Following out first podcast, there has been quite a lot of views expressed. Some very heated, some just saying thanks, here's some of the best.
The podcast is both heartening and frustrating. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú had so much promise a few years ago, back when it was talking about delivering real, world-class public value to license payers by doing the hard work of clearing the footage in the archive and letting the public remix it. Now that vision has been reduced to a sham -- the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iPlayer, a steaming pile of DRM that restricts you to being a mere consumer of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú programming, downloading it to your PC for a mere seven days.
For a minute there, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú seemed like it would enable a creative nation. Now it's joining the jerks in Hollywood who think that media exists to be passively swallowed by a legion of glassy eyed zombie audience members.
You can hear the disappointment in the visionaries at the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, the betrayal at being sold out by management. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is forcing Britons to buy an American operating system -- Windows -- in order to watch British programming, made in Britain. The free and open GNU/Linux -- whose kernel is maintained in Britain -- can't be used for British TV, because of DRM.
I think it’s great that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú was able to bring this debate into the public, and in fine Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú balanced round-table tradition it offers representatives from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, the commercial broadcast sector and proponents of free distribution.
I hope there will be more of these, opening up what’s going on inside the organization’s future media dept. Not only does it begin to allow cluetrainy conversation to occur across the decision making process, but it seems like the appropriate thing for a license fee funded organization to be doing.
The group make some VERY interesting points, including a more detailed discussion (with real world examples) of how the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú doesn’t actually own all the rights to ANYTHING and the nightmare involved in finding out who does - this gives an interesting explanation of why iPlayer content can’t be DRM free.
The other problem is that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú wouldn't be allowed to stick its content out un-DRMd even if it wanted to. That's what this whole Trust thing has been about. As Ofcom's Market Impact Assessment highlighted, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú entering this market affects other TV channels' business models regarding selling downloads, as well as third party companies such as iTunes.
This is a fine example of how complicated rights matters are in the new media world. It will be some time before put to bed the old notions of rights and true consumption habits of users and embrace what is ahead.
If you pay for Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú programming, they’ll probably listen to you. You can help make the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú the beacon of DRM-free, platform-agnostic programming it can be.
This has been the cause of vigorous debate in the UK, but the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú sees it as an choice between doing nothing or doing something—and they have decided to do something. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Trust, the group set up at the beginning of this year under the Corporation's new charter, is responsible for signing off on the plans. Although it generally approves of the direction that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is headed, it did raise a question about DRM.
. Ars Technica also has a with lots of comments and debate.
Read the rest of this entry
