Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BBC Releases P2P TV Client Test

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the next-generation-couch-potato dept.

evildeed writes "The BBC's Internet Media Player trial started today, and a few thousand lucky UK citizens now have a copy. The good news? Legal P2P downloads of quality shows. The bad news? Requires IE and Windows Media Player, and it's probably going to be UK-only. Oh well. One of the lucky few has uploaded screenshots and a brief review." The service was first announced back in may.

21 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. Before anyone asks.. by MullerMn · · Score: 5, Informative

    From http://www.bbc.co.uk/imp/help/index.shtml#fourteen :

    14. When will I get iMP on Mac & Linux?
    Currently, our supplier is working towards supporting a Mac and Linux version.

    1. Re:Before anyone asks.. by squoozer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can certianly sympathize with you. I often wondered why we paid for the creation of the content but didn't have more rights to it. If you paid for anything else to be created you would naturally assume that you would own it at the end. Surely anyone who pays the licence fee should be able to give a copy of a show to anyone else who pays the fee (tax).

      It doesn't bother me much any more though. I got rid of the TV 5 or 6 years ago and so have saved around £600 in license fees. I can't say I have missed it either. I have a decent sized DVD collection for those times when I really want to kick back and watch something. There have always been a few shows though that I have wanted to watch such as some of the nature pieces. They normally eventually come out on DVD but that's not quite the same. Hopefully this will mean I will be able to pick up such shows for a tiny price.

      The thing that worries me, however, is that we will end up with an Internet tax in much the same way as they have in Germany. Be prepared to fight for you right to not pay the BBC.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    2. Re:Before anyone asks.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually I'm a strong supporter of the BBC but this move is highly offensive, adoption of Windows Media and DRM is not in the public interest. I will run only open source applications and refuse to view DRM content on principal. They sould have used VLC and put some more funding into Dirac and theora, something that is in the public interest.

    3. Re:Before anyone asks.. by EvilMole · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Except they don't compete with anyone, it is amazing that the BBC's long standing culture of nepotism and corruption has managed to produce so many worthwhile programmes."

      Ahh, so basically you're one of those people who hate the BBC and will look for any old stick to bash it with? Fine - that puts your previous comments in a little more context. Have you ever thought you might have got the argument the wrong way round - that the fact that the BBC produces so many worthwhile programmes (much more than "free market" ITV) is actually evidence that it's not nepotistic or corrupt? Or would that be using logic instead of your own bias?

      And if you think that programme makers aren't in a competitive market, you know nothing about media.

  2. Genius, I tell you! by rincebrain · · Score: 4, Funny

    He linked to a UK torrent site right from the article! He's a legal genius!

    --
    It's only an insult if it's not true.
  3. DRM-encumbered by ReformedExCon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see how it can be considered P2P. You download the media off of the BBC's servers, not from your friends and neighbors.

    In addition, the media files themselves are DRM-encumbered, so it wouldn't even make sense to have them on a P2P network when the files would 1) stop working after 7 days and 2) may not work on other machines.

    Is this really P2P? If they are opening up the archives, why would they want to put DRM on the files?

    It doesn't make sense.

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
  4. When can I buy the service? by NigelJohnstone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't live in the UK, do they plan to let non UK people get (pay) for access? Anyone from the beeb know?

  5. "UK only"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can someone please tell me how they are going to ensure only those in the UK get it?

    Oh wait, does it mean that it is legal to download it only if you're in the UK?

    1. Re:"UK only"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They have agreements with UK ISP's. It already is in place - as the odd radio broadcasts on the internet are restricted to 'UK only' for rights reasons - they then give a link to the ISP's who are good to go, and say that if you are inside the UK and your SP isn't on the list then you should get in touch with them so they can get in touch with the BBC.

      I imagine an international version will be about sooner or later for all the BBC produced material - but probably fee based. The reason is that those in the UK have already paid the fee by already having (the vast vast majority anyway)a TV licence - so I can see a fee based version run by BBC worldwide as an option for those outside the UK.

    2. Re:"UK only"? by Ngwenya · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They'll use current (imperfect) IP geolocation stuff like everyone else.

      No, they wont.

      I rather think that they will. I know because my wife works for the BBC and showed me a preview of the technology roadmap - which is now public, and so I can talk about it here.

      They're using GeoIP to do IP location, Kontiki to handle the P2P aspect and (at the moment) Windows WMV DRM to handle the encryption and license to view.

      I suspect that this is only the initial technology - there is no way that MPlayer/VLC/etc will implement DRM (and even if they did, they're open source, so people could just dike it out anyway).

      The DRM aspect is for due diligence - so that the Beeb can represent to the content producers (often non-BBC companies) that their content is being safeguarded against the legions of pirates, who, err.. download the stuff via DVB-{S,T,C} and then upload to Bittorrent. In other words - the guys at Kingswood Warren [BBC Tech HQ] know fine that the DRM protection is ultimately bullshit, but that they have to make some good faith effort to raise the piracy bar.

      Back to GeoIP: I tried going out to my (German-based) Web proxy, then back via a UK HTTP proxy to test whether it would work. And it did - proving nothing, BTW, except that non UK people will get access to this content anyway.

      --Ng

  6. Maybe they are just using it as a buzzword by ReformedExCon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Take a look at this page which details how to download the files:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/imp/tour/tour7.shtml

    Maybe the files themselves are hosted on a P2P network and the BBC saves on bandwidth costs by offloading the files onto that network. But it doesn't seem very "P2Pish".

