Careful about the BBC structure! [LWN.net]

Careful about the BBC structure!

Posted Feb 16, 2007 23:00 UTC (Fri) by csamuel (subscriber, #2624)
Parent article: Save the BBC from Windows DRM! (Linux Journal)

To regurgitate (and edit slightly) my comment from the LJ article..

You need to realise that the consultation exercise is being run by the BBC Trust, who have replaced the Board of Governors as overseers, about a proposal being made by the BBC Executive.

My reading is that the Trust want to do the right thing, but have some misconceptions about the usefulness and palatability of DRM, and need constructive criticism of the BBC Executives proposal. As a friend of mine wrote:

The BBC Trustees are pushing to the Executive to drop the Microsoft requirement and go platform-agnostic. I recommend we all support them in this.

So please keep this in mind if you do comment, the last thing we need are inflammatory rants!

(Log in to post comments)

Careful about the BBC structure!

Posted Feb 19, 2007 13:30 UTC (Mon) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

"" So please keep this in mind if you do comment, the last thing we need are inflammatory rants! ""

No it will fun to watch!... well, maybe not for the victims...

I belive "one" solution is for BBC to ask a "guarantee" from MS for their installed software. The idea is that since MS through DRM is going to superintend those systems, the least they can do is to take full responsability for what that DRM stuff will do!

Ha... i think for a news outlet like BBC, every minute that those systems are going to be offline or uncooperative, dosent amount to a large $$$ amount!... at least for MS, anyway!

The part deserving "inflammatory rants" is the psychologic "mania" that the strategic planners at Redmond have, of beliving that the system/network administrators exist to take the fall for them, and clean the mess afterwards.

Careful about the BBC structure!

Posted Feb 19, 2007 15:53 UTC (Mon) by hawk (subscriber, #3195) [Link]

On the other hand, if Microsoft would agree to do such a guarantee deal, consider how Microsoft would be able to use that as a FUD/marketing thing.
They could say that it clearly shows why their DRM solution is superior to any alternatives, as there is a strong backing of it.

From a technical standpoint it might not make any real difference, and the DRM may be intrusive and generally bad, but I'm sure such a deal would be attractive to a lot of Pointy Haired Bosses...

Careful about the BBC structure!

Posted Feb 19, 2007 23:44 UTC (Mon) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

""...consider how Microsoft would be able to use that as a FUD/marketing thing. They could say that it clearly shows why their DRM solution is superior to any alternatives, as there is a strong backing of it. ""

That could cost them several(10s) Million in the process, and severely weaken their FUD efectiveness. But dont worry because they'll do tremendous FUD campaingns anyway, only at a much reduced cost.

"" From a technical standpoint it might not make any real difference ""

Oh yes it might. It could show real weakenesses that are now hiden by the technical ability of thounsands of administrators... im sure MS will never risk that. The rest, the rest is FUD.