Mixed Signals
Any sufficiently advanced information is indistinguishable from noise
Wednesday 16 September 2009, 6:04 PM
BBC HD Freeview encryption confusion
The compromise, which Ofcom believes is legal and has put out for consultation, would not prevent reception of HD content but would only allow scheduling information to be used by set-top boxes which implemented the copy restrictions that the HD content providers wanted.
The proposal is very unlikely to affect technically savvy users who will be able to acquire scheduling information from other sources, such as Internet listings, or who can unscramble the broadcast information by other means. It's also unlikely to deter people able to make alterations to set-top box firmware, much of which is based on open source or has been reverse-engineered by determined enthusiasts.
The BBC has examined other possible ways of placating the rights holders, but has concluded that these would be expensive, delay the introduction of the service, be against its terrestrial broadcasting licence and require the development of large amounts of broadcast and reception equipment with an uncertain market and lifetime.
There has been some confusion over the proposals, with many commentators considering the BBC proposal as affecting the transmissions of the programming itself.
PreviousComments on this post
Quite honestly I wish the BBC would just crawl under a rock and die, bunch of over payed pompous self indulged biased unethical lob sided greedy bureaucratic lazy overpriced glutinousness pigs.
That should be broke up and sold off to the private sectors.
Gosh....I think it's great to have the only media outlet in the world (as far as I know) that has no brain dead intelligence insulting adverts.
Sure the output has a long way to go. I do hope for better times when it comes to the the BBC.
They could burden the viewer with the responsibility for encryption, punishable by fines, imprisonment, and for repeat offenders death.
OK CA, I think I get where you're coming from. Not sure I agree with every word of your first sentence. With reference to your second sentence, I think you will find that's been happening for a number of years now.
Well CA I think the BBC does excellent work. For your licence fee you get many TV channels, 7 national radio channels, many local radio channels, the BBC World Service, one of the best websites on the planet and many, many quality programs. And it annoys the government so it must be doing something right. You sound very bitter, did they turn down your application to be a kids TV presenter?
So is the BBC just proposing encrypting the EPG data, then? And nothing else? That can't possibly be right, can it?
I don't have a either a set-top box or an HDTV, but do have a USB DVB-T adapter and an HD-capable monitor, and tend to watch Freeview on that occasionally. When I already know that something I want to watch is on. Nuts to the EPG data.
Anyway, I can't see myself recording shed-loads of HD Freeview content simply because I don't have anywhere to put it all. And a file-system check over my existing 200 GB partition takes more than long enough as it is already.
Seems bizarre that they would want to add DRM to listings.
Is there much of a download market for illegal schedules? Is there a Pirate Listings Bay site? Do teenagers spend all night and bandwidth secretly adding GBs to their illicit collections of listings schedules? Are Apple about to release their iTimes device? What makes HD listings different to those for BBC3 or Dave or QVC? Are the EPG police going to raid me if I press the "What's on next" button again?
Sorry, this is just a ridiculous situation and a waste of time and effort and yet more irritation to the consumer!
..Oh and CA. Ever been to the US? I'd rather eat my own leg than watch the 90% drivel you get there. We only get the good stuff here and most of that is unwatchable.
The fact remains everyone in the UK do not get a choice of weather or not they want it or not, you don't even haft to have a TV in the house and still you haft to pay it, I mean Christ it wasn't until a few years ago they where still charging the blind full license fee's and no they was not any description services during that time either.
There local regional broadcasts lack substantially when it comes to local community interactions, the news reporting is biased, channels 3 & 4 don't start for the free view until the evening but are broadcast 24/7 on sat or cable, the number of programs being repeated has gone up yet the listings don't reflect this.
In recent years the screening of programs has dissipated to the point where presenters can fire of as many insults to whomever they choose, and yet another member of production staff takes the fall for it.
The BBC continues to make private profits on the side by means of selling various programs as well as other goods and yet the license fee continues to grow year upon year, to an extent the BBC have become nothing more than a finger puppet for the government.
Overall the list just goes on and on and on, the other independent channels have all shown that they can do just as well without mass taxation being applied to the country, along with not having to insult anybody along the way.
Some speak of how bad US TV is well ok that may be so, but our other independent channels certainly don't fit that category, oh and one more thing if you live within the five zones of the borough's of London don't even start because the London weighting allowance pays your fee 8 times over every year.
"channels 3 & 4 don't start for the free view until the evening but are broadcast 24/7 on sat or cable"
This statement is trivially and demonstrably false: I have both Freeview and satellite TV, and both BBCs 3 and 4 are not broadcast until 7pm, PERIOD. They are most definitely NOT broadcast 24/7 on satellite!
Assuming that the rest of your rant is of similar quality, then I have no qualms ignoring it too.
This comment has been deleted at the users request
@CA: Point of fact: if you don't have a device to receive broadcast signals, you don't need a licence. This is from the official website:
------------------------------
You must be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV. It makes no difference what equipment you use - whether it’s a laptop, PC, mobile phone, digital box, DVD recorder or a TV set - you still need a licence.
You do not need a TV Licence to view video clips on the internet, as long as what you are viewing is not being shown on TV at the same time as you are viewing it.
If you use a digital box with a hi-fi system, or another device that can only be used to produce sounds and can't display TV programmes, and you don't install or use any other TV receiving equipment, you don't need a TV Licence.
------------------------------
"You must be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV.
"It makes no difference what equipment you use - whether it’s a laptop, PC, mobile phone, digital box, DVD recorder or a TV set - you still need a licence."
This use to state only for the BBC channels until they lost a court case hence the change in the policy. (A chap detuned the BBC channels from he's equipment.)
"You do not need a TV Licence to view video clips on the internet, as long as what you are viewing is not being shown on TV at the same time as you are viewing it."
Not very specific is it, so this apply's even if you are watching something other than BBC channels.
Current fees.
A colour TV Licence costs £142.50. A black and white Licence costs £48.00.
One big BLOODY RIP OFF!!! the whole thing stinks, it needs scrapping time for them to stand on there own two feet.
