On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 21:31, Kieran Kunhya <kie...@kunhya.com> wrote: > What is so important about the content/metadata ingest and delivery system > that is the iPlayer that it needs to be licenced as opposed to being > developed in-house at a broadcaster?
Possibly the fact that no other bugger is doing it in anything but a cack-handed way. That said, it’s never entirely clear when people talk about “licensing iPlayer” whether they mean the front-end, with its myriad per-platform tweaks, clever Flash applet and AIR downloader, the back-end which ingests content, hooks it up appropriately, and transcodes it into a bunch of different formats, or both. All credit to the front-end developers, who have done a bloody good job considering what they have to work with (I mean, seriously, Flash for HD video?), but the *really* clever and heavyweight stuff is behind the scenes, and—to the best of my knowledge—pretty much distinct from “iPlayer”. Would a broadcaster want to license the one without the other? (possibly) Would the BBC be licensing both out together, or as separate units? Am I wrong about all of this? ;) M. - 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/
