The correct way to handle piracy: The BBC

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Imhotep, Aug 30, 2005.

  1. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    This article illustrates how the BBC is just ahead of the times. Rather than
    trying to pass BS laws or force a change in PC hardware, the BBC has taking
    a radical approach: Give people what they want, simulcast the program on
    the web...read more here

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/26/156251&from=rss

    Imhotep
     
    Imhotep, Aug 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 22:00:59 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:

    >This article illustrates how the BBC is just ahead of the times. Rather than
    >trying to pass BS laws or force a change in PC hardware, the BBC has taking
    >a radical approach: Give people what they want, simulcast the program on
    >the web...read more here
    >
    >http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/26/156251&from=rss


    Again this has nothing to do with computer security.

    The BBC is funded by public money and is in the business of
    distributing its content free to its audience. Thats what it does
    the internet is just another medium for broadcasting.

    However make copies of their content and place it on your
    website and see what they say then.

    things like:

    http://www.alphalink.com.au/~robertd/GoonShowmp3.html
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 31, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Imhotep, Aug 31, 2005
    #3
  4. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:

    >Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    ><PLONK>


    ah the humanity !
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 1, 2005
    #4
  5. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >
    >>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >><PLONK>

    >
    > ah the humanity !
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com


    Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....
     
    Imhotep, Sep 1, 2005
    #5
  6. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Imhotep wrote:

    > Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>
    >>><PLONK>

    >>
    >> ah the humanity !
    >> --
    >> Jim Watt
    >> http://www.gibnet.com

    >
    > Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....


    ....join...
     
    Imhotep, Sep 1, 2005
    #6
  7. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:36:05 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:

    >Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>
    >>><PLONK>

    >>
    >> ah the humanity !
    >> --
    >> Jim Watt
    >> http://www.gibnet.com

    >
    >Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....


    Although your argument has been totally destroyed to the
    level that you have no answer, there is no need to fall apart;
    simply cease wasting space.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 1, 2005
    #7
  8. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:36:05 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >
    >>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>><PLONK>
    >>>
    >>> ah the humanity !
    >>> --
    >>> Jim Watt
    >>> http://www.gibnet.com

    >>
    >>Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....

    >
    > Although your argument has been totally destroyed to the
    > level that you have no answer, there is no need to fall apart;
    > simply cease wasting space.
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com



    Totally destroyed??? The only thing totally destroyed is your credability...
     
    Imhotep, Sep 3, 2005
    #8
  9. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 18:19:05 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    >Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:36:05 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>><PLONK>
    >>>>
    >>>> ah the humanity !
    >>>> --
    >>>> Jim Watt
    >>>> http://www.gibnet.com
    >>>
    >>>Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....

    >>
    >> Although your argument has been totally destroyed to the
    >> level that you have no answer, there is no need to fall apart;
    >> simply cease wasting space.
    >> --
    >> Jim Watt
    >> http://www.gibnet.com

    >
    >
    >Totally destroyed??? The only thing totally destroyed is your credability..


    Not by any of your argument, or abusive behaviour.

    Post something worthwhile or STFU


    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 4, 2005
    #9
  10. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 18:19:05 -0400, Imhotep <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:36:05 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 07:28:15 GMT, Imhotep <> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>><PLONK>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ah the humanity !
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> Jim Watt
    >>>>> http://www.gibnet.com
    >>>>
    >>>>Study it and maybe you can joint us someday....
    >>>
    >>> Although your argument has been totally destroyed to the
    >>> level that you have no answer, there is no need to fall apart;
    >>> simply cease wasting space.
    >>> --
    >>> Jim Watt
    >>> http://www.gibnet.com

    >>
    >>
    >>Totally destroyed??? The only thing totally destroyed is your
    >>credability..

    >
    > Not by any of your argument, or abusive behaviour.
    >
    > Post something worthwhile or STFU


    Hyocrite alert!!!!

    ....and this coming from one who posts replies like "don't worry about it"
    when someone is asking about password cracking/hacking. Still waiting on
    your answer!

    P.S. Nice try at playing the "victim"....

    I would love for you to say some of your crap to my face. I really would. Ah
    but, then you could not hide behind your keyboard!

