Informationoverlord

Congratulations must go out today to the big TV programme and film producers who actually managed with the help of our terrestrial broadcasters in convincing Ofcom that unless they agreed to a BBC proposal to amend to its digital multiplex licence (Multiplex B), to allow the BBC to restrict the availability of programme listing information for HDTV services only to digital receivers (digi-boxes) that implement content management technology, that they would stop some or all of their content being broadcast in HD over the platform.

[For more details of the argument, I first wrote about this here ]

For digi-box/receiver manufactures what this means it that they will now all have to sign licensing deals with the BBC to gain access to Huffman Code look-up tables, for their boxes to be able to ’see’ the HD content. These rules will also apply to the other digital multiplex licences (C and D)

One of Ofcom’s central duties is to further the needs of citizens/consumers. In this instance Ofcom claim this “will deliver net benefits to citizens and consumers by ensuring they have access to the widest possible range of HD television content on DTT.” Why? Well because they bought the idea that the producers of content would really pull programming from HD channels without this. Had Ofcom bothered to look across the pond to the US and looked at what happened when the US tackled this same issue – Broadcast Flag – they would have seen that there was NO way that the content producers would have gone though with their threat.

In the US they lost the argument and nothing changed. Had Ofcom had the balls to do what it is supposed to do and actually put the interests of the consumer first, NOTHING would have changed. Ofcom disagrees:

“Whilst some stakeholder responses asserted that, even if Ofcom were to refuse the BBC’s proposal, rights holders would continue to supply HD content on the same terms as they would if the proposal were approved, the information provided by broadcasters does not support this view.”

Ofcom says it saw evidence from the broadcaster that rights holders in contract negotiations had been holding back content: ” we consider that the evidence put forward by broadcasters does provide material and credible evidence that the lack of an effective content management framework on the HD DTT platform is currently resulting in a reduction of the range of HD content available and is a material factor for ongoing and future content rights negotiations.”

Call me a cynic , but if I knew that a regulator was weighing up whether to introduce some form of DRM, wouldn’t you instruct your negotiating teams to threaten the holding back of content unless it went through – KNOWING that the broadcasters would have to give this EVIDENCE to Ofcom? This is basic ‘head slap’ logic.

The result: “We have therefore concluded that it is likely that content would be withheld from the HD DTT platform in the absence of the introduction of content management.”
Hook, Line and Sinker. Well done Ofcom, and well done the (mostly US) TV and Film Industry.

Ofcom’s Statement

Ofcom is consulting on a request by the BBC to amend to its digital multiplex licence (Multiplex B), to allow the BBC to restrict the availability of programme listing information for HDTV services only to digital receivers (digi-boxes) that implement content management technology.

The BBC first punted this idea back in September 2009 and was sent packing by Ofcom who told it – following a lot on negative response from a first consultation – that it needed more information about why this would be good for consumers if it were to stand any chance of approval.

It seems to have worked.

Ofcom states that it is now minded to approve the request finding that content management is a justified objective and that the ability to restrict the availability of EPG data to receivers which implement content management, represents the most appropriate means for securing the benefits of a wider range of HD content for citizens and consumers. The proposals also call licence holders for Multiplexes C and D, which carry a similar requirement to Multiplex B to provide EPG data in an open format, be also granted a similar licence amendment to allow EPG data to be broadcast in a closed format.

Before allowing the BBC to broadcast EPG data in a closed format under a licence amendment, Ofcom would require that the BBC implements: commitments to establishing an “appeals” process whereby viewers who believe their lawful usage is being impinged by the BBC’s use of content management can raise their concerns to the BBC; to work with the other public service broadcasters to create a ‘user friendly’ consumer guide to content management; to facilitate discussions between broadcasters, manufacturers, relevant industry bodies and consumer groups to develop and implement a good practice framework for the use of content management on the HD Freeview platform; and to give an undertaking that it will respect current usage protections under copyright law and any future extension of these protections, such as those recommended by the Gower’s Review of Intellectual Property – such as format shifting.

So what would this mean in practice?

Under the BBC’s proposals, broadcasters would be allowed to allocate one of three content management states to individual HD programmes:

Unrestricted copy: the digital receiver output is unencrypted and unrestricted copies of HD content can be made onto any digital device. There are no restrictions imposed on internet distribution.

Multiple copy: the digital receiver output is encrypted and unrestricted copies of the content can be made onto digital devices that are compatible with the copy management technology. Internet distribution is not permitted.

Managed copy: the digital receiver output is encrypted and only one copy of the content can be made onto a DVR and one external digital device which is compatible with the copy management technology. Internet distribution is not permitted

In all three content management states:

Ofcom’s current intention is also to make a requirement of the BBC being able to broadcast EPG data in a closed format under a licence amendment, that the free to air HD broadcasters on Multiplex B must only apply the minimum level of content management needed to secure content from rights holders.

This sounds good , but if the minimum level of content management that all broadcaster demand is ‘Managed Copy’ then that will be the minimum level of content management needed to secure content from rights holders – so, this is a fairly worthless statement.

Ofcom is clear that that content management cannot be applied to Standard Definition (SD) content, or HD content that has been converted down to SD, and that no restrictions are placed on the recording of HD content onto an DVR which is integrated with a receiver.

For digi-box/receiver manufactures what this means it that they would have to sign licensing deals with the BBC to gain access to Huffman Code look-up tables, to be able to ’see’ the HD content. This will be licensed on a royalty-free basis and on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRND) terms to any party who undertakes to comply with the content management standards agreed and specified by the Digital TV Group (DTG), and the BBC will be only be able to require content management technologies in receivers that form part of the DTG specification

Why the whole idea should be binned.

It’s all about piracy, right? Just as it was when DRM was stuck on CDs - and that worked SO well. Rights holders don’t want their HD content appearing online (unless they put it there of course) hence why ‘Internet distribution is not permitted.’ In the only option above that rights holder would choose. Very nice. The reality is that if someone want to put your content online on a bit-torrent site they will, and it only takes one person to do it. What this proposal does is wastes time and money for no net benefit to the consumer – nor in reality the rights holder – all for the sake of what exactly?

Also, when you look at, for example the Multiple Copy and Managed Copy options what is are “digital devices that are compatible with the copy management technology” ? Is a blank DVD covered by this? Is an iPod? Or are we, as I suspect, just going to do things that piss off the consumer?

The Rights Holders may say, look most people just want to record something and maybe watch in on a mobile digital device or burn a copy to disc – we’re not going to stop them doing that (although I’m sure they want to stop you doing either of these things), but if they say this – which could fit the description of ‘Managed Copy’ – the questions would be, well, they can already do that now. If that’s what the average person is going to do, then you don’t need any of this DRM in place at all. If instead you’re after the few who will burn off and sell or upload to the internet and share, then they’re going to do that whether or not your output is encrypted or not.

DRM applied in this way is, as it has been every time it has been applied, is a means of saying ‘we are going to treat you all like you’re potential criminals. …because that’s how we like to think of your our valued customers.’ This proposal is merely the latest example of it.

Sadly it is now a done deal. Once Ofcom is ‘minded’ it means it has ‘decided’.