Saturday, July 09, 2011

BBC HD DRM FoI response

The BBC has responded to my latest HD DRM freedom of information request. They've sent 33 documents and released some previously redacted material which they consider no longer sensitive "due to the passage of time." But they are continuing to withhold key information in relation to communications with rights holders. Covering response letter:

"Mr Ray Corrigan
Sent by email to: request-74209-950772a7@whatdotheyknow.com
8th July 2011
Dear Mr Corrigan,
Freedom of Information Act 2000 – RFI20110637
Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act (the Act) received by email on 6th June 2011, asking for:
“full and complete copies of all the BBC communications with Ofcom relating to the Ofcom
consultation 'Content management on the HD Freeview platform'
In particular could you send me:
(a) A full copy, including the redacted sections noted on page 1 and 7, of the 'BBC response to
Ofcom consultation of 22 January 2010'
(b) A copy of the BBC submission to Ofcom of 8 December 2009 on this same matter”
The following table lists the documents being disclosed in this response. In the table the names of
people referred to are as follows:
• Alix: Dr Alix Pryde, Controller BBC Distribution (now Director, BBC Distribution)
• Graham: Graham Plumb, Acting Controller BBC Distribution (during absence of Alix)
• James: James Jackson, Head of Broadcast Infrastructure, BBC Distribution
• Ofcom: Usually refers to David Harrison, Strategy & Market Developments, Ofcom, but
refer to the individual documents for where this differs.
Doc Ref Date and time From To Subject
A3 04 Sep 2009 14:33 Alix Ofcom Email chain regarding Ofcom's publication of BBC letter regarding Mux B licence amendment
A4b 04 Sep 2009 14:33 Alix Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref A3. Includes BBC letter of 27 Aug 2009
A2 14 Sep 2009 13:08 Alix Ofcom Email chain advising BBC of progress of Mux B licence amendment
J13 24 Nov 2009 14:01 Ofcom James Email chain setting up conference call. There are no records about the call itself.
J12a 26 Nov 2009 10:35 Ofcom Graham Email chain regarding interim content management provisions, pending the consultation. I have not been able to locate the document "Letter to David
Harrison.pdf" mentioned in this email
J12b 26 Nov 2009 10:35 Ofcom Graham Attachment to above doc ref J12a (response from Ofcom)
J11 07 Dec 2009 09:18 Ofcom James Email chain regarding BBC's response to Ofcom letter of 9th November. I have been unable to locate a copy of the 9th November letter.
J3a 08 Dec 2009 18:51 James Ofcom Email giving BBC's response to Ofcom letter of 9th November. Note that the final version of attachments contained herein are published in the Ofcom
consultation to which you refer on the page labelled as page 49 (page 52 of the pdf file) here:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/content_mngt/summary/condoc.pdf
J3b 08 Dec 2009 18:51 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J3a. Covering letter. The third attachment to the email is identical to this first one. This is the document you refer to in part
(b) of your enquiry
J3c 08 Dec 2009 18:51 James Ofcom 2nd Attachment to above doc ref J3a. Response to Ofcom letter of 9th November
J2a 16 Dec 2009 19:42 James Ofcom Email giving slight modifications to document J3b
J2b 16 Dec 2009 19:42 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J2a. This is a marked-up version showing the changes.
J2c 16 Dec 2009 19:42 James Ofcom 2nd Attachment to above doc ref J2a. This is the clean version without mark-up
J2d 16 Dec 2009 19:42 James Ofcom 3rd Attachment to above doc ref J2a. This is a redacted version of doc ref J2c. Note that it was the un-redacted version which ultimately made it into the
Ofcom consultation. The only redaction is the text "$100" in section 2.1. At the time it was thought that the total manufacturing cost of HD PVR devices
might be commercially sensitive, given that no manufacturer had released such a machine to market at that time.
J1a 22 Dec 2009 16:20 James Ofcom Email giving more slight modifications to document J3b
J1b 22 Dec 2009 16:20 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J1a. This is a marked-up version showing the changes.
J1c 22 Dec 2009 16:20 James Ofcom 2nd Attachment to above doc ref J1a. This is the clean version without mark-up
J1d 22 Dec 2009 16:20 James Ofcom 3rd Attachment to above doc ref J1a. See same comments on redaction as per document ref J2d.
G1 22 Jan 2010 13:45 Graham Ofcom Email advising Ofcom of BBC blog on subject of HD content management
G2 01 Feb 2010 15:58 Graham Ofcom Email chain setting up meeting to discuss progress of consultation
J18 01 Apr 2010 20:21 James Ofcom Email of BBC's response to consultation, and Ofcom acknowledgement thereof.
J10b 01 Apr 2010 20:21 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J18. Cover sheet for consultation response
J10c 01 Apr 2010 20:21 James Ofcom 2nd attachment to above doc ref J18. This document is the un-redacted version of the BBC's response to the consultation. Some sections of this
document continue to be redacted under section 43(2) of the Act although we are now able to release some of the information that was previously
redacted. See explanation in FOI
J9a 08 Apr 2010 18:37 James Ofcom Email giving the redacted public version of the BBC's response to the consultation
J9b 08 Apr 2010 18:37 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J9a
J17 19 Apr 2010 15:16 Ofcom James Email seeking clarification on content BBC would not be able to show in HD without content management, in response to doc ref J18 above.
J8a 30 Apr 2010 18:44 James Ofcom Email response to doc ref J17 above.
J8b 30 Apr 2010 18:44 James Ofcom Attachment to above doc ref J8a. Some sections of this document have been redacted under section 43(2) of the Act. See explanation in FOI letter.
J6 10 Sep 2010 11:15 James Ofcom Email seeking Mux B licence amendment confirmation
A1a 10 Sep 2010 11:35 Ofcom Alix Email enclosing Mux B licence amendment
A1b 10 Sep 2010 11:35 Ofcom Alix Attachment to above doc ref A1a
J5 10 Sep 2010 17:43 James Ofcom Email thanking Ofcom for doc ref A1a above.
Please note that nothing should be read into the fact that the document reference numbering
system used above is missing some numbers. In compiling this response a number of duplicate
emails were received from different sources, and also some emails were located which contained
only part of an email chain that was included in its entirety elsewhere in a different email. All of
these duplicate emails and duplicate partial email chains were removed from this response after I
