So I thought it might be helpful to summarise why the BBC and other broadcasters care about this issue and why we believe consumers will benefit from a stronger Freeview HD platform supported by an appropriate content management system.

Digital Rights Management (DRM), copy protection or content management is never going to be something that we would expect viewers to react to initially with the view "that sounds like a really great idea". The issues are really quite complex and the benefits not immediately obvious (the primary benefit being that the use of such technologies gives access to a wider and more attractive range of HD content). People understandably want to be able to enjoy media in ways which suit them. They don't like the idea that the owner of that media may want to limit the way they can use that content or have some say on whether it can be shared over the internet.

Digital technology has made the copying and internet distribution of broadcast content much cheaper and easier than was ever possible in the analogue domain. For example, it is now possible to buy a box for less than £100 which will record over a hundred of hours of standard definition television. Locating this content is also much easier and, increasingly, fast network connections make it possible (although sometimes unapproved) to freely download or upload broadcast video content.

Programme producers - i.e. the people who make the content, the performers, musicians, writers, etc. - are understandably worried that digital technology makes it trivially easy to access and distribute their work - often without any payment. This situation presents real problems for them. Good quality television programmes are expensive to make and, even where producers are well paid by the broadcaster who commissions their programmes, they are often dependent on sales of this content in secondary markets (DVD and Blu-ray sales, repeat showings on other channels, and overseas sales) to cover the costs of production (and hopefully make a profit).

Broadcasters are not immune to these concerns either. Yes, the licence fee (for the BBC) and advertising (for other broadcasters with public service obligations) pays for most public service television in the UK, but all broadcasters benefit from the income they obtain from secondary sales of the content they produce 'in-house' (or which they 'co-fund'). Consumers also stand to lose as, without this income, the range and quality of the content available (on free-to-air channels) would inevitably suffer.

Broadcasters could have tried to take a 'heavy-handed' approach to this problem. They could have argued to encrypt all programmes broadcast in a digital format, they could have only distributed services on those platforms which provide extensive controls on the ability to record and distribute content, and they could even have tried to restrict the ability of consumers to watch personal recordings multiple times (other than for legally permissible purposes such as study or reporting). In short, broadcasters could have tried to implement a full DRM system for both standard and high definition content. However, and just to be clear, we have absolutely no intention of doing this.

Instead, and in the specific case of the new Freeview HD platform, broadcasters have looked at the content management controls which exist on all other broadcast HD platforms in the UK. Currently all of these other platforms limit the copying and distribution of HD content in one way or another. However, broadcasters have also looked forward, to make sure that the proposed system allows for things like: the networking of media recorders, displays and servers within consumers' own homes and the transfer of HD content from domestic recorders to personal HD media players.

Overall, we believe the proposed system takes a highly pragmatic approach to content management - which offers consumers more flexibility to view and use content than is available on any other UK platform whilst at the same time protecting the legitimate concerns of rights holders.

The key features of this system are:

• all video and audio content is broadcast unencrypted;
• content management only applies to HD recordings (there is no impact on standard definition recording or on existing Freeview recorders);
• time-shifted viewing of recorded HD content is always possible;
• at least one 'archive' HD copy on a removable device is always allowed;
• networked distribution and viewing of HD content in the home is allowed; and
• the system doesn't even prevent the uploading of standard definition copies of HD content to the internet (although it should be noted that for most content and most applications this may not be permissible under UK copyright law).

Indeed, the proposed Freeview HD content management approach is so 'light-touch' that some have argued that it is not worth having. But, this misses a key point - almost any copy protection system can be circumvented (if you put enough effort into it) - and that it is never going to be possible to prevent the determined pirate from lifting content. However, it is still really important to make sure that the unapproved copying and internet distribution of high value broadcast content doesn't become so easy that people don't think twice about doing it.

