Three things have happened recently which make me think that the BBC’s iPlayer-for-Mac might actually be called iTunes. Here’s why.
1) Today,
BBC Worldwide started selling BBC TV programmes on the UK iTunes Store. This makes them the first UK broadcaster to do so. More importantly, it means that BBC Worldwide have embraced a (kind of) platform-agnostic DRM for their online sales of TV content, something that the BBC have so far been technically unable to do for downloads of their TV catch-up service, iPlayer. The programmes are available for Mac and PC users to purchase through the UK iTunes Store.
2) Apple recently started offering movie rentals on the US iTunes Store. This marked a major change in Apple’s approach to DRM. Previously, DRM-protected content purchased from the iTunes Store had been limited by the number of computers it could be played on, not by the length of time it could be viewed for. Movie rentals changed that model, and enabled Apple to apply DRM for a specific time period.
3) The BBC have been under pressure from the Open Source Consortium (OSC) – as well as many Mac users – to end the windows-only nature of the iPlayer download service. To date, Mac and Linux users have only been able to access a streaming version of the iPlayer, whereas Windows users can download programmes in a format protected by Windows Media DRM, and watch them off-line. The BBC Trust and the OSC recently agreed that the “promotion of Microsoft by the BBC” should end. This was followed by an announcement from BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, that (in the words of the BBC News website) the iPlayer will hit Macs in 2008. To be fair to the BBC, they have been trying to achieve this since way before the iPlayer launched – but have not previously found a practical way to do so on the Mac.
Now, the BBC haven’t yet announced how the Mac version of downloadable iPlayer content will be implemented. But it seems a reasonable assumption to put 1 and 2 and 3 together to come up with QuickTime DRM being key to the implementation. Certainly Ashley Highfield, the BBC’s Director of Future Media And Technology, seems very interested in the idea. And to be honest, the real problem for the BBC so far is that there hasn’t been a way to implement time-based DRM under Mac OS X. iTunes Movie Rentals finally gives them a possible approach.
So, if we assume that the new DRM capabilities introduced in QuickTime for movie rentals will in some way form the basis of a Mac iPlayer, the next question is, how will you access the iPlayer content? There seem three possible ways this could go:
A) iPlayer for Mac is embedded into the iTunes Store. This has been the only way to obtain Apple DRM content so far, and makes life much easier for Apple, as only iTunes needs to be able to interface with the store and download DRM content. However, this does mean that the BBC are not only tied to QuickTime, but are also tied to iTunes.
B) iPlayer for Mac is available on the Apple TV. This would still enable Apple to keep control over the DRM content, as the Apple TV is (effectively) a closed box. Now that Apple TV 2 has direct access to the iTunes store without the need for a computer, including time-limited movie rentals straight to the Apple TV, it wouldn’t be too much of a step to have time-limited iPlayer content on there too. However, this is really an “added bonus” for the BBC and Apple – “iPlayer on Apple TV” still isn’t a solution to “iPlayer on Mac”.
C) iPlayer for Mac is accessed via the iPlayer web site, and downloaded and viewed through an iPlayer Download Manager, as on Windows. This would most suit the BBC, as it would enable them to host everyone’s access to the iPlayer service in one place. However, this is fundamentally different to Apple’s approach to distributing DRM content via iTunes. Also, it’s a little-known fact that whilst QuickTime’s DRM policy allows applications other than iTunes to play protected audio files, it prevents any other applications from playing protected video files (at the moment). So, as it stands, any time-limited video downloaded from an iPlayer web site would only be playable by iTunes (and selected other Apple-manufactured applications such as QuickTime Player). This would need to change in order for the BBC to provide time-limited content without tying themselves to Apple applications. On Windows, iPlayer uses its own iPlayer Download Manager software to download and play the files. If the BBC were to make a similar application for Mac, it would need special permission from Apple in order to function in the same way as its PC counterpart. This goes both for downloading DRM-protected content (as Apple don’t currently let anyone else host QuickTime DRM-protected content), and also for playing DRM-protected video (for the reason mentioned above). If the BBC were to use the same peer-to-peer distribution model as for their PC download manager, they would also need to persuade Apple to allow QuickTime DRM content to be distributed in this way.
