BBC To Create 'Catch-Up TV Player'

grouchal writes "The BBC Trust (a semi independent regulator) has just approved the BBC's efforts to launch iPlayer (no new info on this link yet). This means that UK residents can watch broadcast BBC programs out of sync with the broadcast schedule by up to 30 days for free. The iPlayer will launch for the PC but is expected on Media Center, Xbox 360 devices in the near future. The approval also included some constraints." This would really have made my life a lot simpler when my tivo died a couple of weeks ago.

OS X as well...

I should also add that the BBC will also support OS X [macworld.co.uk].

Re:OS X as well...

Not according to the BBC:

But the trust has asked the BBC to ensure that the iPlayer computer application can run on different systems - such as Apple Macs - within "a reasonable time frame".

Earlier this month BBC Future Media boss Ashley Highfield said the corporation was committed to rolling out the iPlayer on Windows PCs first of all, and then cable TV services, Apple Macs, and eventually Freeview boxes.

But the BBC said it could not commit to a two-year deadline to achieve this goal, saying it was up to the third parties concerned. (my emphasis)

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6607083.s tm [bbc.co.uk]

iPlayer is built on top of Windows Media Player using Windows DRM - part of the BBC's stunning support for open standards and multiplatform development. Even if they do ship it for Mac the DRM issue will probably limit the programmes you can download.

Re:OS X as well...

I don't get the BBC at all. They make a lot of noise about how they can't release some material in some formats because it would create competition for private industry, but then they prop up the largest monopolist in software world. They also waste massively stupid amounts of bandwidth by broadcasting their archived material in e.g. RealPlayer format instead of something more compact like OggVorbis or even MP3 (take a listen to their BBC7 [bbc.co.uk] radio station), there's no need to broadcast that material in that high a quality. It makes it wasteful for most people to listen online and it creates exactly what they say they want to avoid: a very high quality digital copy that competes with commercial vendors (e.g. of books on CD).

Re:OS X as well...

Personally I'd have expected the BBC Trust to represent the licence payers rather than the competition.

They actually take both sides into account. I think they try to be biased towards the licence fee payer though.

UK Resident

This would really have made my life a lot simpler when my tivo died a couple of weeks ago.

Not really...You're not a UK resident.

Linux?

They are also looking at releasing the whole BBC archive to viewers as well.

see http://www.pandia.com/sw-2004/33-bbc.html [pandia.com]

Xbox 360, PC, MEdia Center and other devices?

from TFA "The iPlayer computer application will only be initially available to those with Windows PCs. But the trust has asked the BBC to ensure that the iPlayer computer application can run on different systems - such as Apple Macs - within 'a reasonable time frame'. "

So how long before we can get this on Linux? or the PS3?

And how long is 'reasonable'...?

Suddenly my TV License payments seem more reasonable.....

Re:Linux?

Firstly, I think it very unlikely that the current iPlayer mechanisms would/could be be ported to Linux. They're heavily dependent on Windows DRM, which in turn is heavily dependent on the Windows architecture (complete with Windows' methods for detecting debugger operations to prevent DRM bypass). Thus, while the APIs could be replicated on Linux/OS X, the protections would be trivial to bypass. Leaving aside whether MS would permit a porting effort.

OS X probably has a better shot - since you could implement the APIs without much extra paranoia, but use the inbuilt TPM on Intel Macs to ensure the OS and running environment was in a known good state. Since you can't count on a Linux box having a TPM, you can't make reverse engineering of the DRM system more difficult.

For what its worth, the tech guys at the BBC are fully aware of Linux, and it is in their plan to support it via iPlayer. The best way of accomplishing this isn't through technical means, but political. It's important for people to understand why the BBC is using DRM. They don't want to - it just increases running costs and introduces new points of failure into an already complex system. But the programme makers (who are often not the BBC) together with the contracted personnel who produce the programs insisted that any attempt to broadcast content in the clear would count as unlimited repeat broadcast. Which is fine, but it would cost the BBC a fortune to pay out as per contractual requirements. Hence the DRM enforced limitations, which are a sort of contractual enforcement by proxy. A pretty crappy one, but one which the lawyers would accept.

It's a simple problem to state, but hard to fix at a technical level - because there's no real technical problem. Existing contracts for TV works are written in language which predates the Internet and the on-demand style of viewing. Thus, it's always expressed in terms of initial showings, repeat fees, differential media exploitation rates, etc. Recent contracts which the BBC is creating are far more encompassing of alternative distribution technologies. So the final solution is to get far more sane exploitation rights written into contracts, which accurately reflect TV watching habits of the 21st century, and to stop wishing that the Internet and its on-demand modes of use would just go away.