The proposed system is designed to make sure that the vast majority of consumers (those who buy and use standard products without modification) can watch, record and move Freeview HD programmes between their own devices without ever knowing there is any content management present (like most people don't even know that content on DVDs is encrypted). At the same time, it provides just enough protection to prevent the casual and incremental erosion of the value of HD broadcast content.

We expect the consultation will attract a lot of interest, particularly from those who believe that any form of content management is philosophically a bad thing, and also from the Open Source community who may still fear that this will be more restrictive than it will actually turn out to be for them. And I completely understand that point of view; I just hope that these communities can understand our position too; that we want to deliver the service which enables more viewers across the UK to enjoy high definition content as soon as possible.

We welcome all further input to Ofcom on this matter and hope that any responses can be informed by the significant additional detail provided in our response to Ofcom's letter that initiated the consultation, and to the consultation itself.

It is now up to Ofcom to decide if the system gets the balance right between protecting the interests of consumers and the interests of broadcast rights holders.

Graham Plumb is Head of Distribution Technology, BBC.

This isn't the time to further discuss the DRM debate, or speculate on the relative merits of copy protection but I do want to re-state the BBC's position, and correct some of the inaccuracies in that piece.

The BBC does get caught up in this debate from time to time. The BBC is a content producer, a licensee, and a distributor and we have a commitment to make our content as widely available and accessible as we possibly can to our audiences. We also want to be able to secure a proportion of high-value content from external sources to ensure our channels remain varied and attractive to licence fee payers.

As I stated in my last post, this includes our commitment to launching an HD service on Freeview, which creates both technical and licensing complexities. We believe we have come up with a solution to this challenge.

Without wanting to negate Cory's contribution to this debate, he got a number of major points wrong in his analysis and in particular there are five key areas that need clear correction.

1) DVB CPCM "fell apart after years of acrimonious discussion"

No. This is an agreed standard that is now available to the marketplace (though completely unconnected to this debate).

2) The BBC's proposals will "freeze out" British entrepreneurs, "increase the cost" of HDTV in the UK, "limiting competition"

We are working on the standard with the UK's Digital Television Group (DTG). The DTG's purpose is to agree standards with the consumer electronics sector. Consumer electronics companies generally operate in global markets, and by nature, shared standards mean a level playing field for all in the sector. Further, the fact that you have a properly certified standard through a respected body means consumers have the assurance that the product will work, as well as a shared brand to promote the standard (in this case Freeview HD) - which creates scale. This is good for consumers, and is not just a point of view: it's proven in the case of Freeview and virtually any other market where economies of scale exist.

3) We make the consumer electronics market "subject to the whims of the DTLA" in effect, sidelining Ofcom.

This is not how the DTLA works and is a misrepresentation of the DTLA's role in this process. The DTLA is responding to our requirements - not vice versa. With access to its technology, consumers will be able to share high definition content across home networks. With the consultation that is going through Ofcom, it stretches credibility to suggest that they are being sidelined in this process.

4) We "create a mountain of e-waste" and "break existing equipment"

As I stated in my previous post, this is simply incorrect. Standard definition outputs from HD receivers will be unaffected, so existing DVD and VHS recorders can be used to record all HD programmes in standard definition. SD Freeview boxes remain completely unaffected, the SD signal won't change. This is about new Freeview HD devices. Note that DAB radios, mobile phones, and TV remote controls will also (happily) remain unaffected.

5) The BBC's "cosy negotiation" with rightholders and "secretive consultations" amounts to us neglecting our responsibilities and a desire to slip this process through quietly

This point we take most seriously. Above all else, we are a public organisation funded by the Licence Fee and have committed ourselves to greater transparency and openness because we believe that this is an obligation we have to our audience.

The fact is that discussions with both the DTG and Ofcom about how we solve this issue have been ongoing for months. We have consulted a wide range of stakeholders, and haven't tabled these proposals lightly. Further, we sent Ofcom a formal letter with every intention to undertake this open, public consultation. None of these actions demonstrate an attempt to conceal our intentions.

