BBC's iPlayer: cool concept but a Linuxkiller

[ahhaa]

The BBC has dreamed up a near ideal video podcatcher, but has really run afoul of other interests, such as linuxusers and DRM watchdogs. But... check out the concept itself- works for me!
The player will acquire and manage episodes, so theoretically you'd never miss another Dr. Who episode!


EC threat to BBC over downloads

The BBC has been accused of forcing people to use Microsoft operating systems and has been threatened with a complaint to the European Commission. The charge concerns the use of Microsoft technology in the corporation's forthcoming iPlayer. The web service, set for launch later this year, allows viewers to watch shows up to 30 days after broadcast.

more, and a demo link to the new player at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6236612.stm

vaguely related, but a kinda funny clip of older 'Brits going digital'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5390000/newsid_5394300/5394304.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm

[TBoneit]

Is it just me or does The EC really hate Microsoft, and is it because they are not in Europe.

Where do they get off telling anybody, The BBC, how to do something.

Don't want to use the BBC hardware don't buy it. Simple case closed.

[jman98]

Is it just me or does The EC really hate Microsoft, and is it because they are not in Europe.

Where do they get off telling anybody, The BBC, how to do something.

Don't want to use the BBC hardware don't buy it. Simple case closed.

Yes, they hate Microsoft. Some of it has to do with them being American. Some of it has to do with Microsoft killing competition and being a near monopoly. It really doesn't help matters at all that President Bush and his buddies say "Me so horny for your tax money, Microsoft! Me love you long time!" all the time. According to the Republican mantra - Big Business = Good. Make money = Good. This is also why to them Outsourcing and Losing American jobs = Good because anything that makes rich people richer is a Good Thing.

Ever heard of Dirac? The BBC was (is still?) supposedly going to develop an open source codec that they would encode their videos in. It would be patent free and platform independent. I have no idea what the status of Dirac is at this time, but it appears that for now the BBC has given up and just done the easy thing - gone with Microsoft.

The problem with Microsoft DRM is that if you have an Apple or a Linux box, these files won't play for you. At all. So the BBC has said that either you can give Bill Gates your money or you can get bent. Please note that absolutely NOTHING made them have to use Microsoft DRM on their files. These files have DRM because the BBC, like the RIAA, like the MPAA, thinks you as a consumer are probably a thief and they want to restrict (they hope) your ability to copy their programming for free for your friends. Keep in mind too that the BBC did NOT have to put DRM in anything. They could have just released MPEG-1, MPEG-2 or even Divx files that anybody could have played and instead they chose you to use DRM because you are a thief. You may not know you are a thief and you may not think you are, but the BBC thinks you are.

I don't happen to think the BBC is right. Whether you or others do depend on your level of computer expertise (the less you know, the more likely you are to not understand the issues and just think Microsoft is always right), your political affiliation and whether or not you are an American. Europeans care more about a lot of issues than Americans do, such as freedom of choice and personal liberty. If you don't understand why this is a personal liberty issue that doesn't bother me, but it doesn't mean you're necessarily right just because you don't happen to see things the same way they do. Microsoft is NOT your friend and the sooner you realize that, the better off you will be.

[TBoneit]

So you think they should have gone wth Linux or made it to work with any OS?

Since the BBC has decided they want DRM they more or less had to go with MS or Apple or reinvent the wheel AFAIK. It has to be cheaper to license or they wouldn't do it.

Bottom line this could just force them to drop the concept entirely. That is what I would do if I were them. I would say to those that wanted it, blame the EC.

I'm of the opinion that since it is their content they have rights over it and if they had wanted to make it only run on CP/M and then patch in a proprietary file system they'd be within their rights.

If they were distributing content from all over then others would have a say. From what I've seen the EU doesn't care for Apple either.

No Linux type will have anything to do with DRM, that is why they run Linux as much any other reason IMHO.

What if the choices facing the BBC are do it the EU way and no DRM or don't do it......

[TwistedLincoln]

Any piece of software that propogates or encourages the use of DRM is evil, and must be boycotted. I don't care how easy it is to use, or how convenient, it's still evil.

DRM must be eliminated. Period. Paragraph.

As much as I want to promote GNU/Linux, I'm glad it isn't supported. Adding DRM to Free Software would be like using slave labor to hang human rights billboards...

[ahhaa]

You know what's really odd?
In ye olde daze, we had the Big 3 networks, plus PBS & some superstations like WGN. The programs were better, or at least we liked them better, and they were completely paid for by happy advertisers.

now nobody seems happy, and who wants to watch a wardrobe failure on their iphone?

[redwudz]

jman98, you are straying into politics, which is in violation of our forum rules. I would rather not lock this thread. A notice to all.

Moderator redwudz

[jagabo]

I'm of the opinion that since it is their content they have rights over it and if they had wanted to make it only run on CP/M and then patch in a proprietary file system they'd be within their rights.

As I understand it, a large portion of what the BBC broadcasts is NOT their content. It is produced by independent studios and the BBC's broadcast rights don't include internet distribution. They had to add DRM to keep the independents happy.

[thecoalman]

DRM must be eliminated. Period.

DRM is not the problem, its how its used by the companies that are licensing it that is the problem. It's just another product like any other. I've used this example before, I run a website for band. Suppose I want to offer high quality demos of their songs yet want to limit how many times they can be played copied etc., DRM would be the only way to go about this. the band and the consumer both benefit because you get to sample the song how it was meant to be heard and the band isn't leaving their songs completely open to piracy (yes I'm aware DRM doesn't completely prevent ti from being copied). You like the song pay me and I'll give you DRM free version or if I choose a slightly less inhibited DRM version.