    Imhotep
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Imhotep, Sep 4, 2005
    #10
  11. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 20:49:04 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    <snip>

    >I would love for you to say some of your crap to my face. I really would. Ah
    >but, then you could not hide behind your keyboard!


    I see you are moving from simple abuse to implied physical threats
    but do not wish for things like that because as with a rational
    discussion about issues of computer security and policy you
    would be out of your depth.

    Now get real.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 4, 2005
    #11
  12. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 20:49:04 -0400, Imhotep <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >>I would love for you to say some of your crap to my face. I really would.
    >>Ah but, then you could not hide behind your keyboard!

    >
    > I see you are moving from simple abuse to implied physical threats
    > but do not wish for things like that because as with a rational
    > discussion about issues of computer security and policy you
    > would be out of your depth.


    Jim, I know that if we were face to face you would not be so quick to
    insult. As for computer security, Jim, you are not even in my league.
    Furthermore, 90% of the people here are much more talented than you. You
    know this. This is why you act the way you do.


    > Now get real.
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com


    Jim you are the biggest hypocrite going. You are rude to people on this news
    group and use you anonymity to your advantage. When someone throws your
    shit back in your face you try to play the innocent victim. I said it
    before, at least you are predictable and entertaining! I sure laugh at you!
    I even send some of your postings to my friends who also laugh at you. So
    thanks bud!

    Imhotep
     
    Imhotep, Sep 4, 2005
    #12
  13. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 13:10:54 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    >Jim, I know that if we were face to face you would not be so quick to
    >insult.


    I see you still can't talk about the topic and go off into some ego
    trip. Some people believe anything, amusing but sad.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 4, 2005
    #13
  14. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 13:10:54 -0400, Imhotep <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Jim, I know that if we were face to face you would not be so quick to
    >>insult.

    >
    > I see you still can't talk about the topic and go off into some ego
    > trip. Some people believe anything, amusing but sad.
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com


    Jim, just give it up....
     
    Imhotep, Sep 5, 2005
    #14
  15. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:16:23 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    >Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 13:10:54 -0400, Imhotep <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Jim, I know that if we were face to face you would not be so quick to
    >>>insult.

    >>
    >> I see you still can't talk about the topic and go off into some ego
    >> trip. Some people believe anything, amusing but sad.
    >> --
    >> Jim Watt
    >> http://www.gibnet.com

    >
    >Jim, just give it up....


    I see you just +have+ to have the last word even when you have nothing
    to say after the nonsense you posted has been totally demolished, your
    abuse ignored and your empty threats treated with contempt.

    So walk like an Egyptian.


    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 5, 2005
    #15
  16. Imhotep wrote:

    >>>>>>><PLONK>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>ah the humanity !
    >>>>>>--
    >>>>>>Jim Watt
    >>>>>>http://www.gibnet.com
    >>>>>

    > Hyocrite alert!!!!
    >


    indeed...
    To plonk or not to plonk, that is the question...

    ;-.))
     
    John Veldhuis, Sep 5, 2005
    #16
  17. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:16:23 -0400, Imhotep <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 13:10:54 -0400, Imhotep <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Jim, I know that if we were face to face you would not be so quick to
    >>>>insult.
    >>>
    >>> I see you still can't talk about the topic and go off into some ego
    >>> trip. Some people believe anything, amusing but sad.
    >>> --
    >>> Jim Watt
    >>> http://www.gibnet.com

    >>
    >>Jim, just give it up....

    >
    > I see you just +have+ to have the last word even when you have nothing
    > to say after the nonsense you posted has been totally demolished, your
    > abuse ignored and your empty threats treated with contempt.


    I guess you believe in the imaginary Universe you live in. Hey, power to
    you.

    Now back on topic:
    I really like the way the BBC is handling things. They saw that there is a
    demand from their users to view the shows on the Internet. They listened,
    rather than trying to push new laws or hardware (Like Microsoft and their
    partners)....that is what this post is about...

    > So walk like an Egyptian.


    Ah, Jim...I must say you do make me laugh (at you). I thank you for that.

    >
    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com


    Imhotep
     
    Imhotep, Sep 5, 2005
    #17
  18. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:22:17 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    >Now back on topic:


    as much as its got anything to do with computer security ...
    but certainly better than abuse and lame threats.

