VLC does NOT contain any code to watch DRM infected content.
The content available through Bittorrent etc are usualy "TV rips" that is captured via a "TV tuner card" or as direct hdtv rips from satellite or cable providers.
This is NOT the same content that we are discussing as such content is technically illegal.
Since the iPlayer service is currently (I believe) in closed beta no one will have seen the files to try with VLC, however since this is FULLY DRM'd up complete with a "dies after a certain amount of time" and would require authentication of the iPlayer servers in order to work I cannot see VLC doing ANYTHING with these files. I really would love to be wrong, but since it cannot play encrypted tracks purchased from iTunes I doubt it.
Yep I'd prefer open formats, but the BBC don't own all the rights to it's content, so I'm prepared to meet them half way. I'll accept the DRM for as long as it does not force me into using a Microsoft OS.
Err not quite - the television license is a license to own and operate a TV receiver. Even if you can only receive Sky One you STILL NEED A LICENSE.
Technically you would still need a license if all you owned was a video recorder but had no screen to watch it on.
Under the Communications Act 2003, you need a television licence to receive or record television programmes. This applies if they are received by a satellite, cable or land based transmitter. If you are watching any satellite service, controlled from within or outside the UK, you must have a television licence.
You may have been informed, in the past, that a television licence was not required if you received television program services from outside the United Kingdom. This was changed in the Communications Act 2003, and if you are using your TV to receive or record television programmes broadcast by satellite from outside the UK, you are now legally required to have a TV licence.
Each household with a TV HAS to pay a license fee - it is illegal not to.
This funding is the passed onto the BBC (with additional government/public funding).
The actions of the BBC are regulated by the BBC Trust on "OUR" behalf.
They have been informed that a Microsoft lock in is unacceptable by US and are refusing to do anything concrete.
The PM was petitioned to step in and tell the BBC / the BBC Trust to solve the cross platform issue.
The response - The BBC Trust is on the case I (the PM) don't need to do anything.
Problem - the trusts proposal is to LAUNCH with Microsoft ONLY, and then REVIEW the cross platform issue every six months.
This is a REVIEW with NO "or else" attached, in other words there is NO commitment by ANY of the parties (BBC / BBC Trust / Government) to DO ANYTHING AT ALL!
The BBC is supposed to be "run for the people by the people" and this is simple NOT HAPPENING.
They know it's an issue that we the people care about - they just don't plan on doing sod all about it.
Computers in schools : been here since the "BBC Model A" / RM Nimbus - so his Billness is hardly the first, however our PM's do have a history of bending over and taking it sideways for asshat Americans - what can I say - I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM.
I neither admit nor deny and involvement in such illegal behavior;-)
The iPlayer is an opportunity to get it MADE LEGAL - all that is needed is the cross platform support, and then you won't need to break the law to download your tv.
Now if we only had a similarly simple way of changing the drugs/speeding laws.......
I for one would settle of VHS(ish) quality (as if I had recorded it for myself) if it were unencumbered by any form of DRM.
Those rich enough to own HDTV / Home Cinema setups can pay more for and wait for delivery of the DVD/Blueray/HDDVD/ Whatever the next format for HD is.
After all the BBC is funded by the people of the UK - MOST of which couldn't afford a HDTV at half price let alone the prices they are now.
If you read the article and related items you will fin that this is NOT NEWS.
The prime minster has simply said that it is already being taken care of by the BBC TRUST and that the UK government need take NO ACTION.
"They will measure the BBC's progress on this every six months and publish the findings."
They being the BBC TRUST not the government. AND it a REVIEW not a "in 6 months we will have a cross platform player", its a promise to look to see if anything has been done - no word on any actions that can be taken to force the production of any such player in the likely event of it's non-existence.
In short :
Convicted Fellon (Microsoft) 1 : License Payers 0
Disclaimer
I'm from the UK and this really hacks me off.
JFS AFAIK This was expected wayyyyyyyy back because the "similarities" have already been noticed. However it is *my* understanding that the parentage of this code is *not* what SCO belive. I understand that the JFS in Linux is actually of OS/2 parentage, where it was gestated completly separately from the AIX/UNIX team, and that a "clean line" of development has already been documented.