Of course, the ultimate stupidity of all of this is that the programmes are being broadcast in digital form completely unencrypted right now! DVB-T/C/S transmissions spit this stuff out in full resolution (whereas iPlayer doesn't) which a $200 PC card can receive and store the content on a persistent device. It's almost like the the lawyers put their fingers in their ears and sang "Lalala! Can't hear you!" when this gets mentioned.

End result: Build a MythTV box with a Freeview card. You can suck down as many channels as you like and keep it for ever. Transcode to H.264 and a 500GB hard disk will keep 6 months of programming easily.

--Ng

Re:Linux?

As a sibling has said, what the hell do you know?

Here in Denmark we have our public TV online already, and that plays on all operating systems, although linux is still playing in a lower resolution than under windows. All it requires is installing mplayer and getting the mplayer MS codecs (they are legal in EU).

Still DRM'ed

It's still tied by DRM to the one platform so I don't give it high chances for success. I guess they have a lot of money to keep it afloat it if flounders for a while then catches on (I'm trying to avoid CmdrTaco's fate with the iPod prediction here).

But is there no MythTV or Tivo-type solution available in the Britain? I mean it's publicly funded so shouldn't people get more control over what they've paid for?

An historic day

After months of careful preparation and a dedicated training regime, the slashdot editors have today finally reached the summit of typographical errors - screwing up the world's most recognisable acronym at the beginning of the story headline. Well done guys - you should be proud.

Not UK resident

If anyone from the BBC is reading this, as a non-UK resident I would be happy to pay the annual licence fee if I could get access to the UK BBC channels.

If you could make it work with my Apple TV, even better!

how do you do it?

This would really have made my life a lot simpler when my tivo died a couple of weeks ago.

My goodness I know. It's a wonder how we make it through the day.

A correction

The BCC would like to apologize for being called the BBC for all those years; we realize this will create chaos and confusion to our viewers, but mild sedatives should make the whole thing right.

NOTE: And for anyone reading this post, the posts mentioning the typo are now out of date, as the error has been corrected. We apologize to any Slashdot readers who are confused, and suggest that a spot of work will make everything right.

iWhat?

How long before iApple and iJobs get the iLawyers to send a iMail to BBC for an iNappropriate and possibly iNfringing use of an iWord?

DRM'd pile of crap

Even though I am a UK BBC license fee payer, I won't be able to use this service I have paid for, because I don't use Windows and in and case I'm mot prepared to accept DRM.

I'll continue downloading DRM free BBC shows via bittorrent just as I have for a while now. I have no moral objection to doing this since I've paid for the content anyway.

How long are we going to continue in a situation where the unofficial channels of content delivery are superior to the official ones? Surely it can't be forever and DRM will soon have to die?

Re:DRM'd pile of crap

The BBC produce some of the world's finest television content, and this is mostly due to the way they are funded. If the BBC relied on advertising sponsorship, programmes would end up being made to suit the advertisers. If the BBC relied on general taxation, programmes would end up being made to suit the government.

The BBC is in the pockets of nobody but viewers. If that changes, the quality of programmes WILL worsen. Look to the communist system (where factories are run for the benefit of lazy workers) and the capitalist system (where factories are run for the benefit of rich shareholders) for examples of how things can go wrong when production is tailored to anyone other than the poor sod who has to spend their hard-earned on your products.

Re:DRM'd pile of crap

1) copyright infringement is not theft.

2) I have, on occasion decided to download instead of buying because it's the ONLY WAY to get content without DRM. You say "stealing" causes DRM, but I think it's the other way around. I would be perfectly prepared to pay for non-DRM'd content and I accuse anyone who disagrees with my of judging me by their own standards.

Yay!

I can get British TV programs in less than half a year!

(or how long do you think it will take to hack'n'open it?)

MythTV?

Say you have a data center, essentially a giant MythBackend. Subscribers pay a license fee to stream TV shows, movies, etc. to a MythFrontend appliance in their living room. The license fee in turn goes to pay the networks to let you "re-broadcast" their shows.

Is this essentially what they're doing?

For really good shows, you'd still want to tune in the night of broadcast in order to see it, because say for example you're just obsessed with "Lost" or whatever. But if you miss it, you could always watch it the next night. Or if you just feel like watching a Star Trek marathon then you could do that too.

I really don't know why we don't have this. AT&T promised that I would be able to pull any movie or tv show to my living room back in the 1990s, and still my only options are whatever crap is on Cox's "On Demand" service or bittorent. It seems like the first person to navigate the legalities and set up a data center for this would stand to make really embarrassing amount of money off of it.

