So, BBC News wrote an article yesterday about DRM and why is it bad [1]. Man, I wholeheartedly agree. They give lot's of great examples of why DRM sucks too: Western Digital, Zune, Nokia, Google, Sony, iTunes, HD-DVD, Blu-ray, Virgin...

The day before, BBC News also had an article called "'Digital locks' future questioned" [2], also showing that DRM is bad for consumers.

What I don't know if is someone trying to be fired: when I type in your search engine for "BBC + DRM" the first result I get is an article on BBC World Service, called "BBC Launches DRM Service In Europe" [3].

Hypocrisy, no? Yes, DRM is bad, but BBC folks are also bad not only for using it but also for being DRM promoters. This also isn't a position they changed over the time: in October they avoided going to the European Competition authorities [4] for promoting Microsoft's abusive monopoly by "exploring alternative DRM systems" to Microsoft's DRM, refusing to just ditch DRM.

So, what is it then? DRM is bad for consumers, you admit it, and you force your own costumers to stick with it?

[1] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7136527.stm
[2] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7136069.stm
[3] - http://smallr.net/BBC-DRM-in-Europe
[4] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7047381.stm