BBC Have Broken GetIPlayer

In message , alexd
writes
Martin Gregorie (for it is he) wrote:

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:31:49 +0000, Adrian wrote:

I didn't think you needed a licence for radio programmes, unless you
listen to them on a TV.

You don't AFAIK, but in some ways I rather wish there was one: it would
at least give those receiving the license fee some incentive to take more
notice of their listeners.

I would happily pay for a radio-only license.

I'm pretty sure that, at one time, the TV licence was essentially for
the reception of 'images', and the sound was simply part of the package.
Of course, in those days, anyone receiving only TV sound was a rarity.

However, these days, although you don't need a TV licence to receive
digital radio via a non-recording set-top box, I'm not sure that it is
made clear whether or not a TV licence is indeed required for TV
sound-only (eg if the receiver is incapable of displaying or recording
images).
--
Ian

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:12:33 +0000
Bernard Peek wrote:

On 31/10/14 10:59, Davey wrote:


For which we should be duly thankful. I think it's clear that it's
unreasonable to expect the BBC to build new systems that allow
people to hold on to downloaded content longer than the limits
imposed in its own iPlayer. So while the API will quite possibly
be made available to open-source developers I expect that it will
only allow them to build new interfaces to the same data that
iPlayer delivers.



What is unreasonable is that the iPlayer provided by the BBC doesn't
work for storing content, and if it does, then they 'fix' it soon
afterwards, so that it's useless again. The reason I use
get_iplayer is because I can never get their 'Desktop', or whatever
it's called this month, to work.

I've never really had many problems with iPlayer but haven't used it
much since I found get_iplayer. I was always able to save downloaded
material for up to 30 days.




You are lucky. Whenever I tried to install 'iPlayer Desktop', it would
fail, for one reason or another, but get_iplayer did the job. Maybe I'll
try again now, and see what happens. Watch this space.
--
Davey.

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:04:28 +0000, dave wrote:

On 31/10/14 08:03, Brian Gaff wrote:
Why is the question surely? What possible harm was this doing?

According to the blog I referred to earlier, the hosting contract for
the parts of iPlayer including this feed expired. Presumably the Nitro
project which was supposed to be the replacement was delayed, but the
money saved by cancelling the old contract had already been spent so it
couldn't be renewed.

Typical management incompetence, in other words.

I'm sure management were totally taken by surprise when the project
was not completed on time.

What I don't get is all the DRM/30 day limit stuff. I can record onto
PVR and if I wish (on my Toppy) download those recordings onto my
computer or buy a TV card and set my computer to record and keep those
recordings as long as I want.

What's the limit for other than to annoy?

--
AnthonyL

In article , Bernard Peek
wrote:


I think it's clear that it's unreasonable to expect the BBC to build
new systems that allow people to hold on to downloaded content longer
than the limits imposed in its own iPlayer.

Understandable, but depends on the precise interpretation of "allow",
etc...

Given the generally aggressively paranoid attitude to IPR in the 'meeja
companies' its quite understandable that the BBC would not wish to design a
system with the conscious aim of allowing people to easily make and keep
copies in perpetuity. And I assume the BBC will be faced by the well-suited
legal eagles from said meeja companies who want to maximise their income
without too much regard for mere viewers whose cash they want. You can
probably estimate their POV from the idiotic nag screens on DVDs, etc.

However the reality is that the BBC can't actually stop people from
recording. e.g. it is trivially easy to connect a digital recorder via USB
or spdif or indeed HDMI and record the audio if you know how to do so.
Given this is possible for a clued and kitted home user, it isn't going to
be a problem for serious commercial pirates. Particularly as they also can
get live broadcast access via Freeview, satellite, etc.

Hence the BBC must know they have to face up to the reality that home users
will at times make and keep recordings. Indeed, without this a lot of the
old material they have regained (and now make income from!) would remain
totally lost.

So in reality their main interest is - or IMHO should be - to make a system
that is good for their fee-payers veiwers/listeners without going 'too far'
and actively helping commercial pirates, etc. They can't get this perfect,
so should be erring on the side of not making life harder than necessary
for their millions of fee payers. Without them, they'd have no broadcasts
to worry about!

Its also worth wondering what commercial value a copy of something like an
old BBC radio documentary might have. e.g. The recent R3 item on Joan
Littlewood. It, and items like it, will be of interest to some people. But
unlikely to be a source of a boom in commercial piracy. So treating all
material as if it were a world mass-market blockbuster would be rather an
over-reaction.


So while the API will quite possibly be made available to open-source
developers I expect that it will only allow them to build new interfaces
to the same data that iPlayer delivers.

That may be fair enough if it allows people to access the material as they
wish. All depends on the details. The main problem at present seems to be
the way the feeds were cut off with no warning before any alternative was
on offer.

What I'm curious about is:

1) if access via pid or url will remain possible for get_iplayer or some
derivative and allow recordings to be made.

2) how the BBC will provide a text-based system that those with vision
problems, etc, can use to find items on a search basis that suits the user,
and then access them easily.