had allocated them a reference number, hence the missing numbers, but no information has been
removed in this process.
Most of the emails contain personal contact details (email addresses and phone numbers) of the
people involved, and these contact details have been redacted.
Redactions in Document ref J10c
This is the document you refer to in part (a) of your enquiry. Due to the passage of time, some
parts of this document which were previously redacted have now been released. However, we
continue to withhold part of paragraph 1.4, all of both paragraphs labelled 1.5 (a numbering error
in the document means that there are two adjacent paragraphs labelled 1.5), and part of paragraph
1.6. These paragraphs refer to details regarding the negotiation of broadcasting rights from
content providers and are being withheld under section 43(2) of the Act as disclosure would be
likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the BBC by revealing the tactics used in the
negotiation of Broadcast Rights when seeking to obtain content for broadcast from third parties,
which would in turn have an adverse impact on the BBC’s negotiating position and a
corresponding detriment either in the quality and scope of the Rights so obtained, or in the
increased costs of procuring those Rights.
For example, disclosure would be likely to:
• prejudice the negotiating position of the BBC in ongoing contractual Rights negotiations;
• weaken the BBC’s bargaining position with Rights holders;
• weaken the BBC’s position in a competitive environment by revealing market-sensitive
information or information of potential usefulness to competitors seeking to purchase the
same Broadcast Rights; and
• harm the ability of the BBC to obtain Broadcast Rights in the future.
As section 43 is a qualified exemption, the BBC is required by section 2(2) of the Act to consider
the public interest factors in this case. Specifically, we looked at whether in all the circumstances
of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in
disclosing the information.
In favour of disclosure, we recognised that there is a public interest in the following:
• that there is transparency in the accountability of the BBC for public funds;
• that the BBC is using public money effectively, and that the BBC is getting value for money
when purchasing goods and services; and
• that the BBC’s commercial activities (including the procurement process) are conducted in
an open and honest way
On the other hand, in considering factors that might weigh in favour of the public interest in
withholding, we took into account:
• That the BBC maintains a strong bargaining position vis-à-vis Rights holders during
contractual negotiations in order to ensure that the licence fee is spent effectively;
• That the BBC’s negotiating position in ongoing contractual negotiations is not prejudiced;
• That the BBC’s position in a competitive environment is not weakened by revealing
market-sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to competitors; and
• That the ability of the BBC to obtain Broadcast Rights in the future is not harmed either in
the scope and extent of those Rights obtained or in the cost of those Rights.
I am therefore satisfied, in terms of section 2 of the Act, that in all the circumstances of the case,
the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the
information.
We are also continuing to withhold the section following Paragraph 3.4 under section 43 of the
Act (commercial prejudice). As section 43 is a qualified exemption, the BBC is required by section
2(2) of the Act to consider the public interest factors in this case. Specifically, we looked at
whether in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption
outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
In line with section 17(4) of the Act, we will not explain further the application of this exemption
or the public interest test in this case, as to do so would reveal information which would itself be
exempt. However, I can confirm that I am satisfied, in terms of section 2 of the Act, that in all the
circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public
interest in disclosing the information.
Redactions in Document ref J8b
This document was part of a response to Ofcom who were seeking further details regarding the
content referred to in paragraph 1.2 of the BBC’s response to the consultation (document ref
J10c). Part of this document has been redacted under section 43 of the Act (commercial
prejudice). The information redacted is of exactly the same nature as that redacted in paragraphs
1.4 to 1.6 of document ref J10c and so the exact same public interest test applies here as that
outlined above in respect of the negotiation of Broadcast Rights.
Appeal Rights
You may request an internal review of our decision that your request exceeds the appropriate
limit. Please contact us at the address above, explaining what you would like us to review and
including your reference number.
If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner.
The contact details are: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF, telephone 01625 545 700 or see http://www.ico.gov.uk/
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gutteridge
BBC Distribution"
So just to repeat, they don't want to reveal communications with rights holders because: 
" These paragraphs refer to details regarding the negotiation of broadcasting rights from
content providers and are being withheld under section 43(2) of the Act as disclosure would be
likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the BBC by revealing the tactics used in the
negotiation of Broadcast Rights when seeking to obtain content for broadcast from third parties,
which would in turn have an adverse impact on the BBC’s negotiating position and a
corresponding detriment either in the quality and scope of the Rights so obtained, or in the
increased costs of procuring those Rights." 
And they maintain that public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

They are also withholding some information, the reasons for which they will not explain:
"In line with section 17(4) of the Act, we will not explain further the application of this exemption
or the public interest test in this case, as to do so would reveal information which would itself be
exempt."
But they are satisfied that "in terms of section 2 of the Act, that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information".  I'll have to go through all the documents in detail before considering the next steps. But on a first pass of the latest documents the missing part of the jigsaw remains the communications between the BBC and rights holders.

No comments: