BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#1

Post by afoketunji » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 12:51 PM UTC

BBC demands DRM for HTML5
boingboing.net

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#2

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:00 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#3

Post by samarudge » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:07 PM UTC

First you have to understand that not all of the content broadcast on the BBC is created by the BBC. They carry programs made by independent, limited, for-profit studios. They also regularly carry movies. All of which they put up on their iPlayer service.

As an example, you can currently watch Madagascar, in full, for free on BBC iPlayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00gd77z/Madagascar/).

While there is an argument that programs produced by the BBC should be DRM free, there is no way larger, and independent studios would allow their content uploaded DRM free.

Personally, I want the BBC (and other sites) to be able to use technology like HTML5 video, because I don't like flash, and it's unlikely the studios are going to suddenly decide their OK with DRM free video, I'm not necessarily /for/ DRM in HTML5, but I don't see any other way around it for now.

While you can argue all you want about how DRM is useless and easily broken, as yet no-one has managed to convince big TV and movie (and even game) studios of that. The BBC is just doing what it feels it needs to in order to be able to deliver video using the latest technology, while keeping it's partners happy.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#4

Post by samworm » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:17 PM UTC

samarudge wrote: post #3

First you have to understand that not all of the content broadcast on the BBC is created by the BBC. They carry programs made by independent, limited, for-profit studios. They also regularly carry movies. All of which they put up on their iPlayer service. As an example, you can currently watch Madagascar, in full, for free on BBC iPlayer ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00gd77z/Madagascar/ ). While there is an…

My argument, and I sent this too them when they were doing a consultation a while ago, is that they shouldn't be buying content that they can't use for public service purposes. We have many good sources of movies in the UK, and many of them are "free" at the point of use (ie advert funded). Let them show Madagascar, and while they do that the BBC can run some other program. They should remove themselves from the content purchasing market if the terms are too restrictive to allow them to meet their public remit. We don't /need/ these films on the BBC. They could run some of the content they're currently relegating the digital ghettos of BBC3 and BBC4 instead.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#5

Post by lukifer » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:20 PM UTC

I hate DRM too, and yet I love watching Netflix streaming. The fact is, if it's trivial to clone data to the point that regular users can do it (Napster, etc), the business model for online rental vanishes. The fact that DRM is always defeatable through hacks and analog loopholes doesn't matter: it just has to be good enough to deter the vast majority of users.

I believe we need comprehensive IP reform across the board, including strong consumer protections and freedoms for "owned" content. But if the vendors are using DRM anyway (and they are), I'd rather they do so in a standards-based, interoperable way.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#6

Post by Drakim » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:31 PM UTC

How exactly would DRM for HTML5 work? Couldn't I just fork Chronimum or Firefox and make the browser save the video content in a file rather than showing it?

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#7

Post by simonh » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:32 PM UTC

IMHO the problem is that the technology DRM is being conflated withe the politics and legalities of DRM circumvention.

I have no problem with companies selling DRM protected content. They can sell their property on whatever terms they like. It's theirs to sell, after all, and my right and responsibility to choose whether to buy it or not.

I do have a problem with the criminalisation of DRM circumvention, which reaches perhaps it's ultimate banality in the criminalisation of unlocking your own phone (which requires the cracking of DRM protected firmware). That's ridiculous and wrong.

So I understand the BBC needs DRM to meet it's contractual and legal obligations, while being against the DRM lobby that is behind the most egregious DRM maximalist policies. some might call it a fine line, but I think it's there.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#8

Post by cleverjake » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:37 PM UTC

Drakim wrote: post #6

How exactly would DRM for HTML5 work? Couldn't I just fork Chronimum or Firefox and make the browser save the video content in a file rather than showing it?

It doesn't exist yet, so no. But the crux of the issue is making that not possible...somehow.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#9

Post by venomsnake » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:40 PM UTC

lukifer wrote: post #5

I hate DRM too, and yet I love watching Netflix streaming. The fact is, if it's trivial to clone data to the point that regular users can do it (Napster, etc), the business model for online rental vanishes. The fact that DRM is always defeatable through hacks and analog loopholes doesn't matter: it just has to be good enough to deter the vast majority of users. I believe we need comprehensive IP reform across the boa…

Or we can outlaw DRM and put evolutionary pressure on the content providers and emasculate the gatekeepers.

Re: BBC demands DRM for HTML5

#10

Post by Udo » Sat, Feb 16, 2013, 1:41 PM UTC

samarudge wrote: post #3

First you have to understand that not all of the content broadcast on the BBC is created by the BBC. They carry programs made by independent, limited, for-profit studios. They also regularly carry movies. All of which they put up on their iPlayer service. As an example, you can currently watch Madagascar, in full, for free on BBC iPlayer ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00gd77z/Madagascar/ ). While there is an…

I think everyone understands why these companies (including BBC) are pushing for DRM. That doesn't mean it's not evil.

The larger issue here, expressed quite well by Doctorow, is that this push requires converting the web into a closed platform. It's clear why entertainment companies want to turn the internet into something that can only be consumed by, say, the Apple app store.

That's also the reason why this will never fly. Even if/when the W3C gave in to these demands, browser makers other than Apple and Microsoft would never stand for it. And even if they did somehow, it would be trivial for the open source community to release one without those features.

I'm not saying the outrage is entirely misplaced, because it's important to keep an eye out for what those companies have planned for our future. But as far as the fear of actual threat is concerned this should not alarm anybody.