I also wonder how many people this is going to annoy who have become used
to what has now been broken. Might be more people than the BBC thought.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:12:33 +0000
Bernard Peek wrote:

On 31/10/14 10:59, Davey wrote:


For which we should be duly thankful. I think it's clear that it's
unreasonable to expect the BBC to build new systems that allow
people to hold on to downloaded content longer than the limits
imposed in its own iPlayer. So while the API will quite possibly
be made available to open-source developers I expect that it will
only allow them to build new interfaces to the same data that
iPlayer delivers.



What is unreasonable is that the iPlayer provided by the BBC doesn't
work for storing content, and if it does, then they 'fix' it soon
afterwards, so that it's useless again. The reason I use
get_iplayer is because I can never get their 'Desktop', or whatever
it's called this month, to work.

I've never really had many problems with iPlayer but haven't used it
much since I found get_iplayer. I was always able to save downloaded
material for up to 30 days.




I go to the BBC iPlayer website, and choose a programme, in this case
yesterday's Life Story. I select Download, and it asks me if I already
have 'iPlayer Download' installed. I say 'No, install it now', it then
offers me the choice of Windows or Mac, but no Linux.
I go to 'Installation Help', which leads to several more options, all
of which eventually end up back where they started, even when choosing
'Linux' as the platform. Bloody useless.

--
Davey.

On 31/10/14 12:57, Davey wrote:

I go to the BBC iPlayer website, and choose a programme, in this case
yesterday's Life Story. I select Download, and it asks me if I already
have 'iPlayer Download' installed. I say 'No, install it now', it then
offers me the choice of Windows or Mac, but no Linux.
I go to 'Installation Help', which leads to several more options, all
of which eventually end up back where they started, even when choosing
'Linux' as the platform. Bloody useless.


Adobe DRM software is not installable on Linux, so neither is "iPlayer
Download". This is not likely to change until the BBC gets out of bed
with Adobe. Something a public body should never have done?

--
Adrian C

AnthonyL wrote:

What's the limit for other than to annoy?

Copyrights, basically. Broadcasters buy certain rights to material
from the programme makers. Those rights may, or may not, include
making it available on their on-demand service. If it's allowed to be
on-demand, there is usually a time limit.

As far as I know, this is all determined by the deal the broadcaster
does with the copyright holder (i.e. how much money they are willing to
spend).

--
SteveT

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , alexd
writes
Martin Gregorie (for it is he) wrote:

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:31:49 +0000, Adrian wrote:

I didn't think you needed a licence for radio programmes, unless you
listen to them on a TV.

You don't AFAIK, but in some ways I rather wish there was one: it would
at least give those receiving the license fee some incentive to take
more
notice of their listeners.

I would happily pay for a radio-only license.

I'm pretty sure that, at one time, the TV licence was essentially for the
reception of 'images', and the sound was simply part of the package. Of
course, in those days, anyone receiving only TV sound was a rarity.

However, these days, although you don't need a TV licence to receive
digital radio via a non-recording set-top box, I'm not sure that it is
made clear whether or not a TV licence is indeed required for TV
sound-only (eg if the receiver is incapable of displaying or recording
images).

I think you'd get away with it if you had a Freeview box wired to an audio
system and not a screen in sight. More difficult if you had anything like a
computer screen in the room, even if it didn't take the output from the STB.

--
Max Demian

In article ,
Steve Thackery wrote:
AnthonyL wrote:

What's the limit for other than to annoy?

Copyrights, basically. Broadcasters buy certain rights to material
from the programme makers. Those rights may, or may not, include
making it available on their on-demand service. If it's allowed to be
on-demand, there is usually a time limit.

As far as I know, this is all determined by the deal the broadcaster
does with the copyright holder (i.e. how much money they are willing to
spend).

Yes. The basic problem is that many of the large 'copyright owners' are run
by suits who remain obsessed with 'mechanical' ways to 'protect copyright'.

If you're old enough you may remember 'Magic Alex' and all the others who
kept 'inventing' ways to prevent/detect when people were taping their LPs
onto cassette. Any engineer would have explained why being able to prevent
this *without* degrading the sound was a fantasy.

These days the equivalent is all the ways they try to stop people copying
digital material. None of the systems totally prevent copying. Most of them
simply annoy and inconvenience most *paying* listeners/viewers.

The BBC engineers know this perfectly well. But the problem is that the
suits and managers who arrange to buy the ability to show films, etc,
don't. So impose limitations that simply annoy people and don't plug the
hole in the copy protection fantasy.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Jim Lesurf wrote:
1) if access via pid or url will remain possible for get_iplayer or some
derivative and allow recordings to be made.

Some patches are available on the mailing list. (See the thread
"get_iplayer search and PVR functions no longer work - no fix available"
from the last couple of days.)


I also wonder how many people this is going to annoy who have become used
to what has now been broken. Might be more people than the BBC thought.

Get_iplayer has never been an officially acceptable way to retrieve and
watch content from the BBC, and I can understand that given the rights
ownership of that content. Me, I'm trying to work out how to express
my frustration without setting myself up for a straight "don't use
get_iplayer" type response.

I've listened to more radio, and a greater variety of it, in the last
few years via get_iplayer than since my teens.

Chris