[YLUG] Free the BBC!

[Noah Slater]

> I'm sure most of us would like the right to photocopy banknotes and use
> them to pay for things, too. But (A) tough luck, it's not our choice

Actually, yes it is - we live in a democracy.

> Now think of that applied to BBC content.

How is sterling currancy comparable to digital copyright? In ANY way?

> By asking the BBC to remove DRM from their content you're effectively
> denying them the opportunity to sell it in other markets - and cutting
> them off from a valuable secondary source of income.

This is wildly incorrect. You are either trying to confuse us or are
confused our self.

Your comment implies that the lack of DRM somehow indicates that the
content is in the public domain, which is of course false.

If the content was not DRM restricted all the normal copyright laws
would still hold and anyone copying and redistributing without
permision would still be breaking the law.

It is a fact that DRM can and will be circumvented so the issue of
copyright violation is not solved. All that DRM does is inconvenience
lay abiding users.

People will copy and redistribute what ever measures you take.

> If you want an advert-ridden BBC that broadcasts sixteen hours of
> some QuizCall clone overnight and fills daytimes with several
> channels of the a cheapo version of Jeremy Kyle Show, stuffing the
> few remaining cracks with a downmarket Big Brother, by all means
> continue to bleat on about them removing DRM from their output.

This, once again, is a logical falicy. DRM content is just as readily
copyable as non-DRM content. All that DRM does is inconvenience law
abiding users.

> Within a few years there won't *be* any output worth DRM'ing.

There is NO content EVER that should be DRM restricted.

You should read [1].

> If you want a BBC that continues to educate, inform, entertain and
> challenge its audience, give it some respect and let it protect its
> intellectual property.

Once again, you are either confused or you are trying to confuse us.

Intelectual propery is a made up term used to confuse consumers into
lumping three disparate laws (copryright, trademarks, patents) into
one. [2]

If you want content that can be enjoyed lawfully for many centuries to
come then you should never restrict it with DRM or any other means.

Regards,

Noah

[1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/opposing-drm.html
[2] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html

-- 
"Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the results." - R. Stallman