IANAL
Just what I read about 6 months ago.
1) Supply each student with an internal e-mail address.
2) Segment the network with VLANs.
3) On each VLAN run a *nix box running snort, DNS and an email server. If snort detects an infection it should drop an automated pre-made "fix it" email into the users internal mail box (including any relevant patches and instructions) & drop their access to the DNS allowing the user to only resolve the internal mail server.
4) Once the user has "fixed" their machine, they can send an internal e-mail to the IT department who can then confirm that the box has been patched before allowing the user DNS access.
This would simplify and serve to help automate the whole problem solving routine.
The only drawback is that the students *may* not be using the DNS server as supplied by the IT dept.
1) A Hacker is now someone who frequently changes lane. - (the old term Hacking is now called "pacifing technology")
2) Wardriving is driving after having pacified the monitoring technology. And (if implemented) it should push the value of those vehicles up a few notches.
(insane sounding laughs rebound all around as he reaches for his "pacify all" tool..... AKA The Sledgehammer)
On a serious note - those with antique cars should be safe from this attack of sheer stupidity.
A lot of comments seem to think that this is a "re termination" of IBM's AIX License - accourding to the article (yes I read it)
IT'S NOT ABOUT AIX
This is a new allegation relating to Sequent (an IBM subsiduary).
As for the RCU I *believe* IBM has this covered as the work on RCU that was donated to Linux was *NOT* from the work done at Sequent, but was from their OS/2 work on a *similar* technology. NUMA work however has not been mentioned as yet by IBM.
SCO claims not to have known that their code was in linux while they were distributing it...
(Lets ignore that they continued to distribute it after they knew)
Whatever happened to "Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the the law" ?
If they win does it mean that I can kill someone, then claim in a court of law that I did not know that it was illegal and therefore get away with it ?? I think not !!
Furthermore what about "Caveat Emptor" (let the buyer beware) in this instance SCO "bought into" linux (as a marketable product) and therefore it was their resposibility to perform "due dilligence" to protect themselves. It seems that they (either knowingly or otherwise) ignored one of the basic business rules - "cover your own ass first". There has been enough "fud" circulated about the "viral" nature of the GPL that they cannot have been completely unaware of the ramifications of releasing their own linux distrobution.
Just my tuppence worth.
Anyone seen ide to fibre channel convertors ?
Before you flame - They DO exist this product has them in it see here:-
http://www.axus.com.tw/br1200fc.htm
Anyone seen single drive versions of this ?
As a confessed UK geek, I can only look on in wonder at what the RIAA are trying to do. I also shudder at the thought of what happens when they extend their threat into other countries.
I for one would consider an attack on my PC as an act of war, - no I'm not an 3l33t h4x0r but I'm, willing to learn. RIAA - if you get this power and use it........... Be like the Boy Scouts and BE PREPARED FOR WAR !!
Slashdot Mirror
Yep but the equipment has to be *incapable* of tv reception on examination. Even a video recorder which has a tv reciever in it is subject to the law.
If however you have ripped the tv tuner(s) out of your equipment and are running scart / composite only then you are fine.
Been here done this had the argument and paid the fine.
By definition the BBC OWNS the iPlayer - it is after all their "product".
.... the list is extensive whats the difference ?
You have codecs for mp3,aac,mp4,divx
You want iTunes music what do you HAVE to use ?
At the price of disk space these days - who cares how many players they have - for as long as they work!
You mean one of these :
t v_licence/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/03/pc_tax/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/09/internet_
VLC does NOT contain any code to watch DRM infected content.
The content available through Bittorrent etc are usualy "TV rips" that is captured via a "TV tuner card" or as direct hdtv rips from satellite or cable providers.
This is NOT the same content that we are discussing as such content is technically illegal.