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
  7. Question.. by dotslasher_sri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wouldn't it be a good idea to open up to the world and generate more revenue from advertising (free internet based content = more potential viewers)?. I know BBC is paid be the UK public and all, but if it can generate revenue by itself who not do it?

    Sri.

    1. Re:Question.. by Brown · · Score: 5, Informative

      Currently the BBC depends on the TV licence fee, and shows no commercal advertising. This is a very good thing.

      Once a broadcaster starts depending on advertising for revenues, the overriding concern becomes viewer figures, rather than quality of output; thus ITV (the BBC's main commercial equivelent) shows programs like 'Celebrity Love Island' and 'TVs Naughtiest Blunders 16' at the same time as BBC shows Newsnight (fairly serious news and current affairs program).

      The licence fee, despite many people not liking it, makes for independent and high-quality broadcasting; IMO arguably the best in the world.

      -Chris

    2. Re:Question.. by Martz · · Score: 5, Informative

      The BBC isn't allowed under it's charter to make money from advertising. They are supposed to form a neutral point on everything, including corporate interest.

      That hasn't stopped some companies muscling into the popular TV shows to get their product placed - and recently are increasingly underfire about the whole thing.

      That said - if you do pay the BBC TV/Radio licence - doesn't that entitle me to use of any content that they carry? For example if Radio 1 play a song on the radio - since my licence payment has already reembursed the artist for it - shouldn't I be allowed to listen again and again?

  8. I wonder how long it'll be... by QJimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Till the DRM gets cracked, it's bound to happen at some point, since apple's AAC DRM and the WMA v2 DRM (WMV as well?) have both had decryptors written.

  9. Re:How much did MS paid them ? by Minicle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting that the client for this is MS based when pretty much all other BBC online content (BBC Raido) is distributed by real player clients.

  10. Has anybody got DVD Jon's phone number? by gpig · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think we have a job for him.

  11. Re:Who is this service for? by thetroll123 · · Score: 5, Informative

    >Watch a lot of TV
    No, watch any TV

    >... but only watch BBC programmes
    No, watch any BBC programmes

    >... and don't want to archive their favourite programmes
    This is not unusual at all. Very few people archive TV.

    >Have a fast internet connection ... but don't download stuff already via P2P
    Lot of people have broadband, few know about/can be bothered with existing P2P.

    >Are into new technology and gadgets ... but only Use IE and Windows
    Again, no. It's *have access to IE and Windows*, not *only use*.

    Very weird post indeed.

  12. Re:Missuse of license money by hkmwbz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Yes, it's great in theory.

    But what they are doing is to use people's money - the license fee paid by the people - to support Microsoft's illegal monopoly. Yeah, it's almost a cliché by now, but by forcing people to use IE and WMP instead of relying on open, cross-browser/cross-platform technologies, they are basically forcing people back to IE and thereby contributing to cementing Microsoft's dominant position in the market.

    They are apparently looking on Mac and Linux solutions in the long term. Will they force people to use a certain browser/media player there, too?

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
  13. Dear Beeb by el_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Excellent. The BBC is making moves to let me, a Licence Fee Payer, get at the content I've been forced to pay for in a way that is more useful to me. Well done.

    But can you imagine the arguments that are going on inside the BBC at the moment?

    The licence fee is pretty reasonable at the moment (well I think it is) and a large part of that is due to additional funds that are created when the BBC sells DVDs of archive and popular shows. The nice thing about DVD sales is that licence fee payers benefit, because the BBC gets a cut, but also the underpaid BBC talent gets a chance to make some money. The other source fo revenue is global syndication. I simply don't see how this won't cut into DVD sales.

    I hope the BBC has the foresight to see that this really shouldn't be a problem. People are used to paying a subscription for TV, let non-uk citizens pay their $17.50 a month and let the money roll in. Sure there will be illegal copies of the shows rolling around bittorrent sites, but thats happening already.

    What the BBC really need to do is get into bed with Apple on this. Just open up the archives, explain that it needs to be sold as a subscription ($15 a month has a nice ring to it), all you can eat service and let Apple do the rest.

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
  14. BBC kicks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't assume that this trial is necessarily representative of the final goal. As the BBC is a publicly funded entity, there are politics like, why should UK tax payers be providing content for everyone else in the world? There is also the politics of file sharing like, why is the BBC allowing people in other countries to pirate our shows. These issues lie at the heart of the rationale for providing the service: why should the BBC lock up old shows in a vault. We paid for them. It's their responsibility to fully utilize the potential of the programs. This may mean by offering parallel 'broadcasts' or by opening up the archives. And/or something else.

    I'm suggesting we be careful about treating the BBC like it is a private media conglomerate like Time-Warner-MSNBC-AOL-Haliburton rather than a publicly funded, commercial-free, national broadcast network. Will there be DRM? Maybe. Will there be Mac and Linux versions? Certainly. Will we need to use IE or WMP? Very, very doubtfully. Aside from the fact that there is no IE for Mac anymore, the BBC is developing an open source video player (or is it a codec).

    (I still don't get what he problem with the universal format MP4 is. My best guess in MS didn't want a universal codec that will play on any player and has modified their 'version' of MP4 so that it doesn't work on anything. Still, you'd think it might work with WMP ;-)

    In any case, the BBC kicks! If you want TV to take advantage of the technology afforded by digital communications, look to the BBC. Commercial broadcasters, in contrast, will likely take a route most resembling the RIAA and Hollywood. That's the context in which they operate, and that is their weakness. As an outsider in London, I think the BBC is one of the UK's best assets. It's like a high powered version of Canada's CBC.