I find the Trust's wording careful - and wise.
It establishes a desirable goal - platform agnosticism - without
constraining how that is achieved. It opens up doors to third parties
(e.g. alternatives to Microsoft- or Apple-only DRM) to take
independent initiatives regardless of the BBC (i.e. it reinforces an
interesting market opportunity; hopefully public service
broadcasters, their governing bodies and regulators in other parts of
the world will take notice and add their weight - if they are not
already acting along similar lines); or for the BBC to form
partnerships with third parties that would achieve platform agnostic
coverage; and, possibly, for the BBC (Kingswood?) to come up with
its own fiendish wheeze(s).
To quote Mao Tse Tung: let a thousand flowers bloom.
- Colin
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Colin Moorcraft, onTV Europe Ltd.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://onTV.eu.com
mobile: +44-(0)7766 333067
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 31 Jan 2007, at 16:04, Andrew Bowden wrote:
"The Trust has also asked the executive to adopt a
platform-agnostic approach to the iPlayer. The original
proposal for the service would have meant it was only
available to Microsoft users but the Trust's proposal will
require them to develop an alternative framework which will
allow users of other technology, for example Apple Macs, to
access the service."
Which I mightily suspect is a paragraph a lot easier to write
in a report than to put into action in a way that represents
value-for-money versus reach.....
It's an interesting one - before I looked at the Trust press
release, I
just read that as "persuade Apple to add in extra functionality to
their
DRM policy". However looking at the Trust press release, it says...
"This requires the BBC to develop an alternative DRM framework to
enable
users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to access the
on-demand services."
Which is an even more interesting statement IMHO!
The bizarre bit to me seems to be:
"BBC management's request for the iPlayer to have a feature
enabling users to bookmark a show for download ahead of
transmission was also rejected by the Trust."
Actually, looking at the release again...
"Though advertised in early promotional material, the BBC's
proposition
submitted to the Trust did not seek approval for a 'bookmark' feature,
which would enable users to 'bookmark' a programme in advance of
transmission. The Trust's approval of the proposals would not cover
such
a feature."
I presume that's a "Don't ask, don't get"!
Actually the one I'm interested in is the syndication to third
parties...
"The Trust considers that BBC content should be available to all
significant players on a non-discriminatory basis. It will develop and
publish a syndication policy and consider on each occasion where
syndication is proposed whether a PVT or other action is necessary."
Now I can see that as a cable/IPTV thing - if NTL/Telewest get it, why
not BT Vision etc. Online that could be more interesting. Would
4od be
a significant player for example?
Interesting one...
Are they saying that if I can't book something in advance
from the BBC, I'm more likely to completely forget about it
and rent a DVD at a later date or pay for something from C4
instead......
You mean that's not how you'd behave? :)
-
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/