Since the iPlayer service is currently (I believe) in closed beta no one will have seen the files to try with VLC, however since this is FULLY DRM'd up complete with a "dies after a certain amount of time" and would require authentication of the iPlayer servers in order to work I cannot see VLC doing ANYTHING with these files. I really would love to be wrong, but since it cannot play encrypted tracks purchased from iTunes I doubt it.
Yep I'd prefer open formats, but the BBC don't own all the rights to it's content, so I'm prepared to meet them half way. I'll accept the DRM for as long as it does not force me into using a Microsoft OS.
Err not quite - the television license is a license to own and operate a TV receiver. Even if you can only receive Sky One you STILL NEED A LICENSE.
Technically you would still need a license if all you owned was a video recorder but had no screen to watch it on.
Under the Communications Act 2003, you need a television licence to receive or record television programmes. This applies if they are received by a satellite, cable or land based transmitter. If you are watching any satellite service, controlled from within or outside the UK, you must have a television licence.
You may have been informed, in the past, that a television licence was not required if you received television program services from outside the United Kingdom. This was changed in the Communications Act 2003, and if you are using your TV to receive or record television programmes broadcast by satellite from outside the UK, you are now legally required to have a TV licence.
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/gethelp/faqs.jsp
I'll gladly explain.
Each household with a TV HAS to pay a license fee - it is illegal not to.
This funding is the passed onto the BBC (with additional government/public funding).
The actions of the BBC are regulated by the BBC Trust on "OUR" behalf.
They have been informed that a Microsoft lock in is unacceptable by US and are refusing to do anything concrete.
The PM was petitioned to step in and tell the BBC / the BBC Trust to solve the cross platform issue.
The response - The BBC Trust is on the case I (the PM) don't need to do anything.
Problem - the trusts proposal is to LAUNCH with Microsoft ONLY, and then REVIEW the cross platform issue every six months.
This is a REVIEW with NO "or else" attached, in other words there is NO commitment by ANY of the parties (BBC / BBC Trust / Government) to DO ANYTHING AT ALL!
The BBC is supposed to be "run for the people by the people" and this is simple NOT HAPPENING.
They know it's an issue that we the people care about - they just don't plan on doing sod all about it.
The same can be said for XP & Vista.
- design.htm
For Vista - install - don't update : use http://www.linchpinlabs.com/resources/atsiv/usage
Goodie kernel mode.
Computers in schools : been here since the "BBC Model A" / RM Nimbus - so his Billness is hardly the first, however our PM's do have a history of bending over and taking it sideways for asshat Americans - what can I say - I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM.
The BBC does not own ALL of the rights for it's programming. A lot of it is produced FOR the BBC by outside parties.
As a UK citizen I acknowledge that the BBC is restricted as to what it CAN provide by those who in turn supply it.
What I do not accept is the "Use Microsoft watch BBC" "Use linux/mac and you are shit out of luck".
Essentially HANDING microsoft a FREE selling point - "You can't watch the BBC on anything else", AND PAYING THEM OUT OF OUR LICENSEE FEE.
Convicted Felon (Microsoft) : 1
License Payers : 0
I suspect that you are NOT from the UK.
The BBC unlike most other broadcasters if funded by UK residents paying an annual license fee.
What I object to is the misuse of OUR funding by paying a convicted felon for what is essentially a MONOPOLY lock into their technology.
What was it Microsoft were convicted TWICE for (once in the USA and once in the EU) ?
Ahhh yes being a monopoly.
You also fail to cover MAC users - cross platform is not just about linux.
I neither admit nor deny and involvement in such illegal behavior ;-)
The iPlayer is an opportunity to get it MADE LEGAL - all that is needed is the cross platform support, and then you won't need to break the law to download your tv.
Now if we only had a similarly simple way of changing the drugs/speeding laws.......
I for one would settle of VHS(ish) quality (as if I had recorded it for myself) if it were unencumbered by any form of DRM.
Those rich enough to own HDTV / Home Cinema setups can pay more for and wait for delivery of the DVD/Blueray/HDDVD/ Whatever the next format for HD is.
After all the BBC is funded by the people of the UK - MOST of which couldn't afford a HDTV at half price let alone the prices they are now.