You could probably charge a lot for it, too. Right now I pay $30/month or so for Cable TV. I only watch a few shows, and I never watch them before editing out the commercials with Myth. I would gladly pay 2x or 3x this amount if it meant that I was actually getting commercial-free content, plus the whole backlog of shows I hadn't seen yet.

iThis, iThat

I... want an iToilet so I can take an iDump and I can patent it and I can sell it as the youPoo... BBC iDea good or bad, I can see certain parties wanting their iCut of the iProfits for youCopyright reasons. (ducks)

BBC could make it big(ger)

Let non-UKians pay for a TV license and get access to all the online services. £135.50/year to get access to all of BBC programming and that massive back catalog? I'd certainly consider it.

Anyone got a good UK proxy?

I'm an American in the U.K. doing an internship. I know currently you need to register with the channels to watch tv online (simulcast)- registration only requires a valid postal address (easily forged). And a U.K. ip/isp address. It also checks your ip/isp when you start the links, and you authenticate. But I'm assuming us Americans who want to watch Doctor Who, Hollyoaks, Peepshow etc. just need a good U.K. proxy. Pretty simple- minus the 5-7 hour time change. So this could be great, we wouldn't be forced to watch friday night shows on friday afternoon. Get what i'm sayin?

I cant wait to see ...

the internet grind to a halt as the entire output archive of the BBC crashes onto the P2P networks. Old episodes of East Enders anyone?

Wrongness upon wrongth

As is pointed out in other posts, this won't benefit users of Xbox 360s, PS3s etc in the near future (reasonable timeframe?) or perhaps ever. That's just a symptom though of the underlying wrongtitude.

The root cause is the Memorandum of Understanding that the BBC signed with Microsoft under which they agree to siphon a portion of the license fee straight into Bil Gates's pocket in exchange for access to 'advanced technology'. The BBC can no longer develop its own tech as it sold off its technology arm to Siemens.

Had they not done so, they could have developed their own DRM scheme and licensed it to TV, set-top box, etc manufacturers. The resulting revenue stream would have positioned them very well to play in the online space. Open APIs would also have spurred innovation in the UK software industry.

I'm not in the know as to whether the BBC was required to follow government procurement rules when setting up that Memorandum but the whole thing stinks of wrongness & short-sighted contingency.

"for free"?

Nothing that the BBC does is "for free": UK residents pay for the BBC, to the tune of about $6 billion per year (!) or about $250/year/household.

TV Download roundup

This means that UK residents can watch broadcast BBC programs out of sync with the broadcast schedule by up to 30 days for free.

That is not correct. You can stream programs up to 7 days from the date of broadcast and in some exceptional cases (15%) you may download and keep a recording for up to 30 days.

Lets see how this service stacks up against some of the alternative on demand tv download services.

BBC Iplayer 4/10
Pros
It's free.
Easy to use.
Large selection.

Cons
Poor retention (7 days)
Closed DRM format, can't be viewed on TV or alternative OS's.
Limited life span (30 days max)

Bittorent 7/10
Pros
It's free.
Easy to use.
Good retention (many months)
Open format, can be saved and viewed on TV and alternative OS's.

Cons

Illegal distribution
Availability may be limited
Download speed is variable
Bandwidth Heavy

Giganews 9/10
Pros
Good retention (~120 days)
Open format, can be viewed on TV or alternative OS's.
Very good download speed
It is legal to download for private viewing as long you've paid your licence tax.

Cons

Monthly subscription fee.
Availability relies on people uploading (illegal).
Some may find it hard to use.

BBC seems to love Microsoft

I cannot understand why there isn't more outrage at this move by the BBC. And did anyone see the 30 minute Vista advert the BBC put out recently? Okay, the BBC called it a "documentary", but it certainly looked like a Microsoft-scripted advert to me.

If the BBC isn't called to account for this now will Linux ever be supported? And wouldn't that affect possible future uptake of Linux PCs? I can hear the sales spiel now: "Do you want to watch TV on your PC? Okay, then you have to have a Microsoft PC. No, that Ubuntu thing just can't do the job..."

Whoa, they actually did!

edit, that is.. the title now does read "BBC". Scaaaaary. Rest assured, though, parent poster - you're not going nuts, it did indeed spell "BCC" before. Made me wonder what that electronics chain had to do with it..

Re:File format ? DRM ?

I could be wrong, but I still to remember reading they were rolling their own player, codec, format and DRM, and that they asked permission to open source everything but the DRM. Not sure what happened after that.

Re:We get it for free...

Isn't role reversal a wonderful thing. ;)

Yes, I'm from the UK.