Slashdot Mirror

A quote from a few months ago: The BBC has indicated that third party content owners are seeking to ensure that reception equipment will implement ... copy protection. Because [these] requirements are not mandatory, representatives of content owners have asked the BBC to take steps to ensure that reception equipment will implement the specified content management arrangements.

The "standards issue" is that certain parties want the government to define and impose a DRM system and for the government to make it MANDATORY for all hardware to include and enforce this DRM system.

The guardian.co.uk story contains a link to dtg_bbc_trust_canvas_response.pdf were they say they want a new Digital Rights Management expert working group (diagram on page 2), and where they want a "high integrity receiver conformance regime" for receivers. That is a fancy way of saying want all receivers to the securely welded shut and they want circuitry and software securely locked down to prevent device owners or third party services from unscrewing the box to upgrade them in unapproved ways. And most of all it means strictly prohibiting any open platform such as MythTV or or a generic GPL Linux PC reception where people can modify the software. On page 10 they have a section explicitly titled "Conditional Access and DRM" where they explicitly state their concern is for Canvas to ensure the inclusion of DRM components in receivers.

The EFF has a good article discussing how it's the same thing that went on in the U.S. with the same people demanding the "Broadcast Flag" and demanding the FCC to make it mandatory for all receivers to include a government imposed DRM system on the entire public. There were the same demands for "high integrity receiver conformance regime" to lock down the hardware and software against modification by owners or third party services.

-

I have Freesat. I was in the same situation as the GP up until the switchover - I was on a relay that wasn't transmitting Freeview at all (and analogue reception was quite poor), and there was no cable provider in the area. The flat I was living in had a satellite dish attached by a previous occupant, and so I picked up a Freesat HD box as soon as they became available.

Now that the switchover has happened, I receive what my local MP is referring to as 'Freeview Lite' - I only receive the 'public service' channels provided by the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 (and Channel 5 as well I suspect, although the Freeview website is telling me otherwise).

The thing is, Freesat doesn't offer much more than that. The channels that I get on Freeview are also the only ones really worth watching on Freesat. Most other channels are garbage. I would only really recommend Freesat under the following circumstances:

• If you absolutely must have the one-and-a-half HD channels (BBC HD and the half-a-channel ITV HD).
• If it's your only digital TV option that doesn't require a subscription, and you can't wait for your switchover date.
• If you're a Scottish Gaelic speaker and want to watch BBC ALBA, which is only available via satellite.
• If you want to receive local programming from another part of the UK. A friend of mine in London is considering Freesat so that he can watch Scottish programming.
• If you live in the Republic of Ireland, where DTT isn't nearly as well developed (rebranded boxes are available under the name Sat4Free).

There are other options beside Sky and Virgin - Tiscali and BT IPTV services are available in some areas. I'm currently using Tiscali alongside Freesat, and it provides as good a range of channels as I want along with a lot of on-demand content. It's not the most reliable service in the world however, and I'm not sure I want to recommend them over Sky just yet.

I put my postcode/house number (which is in Merseyside) into the DTG checker and The Wrekin (Midlands) and Moel-Y-Parc (Wales) are my two transmitters - neither has the full complement of channels available at my postcode address (i.e. several multiplexes are missing). Also note that in my case, Granada is unreceivable because a big hill (no, not Winter Hill!) cuts off the signal for me.

The one glimmer of hope is that the full digital switchover (Oct/Nov 2009 for Wales, 2011 in the MIdlands) will allow full power transmission and finally bring all the multiplexes online for the first time ever for me. It's quite surprising how this lack of multiplexes over parts of the country ever since Freeview started is virtually unheard of in the press, although the "missing" channels already generally have low viewership nationwide anyway (Dave included).

Just £10 from Tesco! That's $20 (very approximately).

(Less than two hours work for everyone over 21, unless your employer is breaking the law and not paying you enough.)

Actually, the boxes can update themselves automatically - see, for example this schedule of updates to Freeview boxes (the DVB-T service in the UK). On our box, the updates were as simple as pressing YES when it said it'd downloaded one (but no more updates for us, since SetPal went belly up).