It seems to me that the most likely approach, and certainly the easiest for Apple and the BBC to implement, is option A – the iTunes distribution model – especially given the benefits to Apple of keeping all DRM downloads “inside” iTunes. Apple TV access might then be a bonus offering, in the same way as it is for movie rentals in the States. Even if the iPlayer web site were to be a starting-point for browsing available iPlayer content, the download links to acquire the content would still link to iTunes.
Assuming that the BBC and Apple take this route, what would be in it for Apple? Why would they want to offer (and presumably host) BBC iPlayer content for free in iTunes? Well, if every Mac user is accessing (and downloading) their free iPlayer content through iTunes, Apple then have a great opportunity when the week-long DRM time limit expires. It would be trivial – and very profitable – for Apple to offer a “buy and keep” icon next to the expired downloaded iPlayer files in iTunes. As more and more BBC users download their content via the convenient iTunes / iPlayer integration, more and more people can buy and keep the content via their existing iTunes Store accounts. And it wouldn’t be a huge leap of the imagination to see that the exact same offering could (and would) be available to PC users too. Users on both platforms could download time-limited iPlayer content, watch it on their Mac / PC / iPod / iPhone / Apple TV, and purchase it when it expires.
So, Apple get a bunch more sales of their existing BBC Worldwide content; the BBC get a solution to the iPlayer complaints of Mac users. In addition, the global iTunes stores could give BBC Worldwide a way to expand their TV sales outside of the UK, giving a new channel to sell the BBC’s content abroad (and make a larger contribution towards the licence fee in the process), without the costs of physically distributing this content.
Possibly this might all be a step too far for the BBC. The BBC and BBC Worldwide are different organisations with different remits, and the suggestion of converting free BBC downloads into paid BBC Worldwide purchases might not sit with their respective purposes. More generally, it would be a big ask for the BBC to hand over control of the distribution and playback of iPlayer content to Apple via iTunes (and would be considerably less within their control than the model they use on Windows). What remains to be seen is whether Apple would be willing to adapt their QuickTime DRM approach to suit the BBC; or whether the BBC will have to take the Apple iTunes approach for its free DRM-protected content.
Where this leaves Linux users is anyone’s guess.
Well, as a Linux user, I suspect that uknova (and other torrent sites) are my friend. Any attempt to implement a DRM-enforcing player under Linux is presumably impossible for two reasons:
1) A ‘free’ (as in speech e.g. GPL) implementation would be pointless, since people would simply disable the offending bit of code.
2) A proprietory binary-only implementation, in addition to being anathema to free-software enthusiasts, would be trivially defeated by intercepting the audio / video stream elsewhere in the system. Windows Vista has been explicitly designed to prevent this (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html); Apple disables certain kernel probes where iTunes is concerned (http://blogs.sun.com/ahl/entry/mac_os_x_and_the). Linux doesn’t have these problems.
So, the conclusion must be that for BBC to release an iPlayer-esque thing for Linux would be a challenge not unlike squaring the circle. And if they’re forced to do it, they’ll have to abandon the idea of DRM (or at least DRM that won’t be worked around with well-publicised patches within a day).
However, since I’ve paid my license fee, I don’t feel terribly guilty about downloading BBC programming using BitTorrent. The only ‘additional value’ I get from this (the convenience of time-shifting, basically) is something which I could achieve perfectly legitimately via existing technology (e.g. a video with a timer). I’m not sure how the BBC loses out in such a scenario – am I missing something?
Actually a the moment the plan is for the Mac version of the iPlayer to use the Adobe AIR DRM which is currently being developed.
It will be launched by the end of 2008 and I wouldn’t be suprised if the Windows version also switches from MS to AIR at the same time as this means the Beeb only needs to encode for one format (flash) which also brings the cost down.
There may also be an ‘additional’ option of downloading through iTunes Subscription at some point – as mentioned by Ashley Highfield (free rentals through AppleTV) but that would be something else entirely.
Daniel – it’s not the BBC that would lose out as they’ve already stated they’d like to offer a DRM free solution but they’re not ALLOWED to by other rights holders.
