, who also offered extra funding to extra series. So CBC got Doctor Who, with BBC America getting a deal to broadcast it a year later (BBC America is just Broadcasting Series 1 and the start of Series 2 now)
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
:?:
There's no technical reason why DRM can't be open source. Hell, the AACS DRM is a completely open standard which can be re-implemented by anyone with a copy of the spec.
That's starting to change as Linux becomes more mainstream, though. I use things like the Adobe flash plugin and the official nvidia drivers, neither of which are open source. There's growing pressure being applied to distro maintainers to allow more closed source stuff into releases. Witness, for example, Ubuntu's decision to produce two versions of each release, one which is pure OSS, and one mainstream release which contains things like closed-source binary drivers, the flash plugin, etc.
PSN: SirGrinchX
Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
Also, I got this accidentally and lolled: