Hi 

I'm just making my view known on one aspect relevant to the above.

I use free/open-source software (FOSS), on the basis that it can do a great 
deal to reduce social exclusion in the First World, and assist the 
development of affordable IT systems in the Third World.

An important part of being able to use FOSS is that file formats should be 
free and open - that is, they should be free to use and develop, and the 
structure should be published somewhere so that interoperability between 
platforms and applications can be assured.  The use of proprietary formats, 
owned by one company and requiring to be licensed, is harmful to the 
objectives set out above.

In this regard, I would suggest that the BBC's Digital Services should commit 
itself to supporting open standards.  This would not prevent it from using 
proprietary formats, but this should always be in the context that the same 
content can be accessed using open standards.  This will lead to lower costs 
in the wider economy (as it will encourage competition in the receiver system 
market based on innovation and responsiveness to the customer instead of 
ring-fenced formats), and put the emphasis on the BBC's real strongpoint - 
the richness of its content.

In particular, the BBC, I feel, should fully support the DVB project standards 
published by ETSI.  Although the BBC is a DVB member,  its current digital 
satellite service requires a Sky system to access some features - "open" 
standards-based receivers can get pictures, but not a full Electronic 
Programme Guide or text service.

It makes little sense in any case for the BBC to be promoting formats which 
are owned by a competitor, given that equally effective open formats are 
available.

Best wishes

Kevin Donnelly