I think it is pretty laughable :-)
I am very happy to pay for quality and expensive programming, but
being censored from the same, just because of a legal precedent, is
almost the ultimate insult, especially if one does have a UK TV license.
In my hallucination, it should take one person within Auntie's legal
department about a month to change the contracts for content
production, add some budget for servers and bandwidth, to make the
biggest change to how the BBC works since radio gave way to black and
white TV.
I can hear the voices of resistance still.
There is absolutely no reason not to, and if the BBC doesn't, it will
probably find all of its best content hosted all over the world for
anyone to see anyway..... just as CBS have found out.
So where exactly did all this "locking out" and streaming certain
content to certain places come from? Big brother? :-)
How about leading the way with both feet in to a new world of a
really universal BBC on the net, with none of the boundaries? The
opposite to the TV world.
I'm sure that a way could be programmed to reverse Psiphon or the
like, with something like realtime P2P to distribute the feeds via a
massive server of "trusted" associates, now that would be exciting.
I'll pay and deliver, how's that? I hope that the future is MAC
addresses, not IP's.
Richard
On 27 Nov 2006, at 18:23, Ian Forrester wrote:
Its certainly interesting.
Something I was reading the other day
http://torrentfreak.com/downloading-tv-shows-leads-to-more-tv-
watching/
"Earlier this month we estimated that almost a million viewers get
their latest Lost episode through BitTorrent. TV broadcasters are
now beginning to realize that making shows available for download
is helping their business, instead of hurting it.
CBS's chief research officer David Poltrack said that online
distribution services like YouTube and BitTorrent are friends, not
foes."
Poltrack is not too keen on the paid distribution model iTunes
offers right now. He thinks that TV shows should be available for
free via ad-supported models. In a panel discussion at the Future
of Television Forum Poltrack said that "if [consumers] are going to
steal it, give it to them anyway. But also make it easier to access
and present it better than YouTube or BitTorrent or anywhere else."
:)
Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || x83965
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard P Edwards
Sent: 27 November 2006 18:07
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Psiphon
I believe that the music market place has already answered your
question Ian.
The only "successful" new model allows the customer to use any
authorised device to play the downloaded music on..... therefore
quelling a few of the customers complaints, but still not going far
enough.
If I can already watch content on my computer, then the BBC has to
acknowledge that the same computer can travel with me, so using Geo
IP becomes a censorship which I will either find a way around, or
go and view someone else's content.
As is mentioned on today's News site, perhaps the real debate
should therefore be the other way around, how does the BBC keep its
viewers.
and why is there so much fear about "losing" content, when as soon
as it appears on TV it is effectively sold anyway?
I agree with Ricky Gervais, I don't think that a program loses its
value just because someone can download it. In fact, if it is good
enough then it finds a larger market place.
I understand the law completely, but as has also been affected
today, perhaps the thinking of the "suits" is slightly out of touch
where copyright is concerned. :-) I would love to see the BBC
reverse its thinking and engage us, as the public, in allowing much
more access, even if they have to pressure government to change the
law.
There is nothing to fear :-)
On 27 Nov 2006, at 16:01, Ian Forrester wrote:
Alright alright, I walked into the last two comments :)
But its certainly an interesting debate, what would (we) the BBC
do if
Geo IP was so easily passed. And what would you do if it was so easy?
I thought this might be amusing for some.
http://blogs.opml.org/tommorris/
2006/11/27#obviousTruthsForIdiotsInSuits
Specially this line - "Television isn't dead yet. But, for me, it's
lying on the ground wounded."
Ian Forrester || backstage.bbc.co.uk || x83965 -----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jakob Fix
Sent: 27 November 2006 14:54
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Psiphon
On 11/27/06, Ian Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What happens when setting up a proxy service is as easy as
running an
application and using one is as easy as typing in a url?
isn't that what Torpark is all about?
http://www.torrify.com/
--
Jakob.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