Perhaps Cory does know all this, but is just unhappy that we won't fight for his cause. However our focus is not to champion causes - it's meeting our public service remit which means serving our many audiences as best, as fairly, and as openly as we can.

Graham Plumb is Head of Distribution Technology, BBC.

First of all, as we have already said publicly, no existing Freeview boxes will be affected by this whatsoever. So don't think that your current Freeview box is suddenly going to go off because that's not the case.

Secondly, and this is the difficult bit, the BBC is committed to ensuring that public service content remains free to air i.e. unencrypted. But a form of content management is required to enable us to launch Freeview HD to audiences in early 2010, so we have a simple choice; either we wait for a resolution to the copy protection debate or go ahead and launch Freeview HD and give UK audiences who can't or don't want to pay for subscription services a way to get HD.

The BBC is tasked to offer content on as many different platforms as possible, and with the other PSB partners, want to deliver Freeview HD before the World Cup in 2010.

We've said before that we are specifically avoiding encryption of the broadcast signal to ensure that the public service content remains free to air. Content protection gives content producers comfort to give consumers early and free access to more content, without jeopardising future revenue streams.

Our preferred content management approach (Huffman's Look-up tables) as stated in our letter to Ofcom describes how using this method will allow us to deliver Freeview HD on time, with the least disruption to manufacturers, and the least restriction to audiences. But it is important to stress that the technology places no restrictions whatsoever on copying standard definition content - nor recording and viewing any HD content stored on a PVR. Even in its most restrictive state it still allows one HD copy to be made to Blu-ray and unrestricted copies in SD (and for most content there will be no restriction whatsoever on the number of Blu-ray copies permitted).

We want to make our content as accessible as possible but we have to balance this with the amount of content we have the ability to show. We could have said no to the content owners' request and delayed the launch of Freeview HD, but we had to balance this with the fact that respecting the request for content protection should result in more programmes and hence a better viewing experience for our audiences.

We are confident that Freeview HD will be great, and you'll always be able to copy programmes for personal use. Most people will probably never know that any form of content management exists since they'll not be prevented from the normal home enjoyment or recording on PVRs, DVD and Blu-Ray recorders.

The only actions that may be prevented, and only for certain programmes, are retransmitting the content in HD over the internet or, in some cases, from making more than one digital copy of the highest-value content onto Blu-ray.

Graham Plumb is Head of Distribution Technology, BBC FM&T

The plan is still to launch Freeview HD on December 2nd at the Winter Hill transmitter serving Manchester and Liverpool. The plan has always been to roll Freeview HD out around the country following switchover and Winter Hill was selected as the first achievable transmitter. There will need to be a retrospective upgrade of regions that have already switched.

The originally mentioned date of November came from the fact that Winter Hill starts to switch over in November. But it was quickly realised that the BBC's second Multiplex (Mux B) that is being converted for Freeview HD actually switches over on 2nd December at Winter Hill.

The March 2010 date in the Ofcom document is simply the last backstop date by when Winter Hill has to be on air to comply with our licence conditions. They've built in a contingency (as already happens in switchover licences).

The BBC has been working on plans to deliver early upgrades to some stations (serving high populations) that are late in the switchover programme and would otherwise have to wait long for Freeview HD.

One example is London that switches over in 2012 but we're planning to upgrade its Crystal Palace transmitter in December this year. There are another four main transmitters that we plan to upgrade in the first half of 2010. We can give the names and dates of these transmitters in a little while when plans are a bit firmer. We are also planning an upgrade to the Digital UK postcode database, which will tell viewers when they can expect their transmitter to be upgraded to Freeview HD.

Although everything is still on track against plans, there are significant technical and contractual challenges - not least to get transmission and domestic receiver equipment through design, development and delivery stages within an ambitious timescale. As with any major technical project, there is always a risk of slippage due to circumstances beyond anyone's control. However, there is industry-wide commitment to rolling out Freeview HD as soon as possible, and good progress is being made on all fronts.

Graham Plumb is the Head of Distribution Technology, BBC Operations Group.