If you want HD PAY FOR IT.
Not legaly you can't.
We are paying (indirectly) a convicted felon to restrict our use of what as you point out is content WE have already paid for.
The BBC (Microsoft) player wraps everything in Microsoft DRM - VLC CANNOT PLAY IT.
If you read the article and related items you will fin that this is NOT NEWS. The prime minster has simply said that it is already being taken care of by the BBC TRUST and that the UK government need take NO ACTION. "They will measure the BBC's progress on this every six months and publish the findings." They being the BBC TRUST not the government. AND it a REVIEW not a "in 6 months we will have a cross platform player", its a promise to look to see if anything has been done - no word on any actions that can be taken to force the production of any such player in the likely event of it's non-existence. In short : Convicted Fellon (Microsoft) 1 : License Payers 0 Disclaimer I'm from the UK and this really hacks me off.
JFS AFAIK This was expected wayyyyyyyy back because the "similarities" have already been noticed. However it is *my* understanding that the parentage of this code is *not* what SCO belive. I understand that the JFS in Linux is actually of OS/2 parentage, where it was gestated completly separately from the AIX/UNIX team, and that a "clean line" of development has already been documented. IANAL Just what I read about 6 months ago.
2) Segment the network with VLANs.
3) On each VLAN run a *nix box running snort, DNS and an email server. If snort detects an infection it should drop an automated pre-made "fix it" email into the users internal mail box (including any relevant patches and instructions) & drop their access to the DNS allowing the user to only resolve the internal mail server.
4) Once the user has "fixed" their machine, they can send an internal e-mail to the IT department who can then confirm that the box has been patched before allowing the user DNS access.
This would simplify and serve to help automate the whole problem solving routine.
The only drawback is that the students *may* not be using the DNS server as supplied by the IT dept.
Hacking & Wardriving -
:-
..... AKA The Sledgehammer)
New definitions
1) A Hacker is now someone who frequently changes lane. - (the old term Hacking is now called "pacifing technology")
2) Wardriving is driving after having pacified the monitoring technology. And (if implemented) it should push the value of those vehicles up a few notches.
(insane sounding laughs rebound all around as he reaches for his "pacify all" tool
On a serious note - those with antique cars should be safe from this attack of sheer stupidity.
A lot of comments seem to think that this is a "re termination" of IBM's AIX License - accourding to the article (yes I read it) IT'S NOT ABOUT AIX This is a new allegation relating to Sequent (an IBM subsiduary). As for the RCU I *believe* IBM has this covered as the work on RCU that was donated to Linux was *NOT* from the work done at Sequent, but was from their OS/2 work on a *similar* technology. NUMA work however has not been mentioned as yet by IBM.
SCO claims not to have known that their code was in linux while they were distributing it... (Lets ignore that they continued to distribute it after they knew) Whatever happened to "Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the the law" ? If they win does it mean that I can kill someone, then claim in a court of law that I did not know that it was illegal and therefore get away with it ?? I think not !! Furthermore what about "Caveat Emptor" (let the buyer beware) in this instance SCO "bought into" linux (as a marketable product) and therefore it was their resposibility to perform "due dilligence" to protect themselves. It seems that they (either knowingly or otherwise) ignored one of the basic business rules - "cover your own ass first". There has been enough "fud" circulated about the "viral" nature of the GPL that they cannot have been completely unaware of the ramifications of releasing their own linux distrobution. Just my tuppence worth.
Anyone seen ide to fibre channel convertors ? Before you flame - They DO exist this product has them in it see here :-
http://www.axus.com.tw/br1200fc.htm
Anyone seen single drive versions of this ?
As a confessed UK geek, I can only look on in wonder at what the RIAA are trying to do. I also shudder at the thought of what happens when they extend their threat into other countries. I for one would consider an attack on my PC as an act of war, - no I'm not an 3l33t h4x0r but I'm, willing to learn. RIAA - if you get this power and use it ........... Be like the Boy Scouts and BE PREPARED FOR WAR !!