Slashdot Mirror
BBC Discusses PVR Software, Creative Archive Plans
Fidigit writes "You may have heard something about the BBC Internet Media Player {iMP) - a computer-based PVR for the BBC's TV and radio content, 'only... available to UK broadband users', which'll use P2P to shuttle content around between downloaders. Now we hear the iMP content will distributed using DRM, using Microsoft's DRM technology, 'in a break with the BBC's long-standing support of Real.'" The previously mentioned BBC Creative Archive is also discussed - apparently its content "...will be downloaded using a similar application, but will not be restricted by DRM, enabling people to re-edit it, or use it to make other programmes" - the content "will not be the complete BBC archive", but an example given of the initial content is "nature programmes".
No, the BBC doesn't need to keep a lot of its content secure because it has all been paid for by the license fee. In fact, the BBC is pretty much obliged to distribute its stuff as far as possible - we own it already!
Most of the people at work (non IT - all over 34yrs) look at me funny when I mention I listen to music on my PC - even though its ripped from CD's i purchased years ago. The notion that I have "MP3's" makes me look suspect (sheez - imagine if I had ripped everything to OGG !).
Downloadable Nature shows - now that's a Good Thing - Once the average person understands that "you are not a pirate if you download music/videos", then its a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned.
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
So they use P2P so that I can send part of the contents to people with MY bandwidth (baid by me on a monthly basis), but comes with Digital Restrictions Management so that I cannot actually use it as I want?
Yeah right, that'll happen.
---- Take the Space Quiz!
so you pay the TV licence then even though you don't have a TV?
This distribution of programmes is part of the BBC's public service agreement as all BBC content is supposed to be free, as in no money required and as in to be used by other people.
You over simplify; the BBC archive os beset by complex ownership issues; especially the older stuff. In many cases, the actors, writers, directors have rights involving repeat showing fees etc. Much kudos to the BBC to attempt to find a way through these problems. ... Yes the new contracts have this sorted out.
I'm a bit jealous because it won't be available outside UK (well, I understand the legal mess it would be, but BBC is a real reference outside UK, and I'd be glad to watch legally some of their programs).
The good point is, at last, somebody big understood what P2P could bring technically. As they are close friends with Real and its network, it means a lot for the future if this experiment works fine.
The really bad point is this MsDRM. It means no standard and even no cross-platform; it means no freedom for the player (I don't really appreciate WMPlayer and usually watch wm file using VLC which brings me many more functions I like).
When will big company understand that opening their offer to as many customers/users as possible is a good thing? If you've got a shop, you try to make it accessible to anybody, with or without a car, with or without disabilities; you try to be opened as much as you can!
Why the technical options are not the same (and it's so easier with the Internet and the standards than with real world places)?
Why consider all the Internet users/customers as thiefs? Imagine a shop where you are systematically checked walking out, will you come back?
Why can a UK citizen rip/mix/burn as much BBC programs as he want from his TV plug but not from his IP plug?
I hope they will change their mind with the time (for example after the experiment!) but I know they have also to face the rights owners (producers, agencies) who are certainly a bit less interested in what final users experience
ClaudeBBG
In the UK it is illegal to make MP3s from your own CDs. The copyright exceptions for "fair dealing" don't cover nearly as much as the US's "fair use".