The point is I or the band the producers of the file can make my own choice as to how it can be distributed with or without DRM. You as the consumer can choose to either buy it or not.

[ahhaa]

"the band and the consumer both benefit"

Hey Coalman- what I've never understood is why, not so long ago, music was financially healthy and now its not. We had Phillips cassettes for cars but still bought albums enough... now its song by song right?

what isn't being recognized (imho) is the absolute surfeit of pop music everywhere you go- what's of value to me these days is silence to tell the truth. no offense meant!

[thecoalman]

what's of value to me these days is silence to tell the truth. no offense meant!

No offense taken and I agree with you as far as what's mainstream. But..... my father said the same thing as did his father ,and his father... Maybe we are just getting old.

[TBoneit]

jman98 wrote, "I don't happen to think the BBC is right. Whether you or others do depend on your level of computer expertise (the less you know, the more likely you are to not understand the issues and just think Microsoft is always right), "

When I started with computers There was no Microsoft. There were computers with Proprietary OS's. TRSDOS, Apple II. CP/M.

I even dabbled in OS9 a multi tasking Multi user OS and have computers for that and a TRSDOS and a CP/M Luggable computer in the basement. Then IBM came out and IBMDOS and then MSDOS and I built my first clone, a 8Mhz XT Clone. Two floppies at first then a whopping 20 Megabyte Seagate MFM hard drive.

and so on. I still have the MS Word 1 in the basement. It came with runtime of Windows 2 as I remember it.

The fact that I prefer Windows over Linux has nothing to do with not knowing anything. It has everything to do with Windows being easier and having more programs and more choice and more sophisticated programs. My opinion of course.

IMHO it is running on more machines because it is better. Is it cheaper? Maybe in the long run it is. There is more to the cost of ownership than the initial price.

A cheap car that always needs repairs can cost more than a better built car that just runs. For repairs read support and training costs with Linux.

I still use the command prompt every day. Why speed and some things are easier.

A business that makes no profit isn't a business for long.

[jman98]

Let me put this another way. Imagine that you are a big fan of NBC's show "The Office". I happen to be and if you are too, that's great for my example. Let's say that you HAVE to pay NBC, not your cable company, but NBC a fee EVERY YEAR to watch ANY show on NBC. Legally, the only way you can not pay the fee is to not have a TV. Yes, that's not how the USA works, but bare with me. Given that you HAVE to pay the fee, now suppose that NBC says to you "You can download and watch The Office for free if you wish, but it only works on Apple." Do you still feel the same way? By the way, you don't own anything by Apple. Still think it's OK?

From a certain standpoint, I suppose what TBoneit thinks (and me too for that matter) is irrelevent because we aren't allowed to watch this content anyway. I'm a lot more interested in how Brits view this than reading the arguments of 2 guys who can't watch this stuff anyway. ZERO of the people responding to this thread live in the UK, so I suppose it's pointless for us to debate this further. It's like Frenchmen complaining about some law that the US Congress passes.

[EddyH]

this isn't really new news, it's more a disappointment in that BBC are perpetuating the same refusal to offer additional video formats - all their existing online materials and any live streams they've offered have been the same

pity, i was otherwise pleased to see that their digital delivery plans were coming to fruition after how much coolness was promised over the past 3 or 4 years since they started the digitisation and web archiving project

as for the license fee issues, i'm not so bothered; it's a small amount to pay per household compared to what e.g. Sky, Cable companies also charge, and it funds some pretty awesome stuff. The majority of the awesomeness is easily accessible by most people - appearing on digital and analogue terrestrial TV and radio stations. That a for-now small watch-again project is only available as WMV thru a windows-specific player (and their audio ones through either Realplayer or iTunes, i think?) doesn't really bother me much, and is a dodgy argument against the whole licensing idea. A lot of people still don't have broadband connections, or even PCs (or digital TVs / DAB radios... hell, i don't have DAB even), and so can't access that or certain other materials at all.
On the other hand, you can get rid of the TV, not pay the fee, and still legally have a radio and get a fair whack of their best material absolutely for free
(Stephen Fry was correct - Radio 4 possibly represents the current height of human cultural achievement, and certainly if you combine it with the other analogue bbc radio stations)

Also, Pete Doherty on Jonathan Ross right now. Surprised. Only seen him in the tabloids so far. He's actually not a complete pot of toss and a decent musician. Hmm. So that's a readjustment in the mental status quo.

[RabidDog]

I dislike that these progs are drmed, (but I use windows), the point being that the BBC is paid for by all of us (most UK=ers) and they are punting out these downloads in msoft only. They say they will be producing a system for apple and linux, but really these two markets are so tiny as to be almost worthless. :P I want a full download service that I can call up the weeks programs, get them all downloaded overnite, and watch whenever I want, in whatever order I like.

[TBoneit]

RabidDog. What you want would be great for those of us in other countries. The BBC content would be all over the internet. We could watch it and build libraries. Which is why they are DRMing it.

Think of it this way. Does the BBC license all the content in their shows, music, script, etc. for worldwide distribution?

They may be paying license fees for the UK and USA (BBC America broadcasts) And not paying extra for worldwide rights for things incorporated into their videos.

I'm sure that is the reason why for example you can not just go to Canada or Mexico, just over the border, and sign up for USA Satellite reception legally. They only pay the content providers for USA distrobution rights.

[RabidDog]

I dont care! I want it ALL,, Yesterday! at no cost to myself! posted to me ! on hi-def disks, with a tax free 62" LCD that dispenses Beer and lager!
Note to self : Buy a stronger harder ! key.. present one not forceful enough!

Just joshing you geeks and fruit munchers