5 ms·

Shame on you BBC. Technology cannot prevent IP theft. You can outlaw it and hope fear will stop people from sharing. Or else you can find better ways to monetiz

by anoncow 14y ago

Shame on you BBC. Technology cannot prevent IP theft. You can outlaw it and hope fear will stop people from sharing. Or else you can find better ways to monetize your IP. BBC should be working on putting that license money to better use. Our greed knows no bounds. People with money and power have the means to act on their greed. Left in their hands, the internet will become as useful as the tv is today. Anything that is not certified by the moneybags will become illegal. Shame on you bbc for taking money from the same people whom you intend to screw.

timc3 14y ago
Why? They have a right to do whatever they like with their content In accordance with the rules laid down to them. If it means that I in Sweden can pay and watch BBC content then where is the shame in that.
- anoncow 14y ago
  as a corporation running on public money, i expect the bbc to keep public interest in mind. Drm only hinders the paying public. I will have to pay for a windows license if i intend to view content i have already paid for, so that bbc can keep their illegitimate masters happy. As for others, they are free to use proprietary software to deliver their content. I just want them to stay away from buying out the somewhat open internet that we have today. for people who believe that if only open source could reliably protect IP - almost nothing can protect content which is meant to be consumed. Only law can and that is where we are headed.
FuzzyDunlop 14y ago
This isn't the BBC screwing people over. This is likely a constraint introduced by licensing American (or foreign) exports for broadcast over here. If the licensors want DRM as part of the agreement, then there's not much choice left for the BBC unless they want to reduce the diversity of their content.
- drucken 14y ago
  That is not true, since there is a significant commercial part of the BBC and since the parts of the DRM submissions quoted referenced reasons of control over BBC identity (mixing streams etc.). But lets say for the sake of argument it is true, then there would be no need for the BBC to actively campaign on a part of a standard that they themselves would not/could not have elected to use and would only be imposed on them by others.

by anoncow 14y ago

timc3 14y ago

Why? They have a right to do whatever they like with their content In accordance with the rules laid down to them. If it means that I in Sweden can pay and watch BBC content then where is the shame in that.

anoncow 14y ago
as a corporation running on public money, i expect the bbc to keep public interest in mind. Drm only hinders the paying public. I will have to pay for a windows license if i intend to view content i have already paid for, so that bbc can keep their illegitimate masters happy. As for others, they are free to use proprietary software to deliver their content. I just want them to stay away from buying out the somewhat open internet that we have today. for people who believe that if only open source could reliably protect IP - almost nothing can protect content which is meant to be consumed. Only law can and that is where we are headed.

FuzzyDunlop 14y ago

This isn't the BBC screwing people over. This is likely a constraint introduced by licensing American (or foreign) exports for broadcast over here. If the licensors want DRM as part of the agreement, then there's not much choice left for the BBC unless they want to reduce the diversity of their content.

drucken 14y ago
That is not true, since there is a significant commercial part of the BBC and since the parts of the DRM submissions quoted referenced reasons of control over BBC identity (mixing streams etc.). But lets say for the sake of argument it is true, then there would be no need for the BBC to actively campaign on a part of a standard that they themselves would not/could not have elected to use and would only be imposed on them by others.