I agree with your main point, though. Retailers aren't going to be happy if boxes are remotely nuked.

Actually, the switchover will start in 2008 (http://www.dvb.org/index.php?id=229) and will finish in 2012. Have a look the the map of the switchover times at http://www.dtg.org.uk/consumer/switchover_map.html

BTW, I've already got digital television, as have about 66% of the rest of us Brits :-)

Cheers,
JohnT

Um, some goverments have already begun to abandom analogue TV. Berlin, for example. The deadlines have passed and the terrestrial analogue TV has been turned off, accordingly. Other regions in Germany will follow in 2004. The transisition should finish in 2010, like in several other countries (e.g. UK, Japan 2011)

An overview about the state on digital TV in the world.

Um, some goverments have already begun to abandom analogue TV. Berlin, for example. The deadlines have passed and the terrestrial analogue TV has been turned off, accordingly. Other regions in Germany will follow in 2004. The transisition should finish in 2010, like in several other countries (e.g. UK, Japan 2011)

An overview about the state on digital TV in the world.

The FCC assigned a royalty sharing organization, ATSC, to deliver a "unified" Digital Television system. But ATSC had no motivation to use the improved European-developed COFDM DTV system now the world-wide DTV standard. Unlike ATSC, it works. You can get it free over the air or in a bus. I believe former FCC director William Kennard is to blame. He didn't want to slow down the "lucrative" 3G auctions. Now we're stuck with a broken DTV system, the VHF auctions are delayed (again), and everyone lost...except the cellular carriers.

In the UK, all you need is a $99 box with rabbit ears. US broadcasters are stuck. They may eventually be forced into PPV and soft porn since only rooftop antennas can pick up ATSC. The FCC let this happen. It's criminal negligence."

It makes no difference where the broadcast is uplinked from, whether it is London or Sweden - broadcasts to Europe have to abide by the laws of all countries in Europe, unless they are encrypted, and subscriptions are not available in all countries.

The ITC, (Independent Television Commission in the U.K.), recently fined a Swedish broadcaster for screening an unsuitable trailer - details here.

Wi-Lan isn't Wi-Fi (802.11b)- wi-lan is W-OFDM, wireless t1/e1- and they have a great technology for the reception of HDTV so that you don't get the silly black blocks that disrupt signal,-- but instead, the FCC chose to back 8-VSB, an inferior technology.

The greater question is, why is the FCC deciding this? They didn't decide which cell phone technology was going to reign, only which frequencies we'd use.

Sources? http://www.wi-lan.com

commentary: If we were to follow the 'lead' from the ATSC then this is what the future would look like. The Americans are still in denial about the Brazilian (and other) DTT test results (denying the basic facts that a single carrier system can never work for wireless DTT) and have carried out their own tests arriving at their own conclusions using incorrectly configured DVB-T equipment. The sooner the US drops its single carrier 8-VSB based standard in favour of an OFDM solution the better for all concerned. A report summarising why DTV is not happening in the US (example of flawed thinking: DTV does not necessarily mean HDTV). Unfortunately, DVB and ISDB have (so far) been unable to agree on a common OFDM way forward even though both standards are nearly exactly the same (ISDB improved the DVB-T standard with the addition of extra time interleaving, band segmentation and the option for 4k carriers). However, due to the wide acceptance of DVB-T and its myriad other supporting standards it is unlikely that ISDB compliant equipment will ever be deployed outside of Japan.

Take-up of Digital TV in the UK has been the most successful in the world in percentage terms (the US is not far behind); but can it continue to grow at the same pace? ITVdigital, the DTT service provider in the UK, launched with an early (2k carrier) release of DVB-T and had been reasonably successful (although I am sure some would disagree?) with over 1.2 million subscribers up to the end of 2001. Unfortunately, due to a combination of factors ITVdigital are in danger of closing down and are currently in administration. The BBC in their annual R&D review for 2000-2001 (Digital Television Distribution section) list some of the issues associated with DTT in the UK and give an interesting insight into how improvements can be achieved. Thanks to the wealth of experience gained in the UK other European DTT service providers will be able to provide a more advanced and improved service to their customers. Get the insider views on the UK DTT experience from the following newsgroup: uk.tech.digital-tv;

Wi-Lan isn't Wi-Fi (802.11b)- wi-lan is W-OFDM, wireless t1/e1- and they have a great technology for the reception of HDTV so that you don't get the silly black blocks that disrupt signal,-- but instead, the FCC chose to back 8-VSB, an inferior technology.