The BBC doesn’t own all the rights to ANY of its TV shows as every piece of music, every writer, every conducter on a classical piece is a seperate rights holder who would have to be paid extra for every airing over the initial agreement.
The BBC basically pays for the right to rent a show for broadcast. The licence gives them permission to air it a certain number of times on their main network (BBC Three second showings have to be paid for seperately) and for seven days as a catch-up online.
Legally – under UK media law – if you record something with a PVR, DVD-Recorder or even good old fashioned Tape Recorder – you are obliged (legally) to delete the recording with 28 days – it’s just nobody ever does and in the past you couldn’t enforce it.
I wouldn’t be suprised if Sky had to do some heavy duty negotiations to let people keep shows on Sky+ for more than 28 days and is also why it’s so difficult to get the shows OFF the Sky+ Hard Drive.
Your licence fee pays for that short term rental of a show – it doesn’t pay for the BBC to own it and do with as it will forever. The money made by BBC Worldwide from DVD releases of Shows doesn’t all go to the BBC – some goes to rights holders, repeat fees for actors, music rights etc…
Well thought through (and thanks for stopping by at my place earlier btw). I guess it would make sense to utilise iTunes if the 7 day catchup content remained free alongside the recently introduced paid content (gives them a chunk of the mobile content market too I suppose).A better option than an Apple TV only walled garden approach anyway. It would certainly help get some much needed TV content onto the Brit iTunes store and bring a bit of a boost to Apple TV in the UK. Maybe the Beeb get to cut a good deal in licensing Apple’s DRM as the BBC are a prominent name to have on board and just being there may leverage much needed content from others. Auntie does seem committed to a variety of delivery formats for their content though this scenario still leaves Linux owners on streamed content only which will probably still be the case for the joint Beeb,ITV,C4 Kangaroo on demand TV project also.
Ryan,
So the plan is to use AIR, is it? Thanks for the info – I had missed that detail during my research, but you’re right, it does seem to be a more likely approach. (You wouldn’t happen to have some insider knowledge here, would you?) I assume that Adobe’s AIR DRM development is now sufficiently developed, which led to the 7th Feb announcement of Mac iPlayer downloads in 2008.
This does make a lot of sense – and at least Adobe aren’t also an OS manufacturer, making the tie-in a bit less painful. Switching the iPlayer app to a single approach and codec would make a lot of sense for the Windows iPlayer app too, as you suggest.
Perhaps, then, this article should be read more as “the reasons why the BBC *couldn’t* use iTunes as the primary delivery mechanism for iPlayer downloads” – the concessions to Apple would be too great and too painful.
Thanks for the comments!
Dave – all I can say about AIR is that I’ve heard more than once that it will be the platform of choice. Add to that the rumour that iPlayer might be moving from Flash/Windows Media to the single Mpeg4 H.264 format instead and it’s starting to look more credible.
There are also teams within the BBC playing with AIR – the Radio Labs team created an AIR version of the funky Podcast Browser but never released it.
The basic problem is the strength, and covert government/legal support for rights holders. This is a world wide thing, but is being wrongly exploited by rights management people. The correct view of copyrights is that it is NOT a way to pay artists, but a way to promote the development of artistic creativity.
For me this means we, the customers, have to make some move to get a re-balance of the situation. It is very much against our interest to have any DRM on media, the copyright laws do not require it and rights people are wrong to implement it. Using this sort of technological trick to force us to respect the law is not the way to go. They must use existing laws in the correct way, or find another solution to the distribution of their products. One of the main causes of all the fuss is that the music, film and TV industries have not been forward looking and created a new business model that embraces digital downloads, preferring to sit back and support old models and complain about it when they stop working. If hollywood ran iTunes then I could begin to understand, but it took an independent company, Apple to design a way to kick start legal downloads.
Let’s see if the BBC can find a way to provide an agnostic, business model to run and stream their TV programs through downloads. Hopefully without DRM. I believe that is what they would like to do – open, worldwide distribution with single small payments for each download and no DRM, of the whole current and back catalogue of programs.
Now the rights people have to wake up and answer that demand, or at least propose something better than to just bleat to the government about fictitious “loss of £400m” to pirates downloads.
The ball is in your court, rights people, propose something your customers want.