    >I really like the way the BBC is handling things. They saw that there is a
    >demand from their users to view the shows on the Internet. They listened,
    >rather than trying to push new laws or hardware (Like Microsoft and their
    >partners)....that is what this post is about...


    You miss the point entirely. Its nothing at all to do with copyright
    or laws. The BBC are secure in existing EU legislation protecting
    their material. They can, and as in the example I posted threaten
    someone infringing that on a website the other side of the planet.

    However their mission is as a broadcaster and they are publicly
    funded to originate and broadcast material, that's what they are
    doing on shortwave, medium wave, longwave and satellite.

    Broadcasting their material on the Internet is just an extension of
    what they do into a different medium.

    However, not many broadcasters have the funding and the mission
    to do that or the ability to produce quality products. This
    introduces the problem of how the content is paid for. It is that
    which MS and others are trying to address.

    Personally I think they are doomed to fail, but Sky television
    for instance in the UK has managed to come up with a secure
    delivery system for its content using a specially programmed
    satellite receiver and a smartcard now installed in 6m households
    and make a tidy profit from the technology and delivery.

    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 5, 2005
    #18
  19. Imhotep

    Imhotep Guest

    Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:22:17 -0400, Imhotep <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Now back on topic:

    >
    > as much as its got anything to do with computer security ...
    > but certainly better than abuse and lame threats.
    >


    Your the King of verbal abuse, please stop wasting my time with this...

    > However, not many broadcasters have the funding and the mission
    > to do that or the ability to produce quality products. This
    > introduces the problem of how the content is paid for. It is that
    > which MS and others are trying to address.


    So, what you are saying is that it is more expensive for a company to
    broadcast the show via the Internet? I think that statement is incorrect.


    > Personally I think they are doomed to fail, but Sky television
    > for instance in the UK has managed to come up with a secure
    > delivery system for its content using a specially programmed
    > satellite receiver and a smartcard now installed in 6m households
    > and make a tidy profit from the technology and delivery.


    Ah yes, the old use proprietary hardware and pass the cost to the your
    users...Personally, I'm not interested.

    I hope the BBC succeeds. I like how they do business and their support for
    Linux on their web site. They have my vote.

    Im

    > --
    > Jim Watt
    > http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Imhotep, Sep 5, 2005
    #19
  20. Imhotep

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 18:35:01 -0400, Imhotep <>
    wrote:

    >> However, not many broadcasters have the funding and the mission
    >> to do that or the ability to produce quality products. This
    >> introduces the problem of how the content is paid for. It is that
    >> which MS and others are trying to address.

    >
    >So, what you are saying is that it is more expensive for a company to
    >broadcast the show via the Internet? I think that statement is incorrect.


    Of couse - it involves costs to broadcast on the Internet, you think
    bandwidth is free? It raises all sorts of issues for the BBC who are
    funded by the UK licence payer and pay rights for broadcasting to
    the UK.

    There was even a debate on whether it was appropriate to spend
    broadcasting money on a website, and on digital TV services that
    not everyone who pays for them can receive.

    >Ah yes, the old use proprietary hardware and pass the cost to the your
    >users...Personally, I'm not interested.


    I doubt that Rupert Murdoch will lose sleep over that, but the point
    is they have established a large market using a box where the user
    has no control over the software running in it. Software which,
    incidentally is believed to be unix based and crashes now and again.

    >I hope the BBC succeeds. I like how they do business and their support for
    >Linux on their web site. They have my vote.


    But not your money, thats OK for an organisation which is funded by
    others, but a commercial organisation needs to get a contribution from
    its users or it can't pay the salaries of the content providers, for
    its bandwidth and other resources. And to get really off topic, BBC
    television is by far better than any commercial sevice I've seen.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Sep 6, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Neil
    Replies:
    174
    Views:
    3,376
    Briscobar
    Apr 17, 2006
  2. luminos
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    484
    Mike Kohary
    Jun 24, 2004
  3. Ant
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    2,358
    Oldus Fartus
    Jun 24, 2004
  4. jim evans

    Correct White Balance Doesn't Mean Correct Color??

    jim evans, Oct 21, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    28
    Views:
    1,015
    Dave Martindale
    Dec 27, 2005
  5. §ñühw¤£f

    Best way to handle fascists...

    §ñühw¤£f, Jul 30, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    590
    Mike Yetto
    Aug 1, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page