-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
____/ Mark Kent on Thursday 28 Jan 2010 12:01 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ Homer on Tuesday 26 Jan 2010 21:11 : \____
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Mark Kent spake thusly:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> BBC given go-ahead for Freeview HD copy-protection
>>>> One suspects that some aspects of the BBC's charter are being broken
>>> They've circumvented the charter's requirement for unencumbered
>>> transmissions, by only encrypting the program information stream (a.k.a.
>>> service information data), rather than the content. However, the effect
>>> will be the same for the majority of people who want to view BBC HD
>>> transmissions using e.g. homebrew equipment, since they'll be unable to
>>> access the HD channels without (presumably unpublished) foreknowledge of
>>> the technical details, and AFAIK they'll be locked out of the
>>> corresponding EPG data completely, making things like scheduled
>>> recordings rather difficult.
>>> Technically, this is not "copy protection" or even DRM at all, but it's
>>> the nearest the BBC can get to it without violating the charter.
>>> Ultimately it /will/ actually be possible for homebrew (read: Linux)
>>> users to watch BBC HD content without submitting to the "content
>>> providers'" demands that they only use "sanctioned" (i.e. restrictive)
>>> equipment, but they'll need to use "hacks" that will inevitably become
>>> available, much like they did when the MSBBC DRM'ed their iPlayer
>>> content (a "hack" that still works, BTW).
>>> This anti-"piracy" measure is a poor joke, that ultimately won't even
>>> achieve its dubious objective, but will simply make life temporarily and
>>> unnecessarily difficult for certain people ... people who are legally
>>> entitled (i.e. /licensed/) to view this content. It's a waste of /our/
>>> money, and a waste of /everybody's/ time, like every other misguided
>>> "DRM" endeavour undertaken at the unreasonable demand of greedy,
>>> paranoid, ignorant, naive, hysterically belligerent Intellectual
>>> In short: I am legally entitled to view BBC's HD content, and I *will*
>>> view it using any equipment I damned-well want, whether the BBC and
>>> their demented "content providers" want me to or not.
>> IIRC (I wish I knew where I read it), the "Linux" thing is still work in
>> progress/ negotiation. But anyway, shouldn't the BBC /encourage/ sharing or
>> the content among taxpayers so as to reduce bandwidth costs to the BBC? The
>> EU Commission actually /embraced/ torrent and invested 20ml Euros in it for
>> this reason.
>> You don't spread programmes by limiting their distribution (which is
>> inevitable anyway because ripping is always simple, even with a microphone
>> and/or tripod).
> I'm 99.9% certain that there was a court case here a few years ago in
> which it was established that the decryption of signals broadcast to
> your house was within the householder's rights.
> I think the channel in question might have been "Red Hot Dutch" (yeah,
> work it out!), but I'm struggling to find anything about it online.
> The wireless telegraphy act 1948 in general permits listening to anything,
> but says that the listener is not allowed to pass on any information
> they learn which wasn't intended for the listener.
> We've since had some trendy laws pushed through with the intention of
> addressing "cybercrime", however, I doubt that they will really help in
> that goal, as they're usually drafted by certain industry figures, and
> generally have not been reviewed by any technical expertise outside of
> that space.
> There was a chap recently fined Â500 or thereabouts for using an open
> wifi signal... under "fraud" laws. Wierd.
The BBC has hardly any say in this. It's the copyright lobby that they constantly
blame and I believe them. But why be so supine?
~~ Best of wishes
#define sizeof(x) rand() -- Dark_Brood
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/0 :0 Sat Jan 16 04:09 still logged in
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----