It was on, or about, Fri, 29 Jun 2007 11:52:54 +0100, that as I was
halfway through a large jam doughnut, Mark Kent wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ Mark Kent on Friday 29 June 2007 08:51 : \____
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Wednesday 27 June 2007 12:01 : \____
>>>>
>>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>>> ____/ spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Wednesday 27 June 2007 00:16 : \____
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> did eloquently scribble:
>>>>>>>> http://www.pact.co.uk/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Seems to be the UK TV equivalent of the MPAA, especially the
>>>>>>>> branch known as the Producers' Rights Agency (PRA).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A "PACT" indeed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seems appropriate... Pact with the devil an' all that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> RAKT would have suited better... you defend media with DRM, we
>>>>>> defend Windows. It's quite the racket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Ahh, starts to make sense.
>>>>
>>>> New article (glorifying the BBC of course):
>>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/technology/6245062.stm
>>>>
>>>> See what Mr Highfield, a Hollywood martionette, has to say.
>>>>
>>>> "I am fundamentally committed to universality, to getting the BBC
>>>> iPlayer to everyone in the UK who pays their licence fee," said Mr
>>>> Highfield.
>>>>
>>>> Errr.... so how come you chose the Microsoft monopoly route?
>>>>
>>>> It's outrageous. I hope that Iain and Mark will get their complaint
>>>> in the EU warmly accepted. It's the type of nepotism and favouritism
>>>> nonesense that get people deeper and deeper in monoculture. The BBC
>>>> covers up for Mr Highfield. The good ol' boyz club.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It is indeed. The proper solution is to ask for licence details and
>>> verify people that way, then stream using standard players, not
>>> promote a Microsoft-only solution.
>>
>> Is Mr Highfield and the BBC part of the Conspiracy or just a helpless
>> victim.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tqwz59YF03c
>>
>> As radical as he may seem (not a great speaker either), he does make a
>> valid point. All these relationships are connected through
>> partnerships, lobbying arms, and proxies that are very much visible.
>> Nobody intervenes because it's the money that reigns, not the benefit
>> of the ordinary citizen. Makes me think of another Russian Mafia in the
>> making...
>>
>>
> Of course these things are connected - this does not, in any way, excuse
> the limiting of access to material paid for by licensees to those who
> happen to use a particular type of proprietary software.
I quite agree. In my view this is like all vehicle owners paying the Road
Tax Licence, then being told that only drivers of a certain make of
vehicle are allowed to drive on the highway.
--
Using X-No-Archive suggests the post is of little value &
not worth archiving. Anyone marking *all* their posts
XNA is a sure sign of low self-esteem. In short, they
are NOT worth reading to begin with.
|
|
