Re: New Website

But with respect, GIP is not for the purposes of circumventing international copyright law, however dismal your country's television. I have the same complaints about a lot of UK telly! If we explicitly or implicitly encourage the use of GIP to operate outside of copyright law, the whole thing

Re: New Website

that's all. Oldtimer43 -Original Message- From: Square Penguin Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:20 PM To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Re: New Website To address a few points: iplayer in URL: There is nothing wrong with having 'iplayer' in the URL a

Re: New Website

Shouldn't the 'as far as I'm aware' side of things be looked into? It'd be a shame for the new forums and any associated sites to be shut down for using a logo To put my concerns into context; I help admin a site for vintage radio control cars and they were recently threatened with legal action

Re: New Website

I would suggest a total re-design of the logo with its own identity. Or no logo at all ! On 17/07/13 09:04, Jonathan H wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Square Penguin > wrote: > >> Use of Logo: That is get_iplayer's logo and always has been as far as I am >> aware. It is on the front pag

Re: New Website

Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:56 PM To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Re: New Website The BBC can request the take down of the site and I'd make necessary adjustments to address the concerns and put it back up. I'm happy to address them before it gets to that stage. However, t

Re: New Website

On 17/07/13 09:22, Square Penguin wrote: I appreciate that you are able to recognise the emotional nature of your reaction. Logo: I may need to make this point again - I didn't make the logo. It's from Phil Lewis' original site. It's still there now if you want to take a look. As I said, if s

Re: New Website

I'd agree with the point about the logo, even though it's been around a long time, it feels like the kind of thing that the BBC could get shirty about - especially on a web page that looks professional ( In the sense of looking good, rather than looking like it's asking for money!) Unfortunatel

Re: New Website

> On 17 July 2013 at 09:49 michael norman > wrote: > In terms of what is not acceptable I DO NOT ACCEPT your right to put a > project at risk because or your perception of the needs of existing > and > new users. Well said, that man. -- TQ via webmail

Re: New Website

On 17/07/13 10:01, Square Penguin wrote: I discussed the matter directly with get_iplayer's maintainer, who is fully on board. It has struck me throughout this discussion that he has not said so, unless I have missed something. I have already said I am prepared to use another logo and use anot

Re: New Website

>> I have already said I am prepared to use another logo and use another >> URL if the community truly believes that will make a difference. > I repeat what I said before, that the community should have been asked > before the event, and I have no evidence that you did so. The logo is, as the Yank

Re: New Website

On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I hear the concerns raised here. And your reservations were shared where exactly. As a result, I have replaced it with the worlds worst logo ever. But it'll do for now and it site spec

Re: New Website

When Sky or Virgin et al create a Set Top Box, they negotiate licensing fees with the content providers. Their subscription numbers are clearly known, and thus the 'reach' of the media is clearly known, and for what duration. All of this is built into the negotiated price for the content, and ever

Re: New Website

michael norman wrote: >On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: >> TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I >> hear the concerns raised here. >And your reservations were shared where exactly. There's no reason why SP's reservations should have been shared anywhere.

Re: New Website

re Mr Normans comments. If it looks like a Troll and smells like a Troll .. On 17. juli 2013, at 12:43, Jeremy Nicoll - ml get_iplayer wrote: michael norman wrote: > On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: >> TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I >> hear

Re: New Website

On 17/07/13 11:43, Jeremy Nicoll - ml get_iplayer wrote: michael norman wrote: On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I hear the concerns raised here. And your reservations were shared where exactly. There's no reason why

Re: New Website

If the licence terms permit it, yes. On 17 July 2013 11:58:58 michael norman wrote: On 17/07/13 11:43, Jeremy Nicoll - ml get_iplayer wrote: > michael norman wrote: > >> On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: >>> TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I >>> hea

Re: New Website

On 17 July 2013 11:58, michael norman wrote: > On 17/07/13 11:43, Jeremy Nicoll - ml get_iplayer wrote: >> >> michael norman wrote: >> >>> On 17/07/13 11:06, Square Penguin wrote: TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I hear the concerns raised here. >

Re: New Website

I think the question is this: 1) How can make iplayer easier to discuss? Do you mean get_player and BBC iplayer both or just get_iplayer ? 2) How can we make it easier to download / find? Assuming you mean get_player my latest google search gives me the old Linuxcentre link and SQ's guide.

Re: New Website

David wrote: > >Some points: > >1) Open Source does not mean free. >The two are often confused. Absolutely, but the home page at http://getiplayer.co.uk/ explicitly says that get_iplayer is both 'free' and 'open-source', so the distinction doesn't matter here. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions a

Re: Re: New Website

To address a few points: iplayer in URL: There is nothing wrong with having 'iplayer' in the URL as far as I am aware. The site does not generate revenue (which is key) or seek to dilute the trademark. Legal precedent for this is well established. Check out 'ryan air sucks' for just one notabl

RE: Re: New Website

: 17 July 2013 01:20 To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Re: New Website To address a few points: iplayer in URL: There is nothing wrong with having 'iplayer' in the URL as far as I am aware. The site does not generate revenue (which is key) or seek to dilute the tradem

Re: Re: New Website

It's possible you misunderstood my point. There will be no arguing or defence. I am simply stating it is illogical to believe there is any form of 'defence' when another programme has received a cease and desist whilst already fulfilling the criteria of obscurity, non use of iPlayer and not be

Re: Re: New Website

The BBC can request the take down of the site and I'd make necessary adjustments to address the concerns and put it back up. I'm happy to address them before it gets to that stage. However, that is going to have no effect of get_iplayer, the programme, itself. I have simply created a site that

Re: Re: New Website

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Square Penguin wrote: > Use of Logo: That is get_iplayer's logo and always has been as far as I am > aware. It is on the front page of this mailing list. If someone would like > to do another one I'd be more than happy to use it, but if the BBC decides > to go aft

Re: Re: New Website

I appreciate that you are able to recognise the emotional nature of your reaction. Logo: I may need to make this point again - I didn't make the logo. It's from Phil Lewis' original site. It's still there now if you want to take a look. As I said, if someone provides a new one I'd be willing t

Re: Re: New Website

One hundred mil is only a billion in the States ;) in civilised society, it's one thousand million. Apologies for earlier confusion on my part re Radio Downloader allowing people to circumvent geo restrictions, I was thinking of Beebify... Amusing when you consider what likely popped into your

Re: Re: New Website

Perhaps it is. Would you submit one? Or another talented soul here maybe? ___ get_iplayer mailing list get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Re: New Website

I discussed the matter directly with get_iplayer's maintainer, who is fully on board. I have already said I am prepared to use another logo and use another URL if the community truly believes that will make a difference. But I will be providing the guides for people. That won't change. The p

Re: Re: New Website

TBH I had reservations about the logo before launching the site and I hear the concerns raised here. As a result, I have replaced it with the worlds worst logo ever. But it'll do for now and it site specific, signifying that the site is the get_iplayer forum site and not get_iplayer itself.

Re: Re: New Website

On 17 July 2013 09:22, Square Penguin > wrote: The implied sentiment (one you are not necessarily making but others are) that new users should be discouraged so that the old timers can continue to enjoy the spoils is, frankly, repellent. get_iplayer is a