The greater question is, why is the FCC deciding this? They didn't decide which cell phone technology was going to reign, only which frequencies we'd use.

Sources? http://www.wi-lan.com

commentary: If we were to follow the 'lead' from the ATSC then this is what the future would look like. The Americans are still in denial about the Brazilian (and other) DTT test results (denying the basic facts that a single carrier system can never work for wireless DTT) and have carried out their own tests arriving at their own conclusions using incorrectly configured DVB-T equipment. The sooner the US drops its single carrier 8-VSB based standard in favour of an OFDM solution the better for all concerned. A report summarising why DTV is not happening in the US (example of flawed thinking: DTV does not necessarily mean HDTV). Unfortunately, DVB and ISDB have (so far) been unable to agree on a common OFDM way forward even though both standards are nearly exactly the same (ISDB improved the DVB-T standard with the addition of extra time interleaving, band segmentation and the option for 4k carriers). However, due to the wide acceptance of DVB-T and its myriad other supporting standards it is unlikely that ISDB compliant equipment will ever be deployed outside of Japan.

Take-up of Digital TV in the UK has been the most successful in the world in percentage terms (the US is not far behind); but can it continue to grow at the same pace? ITVdigital, the DTT service provider in the UK, launched with an early (2k carrier) release of DVB-T and had been reasonably successful (although I am sure some would disagree?) with over 1.2 million subscribers up to the end of 2001. Unfortunately, due to a combination of factors ITVdigital are in danger of closing down and are currently in administration. The BBC in their annual R&D review for 2000-2001 (Digital Television Distribution section) list some of the issues associated with DTT in the UK and give an interesting insight into how improvements can be achieved. Thanks to the wealth of experience gained in the UK other European DTT service providers will be able to provide a more advanced and improved service to their customers. Get the insider views on the UK DTT experience from the following newsgroup: uk.tech.digital-tv;

There is an interesting article about it here.

Digital terrestrial includes many new non-analogue including BBC3 and BBC4.

Not quite. BBC4 is up and running (actually, they just renamed BBC Knowledge), but BBC3 is still in the pipeline [The consultation papers can be found here]

ITV Digital faced an uphill struggle since the beginning. They actually started out life as "ON Digital", but no-one knew who they were, or really what they did. Bad marketing saw this "faceless" TV company (for whom very few Brits even saw it in action) struggle. So they renamed, and rebranded after a bright spark thought "The two shareholders are Carlton and Granada - everyone knows who they are!". Hence ITV Digital. A bad start, but perhaps a better future after Monkey and Johnny Vegas (listed in order of merit) might help turn things around, and if they could get the rights to the Nation's Passion (football) they might be in with a chance!

So they bid for the rights to show Nationwide League games. [details of exact amounts here] Everyone thought that the bean counters at ITV Digital had done their homework, and could afford the legally binding amounts to be paid to the League.

Alas, no. They came up short in the money stakes: Dear Mr Digital, your account is overdrawn to the amount of a squillion pounds. Please advise us how you intend to rectify this matter. Until you contact this branch, I have cancelled your cash card. You have been charge 25 quid for this letter..."

Because of ITV Digital's bad management at all points, they are in trouble. Or dead - depends who you believe. Maybe Microsoft can inject the cash and management required to make it work.

One thing (OK the only thing, apart from Futurama) I admire about Sky, is their ability to make a business plan and stick to it. They sunk a whole load of money, investing in the infrastructure to make Satellite work - and it now pays. They are now doing the same to Sky Digital. Good on them - they made it work.

It's a shame that the prat at ITV Digital who signed the contract is now causing a number of football clubs around England to suffer because ITV are refusing to pay what they legally bound themselves to.

Graham
--------