Too many digital commentators and bloggers do not engage with these issues in any productive way.
Attack articles do not reform political procedures, substantive policy suggestions do.
The BBC quite obviously, and validly, worries that open use of its content will put it at a competitive disadvantage. They can foresee International producers withdrawing content from its platforms if its distribution channels are not duly protected. That does not seem like an unfair concern.
There might be space to argue that the BBC is being short-sighted. That is to say, that while we understand its concerns on this issue, the introduction of DRM will negatively affects its longer term success. That is to say, the success of the BBC has been prefaced on the wide distribution of its original content around the world. In fact, it wouldn't be too strong to say the BBC's reputation rests on the free, worldwide distribution of its news programming -- today this has been inherited by its news website.
We might press the concern that locking all of its content behind DRM technology will harm the wide distribution of its content, hurting awareness of its international brand.
We ask the BBC to consider the following example: fears of recording radio programming have existed since the early 20th Century. If the BBC, cracked down on its distribution in response to those issues in the 50s-, we believe the BBC wouldn't be the worldwide powerhouse it is now.
Locking up its content is not in the long term interests of the BBC brand, esp. as the developing world -- China, Brazil, Russia -- start looking online for reliable programming.
Therefore, we call on the BBC to initiate a review into the implications of its policy decision, and its effect on international brand awareness.
This isn't my argument, but at least it understands, appreciates, and responds to their economic concerns.