<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New and Improved News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/</link>
	<description>Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 00:43:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: nick s</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/comment-page-1/#comment-188013</link>
		<dc:creator>nick s</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/#comment-188013</guid>
		<description>It looks as if the first round of feedback has been helpful in that regard: though I&#039;m an expat, I know my way around the Beeb&#039;s schedule enough to make suggestions on things like &#039;series bundling&#039; that won&#039;t scare the horses too much.

On the archive, it&#039;d be great if the corporation had the flexibility to adopt the classic tech strategy of &#039;seek forgiveness, not permission&#039;: that is, just bloody well do it and clear up any mess later once the rights-holders a) see that the genie&#039;s out of the bottle; b) realise it&#039;s not necessarily a Bad Thing. YouTube could do it, somewhat under the radar; but the BBC is not YouTube. While an outsider sees at least half a century&#039;s sunk costs in the BBC archives, those within the corporation see rights-wrangling that could keep them occupied for the next half-century, ready to kick off as soon as they twitch in that direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>It looks as if the first round of feedback has been helpful in that regard: though I&#8217;m an expat, I know my way around the Beeb&#8217;s schedule enough to make suggestions on things like &#8216;series bundling&#8217; that won&#8217;t scare the horses too much.</p>

	<p>On the archive, it&#8217;d be great if the corporation had the flexibility to adopt the classic tech strategy of &#8216;seek forgiveness, not permission&#8217;: that is, just bloody well do it and clear up any mess later once the rights-holders a) see that the genie&#8217;s out of the bottle; b) realise it&#8217;s not necessarily a Bad Thing. YouTube could do it, somewhat under the radar; but the <span class="caps">BBC</span> is not YouTube. While an outsider sees at least half a century&#8217;s sunk costs in the <span class="caps">BBC</span> archives, those within the corporation see rights-wrangling that could keep them occupied for the next half-century, ready to kick off as soon as they twitch in that direction.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/comment-page-1/#comment-188008</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:33:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/#comment-188008</guid>
		<description>As always when Doctorow is on the topic of DRM, it&#039;s worth checking the facts for yourself. He doesn&#039;t always seem to understand the details of what he&#039;s talking about, and he&#039;s much more of a ax-grinder than a straight reporter on this subject.

For instance, as far as I can tell, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/31_01_2007.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;latest&lt;/a&gt; mention of the matter from says that the BBC Trust &quot;requires the BBC to develop an alternative DRM framework to enable users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to access the on-demand services&quot; within a &quot;reasonable timeframe&quot;. His claim that the BBC will force a Ubuntu-loving U.K. to purchase Windows would seem to be nonsense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>As always when Doctorow is on the topic of <span class="caps">DRM</span>, it&#8217;s worth checking the facts for yourself. He doesn&#8217;t always seem to understand the details of what he&#8217;s talking about, and he&#8217;s much more of a ax-grinder than a straight reporter on this subject.</p>

	<p>For instance, as far as I can tell, the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/31_01_2007.html" rel="nofollow">latest</a> mention of the matter from says that the <span class="caps">BBC </span>Trust &#8220;requires the <span class="caps">BBC</span> to develop an alternative <span class="caps">DRM</span> framework to enable users of other technology, for example, Apple and Linux, to access the on-demand services&#8221; within a &#8220;reasonable timeframe&#8221;. His claim that the <span class="caps">BBC</span> will force a Ubuntu-loving U.K. to purchase Windows would seem to be nonsense.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nick s</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/comment-page-1/#comment-187863</link>
		<dc:creator>nick s</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 05:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/#comment-187863</guid>
		<description>I count Cory as a friend, but he&#039;s being disingenuous here, and he knows it. The iPlayer initiative was always a separate development from the Creative Archive, addressing a different audience and offering different content.

The people within the BBC who&#039;ve worked their arses off to open the archives have had to deal with all the problems of a generic large corporation, plus the special problems of the BBC&#039;s position and structure, plus the specific problems of the BBC&#039;s top-level management in recent years. In short, it took a long time to work something up to satisfy Greg Dyke, then he was forced out; and the post-Hutton restructuring put them back at square one. 

Shooting spitballs from the position of a privileged outsider is fine and dandy, and perhaps Cory thinks he&#039;s helping the people who&#039;ve been fighting turf battles inside the organisation for a number of years. But I suspect he&#039;s doing the opposite. If the people running the Beeb&#039;s internet strategy had the power in their hands, and the ability to dictate terms to rights-holders, everything would be out there, in the open, DRM-free, right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I count Cory as a friend, but he&#8217;s being disingenuous here, and he knows it. The iPlayer initiative was always a separate development from the Creative Archive, addressing a different audience and offering different content.</p>

	<p>The people within the <span class="caps">BBC</span> who&#8217;ve worked their arses off to open the archives have had to deal with all the problems of a generic large corporation, plus the special problems of the <span class="caps">BBC</span>&#8217;s position and structure, plus the specific problems of the <span class="caps">BBC</span>&#8217;s top-level management in recent years. In short, it took a long time to work something up to satisfy Greg Dyke, then he was forced out; and the post-Hutton restructuring put them back at square one.</p>

	<p>Shooting spitballs from the position of a privileged outsider is fine and dandy, and perhaps Cory thinks he&#8217;s helping the people who&#8217;ve been fighting turf battles inside the organisation for a number of years. But I suspect he&#8217;s doing the opposite. If the people running the Beeb&#8217;s internet strategy had the power in their hands, and the ability to dictate terms to rights-holders, everything would be out there, in the open, <span class="caps">DRM</span>-free, right now.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Sullivan</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/comment-page-1/#comment-187803</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Sullivan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/#comment-187803</guid>
		<description>Given hopes and ambitions for the semantic web, it seems ludicrous for big organizations to hold onto content in order to  . . . what exactly? Maintain control of something? Whatever the motivation, as data becomes more machine readable, searchable, and intelligent, locking material up, limiting its possibilities,  will make the organization in question a much less significant player in all of those aspects of culture mediated by the internet. That seems a huge price to pay for short term control.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Given hopes and ambitions for the semantic web, it seems ludicrous for big organizations to hold onto content in order to  . . . what exactly? Maintain control of something? Whatever the motivation, as data becomes more machine readable, searchable, and intelligent, locking material up, limiting its possibilities,  will make the organization in question a much less significant player in all of those aspects of culture mediated by the internet. That seems a huge price to pay for short term control.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leederick</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/comment-page-1/#comment-187794</link>
		<dc:creator>leederick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/22/new-and-improved-news/#comment-187794</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;As he says, the BBC exists to make its content maximally available to the public.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

No it doesn&#039;t. The purpose of the BBC is not to use tax extracted from the British public to provide non-residents with free stuff. It&#039;s in their charter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><i>&#8220;As he says, the <span class="caps">BBC</span> exists to make its content maximally available to the public.&#8221;</i></p>

	<p>No it doesn&#8217;t. The purpose of the <span class="caps">BBC</span> is not to use tax extracted from the British public to provide non-residents with free stuff. It&#8217;s in their charter.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

