Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] BBC Still Snubs Linux, Limits/Fully Restricts Access (Offers DRM Route for Macs)

Verily I say unto thee, that Mark Kent spake thusly:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:

>> BBC does the right thing: will support Macs with iPlayer
>> 
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Of course they couldn't do this without a little bit of snarkiness,
>> | with BBC New Media boss Ashley Highfield saying that Apple's
>> | "proprietary and closed framework for digital rights management
>> | gives us headaches [but] it is one of our top priorities to
>> | re-engineer our proposed BBC iPlayer service to work on Macs."
>> `----
>> 
>> http://www.tuaw.com/2007/04/18/bbc-does-the-right-thing-will-support-macs-with-iplayer/
>>  http://tinyurl.com/2xhd48
>> 
>> The Microsoft DRM brainwash all over again. The BBC does _NOT_ need
>> DRM. DRM is a dying technology that Microsoft is still betting on.
>> It's means for controlling the users and abusing their rights.

> These people are completely insane - this is /not/ the right thing,
> DRM is not the right thing at all.

Correct. If the original broadcast is not DRM encrypted, then why the
hell should it be so important to encrypt the "Web" version? This is
ridiculous, especially since the digital version will likely be a highly
compressed, low quality version of the original. Yes, I'm sure some
Korean pirate is going to duplicate *that* and sell it on DVD on eBay
... not! The BBC are idiots.

As for principle, well IMHO nobody should be using DRM for anything,
ever. This is AFAICT your main beef, and I'm right behind you. Use
copyright *law*, and subsequently those charged with *upholding* those
laws, to protect content. *Don't* be vigilantes and force *all*
consumers to live in a DRM prison, punished for crimes they *might* commit.

> So come on, Ashley Highfield - what's your technical background?  Why
> is one proprietary and closed system (Microsoft) any better than
> another (Apple)?

Because his new business partner, Microsoft, says so.

It's odd that in all this, the BBC never once considered RealNetworks
Helix DNA framework as a solution. If they had, then at least they would
have had a fully interoperable DRM system that worked with *all*
platforms. But then I guess that would not have been in the best
interest of their new "technology provider" pals, Microsoft.

> What's really bl**dy irritating is that my licence fees are being
> wasted on paying people like this guy.

It galls me to think that *my* BBC license fee contributes towards
furthering Microsoft's goals. Did the BBC ever stop to consider whether
these decisions were in the best interest of their *subscribers*, you
know, like they are mandated to do by their charter?

-- 
K.
http://slated.org

.----
| I found [Vista] to be a dangerously unstable operating system,
| which has caused me to lose data ... unfortunately this product
| is unfit for any user. - [H]ardOCP, <http://tinyurl.com/3bpfs2>
`----

Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.20-1.2312.fc5
 14:46:34 up 2 days, 12:18,  2 users,  load average: 0.18, 0.32, 0.27

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index