Please to be havink no TURDs!
The BBC are in an ideal position to realise that DRM does not, and cannot ever work.
The reason for this is simple - in encryption terms, the attacker and intended recipient are the same individual.
Ergo, the attacker knows everything about the message and can ALWAYS break the encryption in a very short period of time.
Which leads to the conclusion that DRM is worse than useless - it acheives two things:
1) Costs the supplier money.
2) Irritates legitimate users as they are forced into a particular player and/or decryption system.
There are only two viable models for this kind of distribution:
1) Watermarking with unique identifier (eg TV licence number)
This means that you will always know where a given copy came from.
There are several watermarking techniques which are extremely difficult to remove and even persist in printed copy.
By *not* restricting the legal use of the copy, the legal user doesn't have any reason to bother trying to remove it.
The downside is that peer-to-peer become impossible as every user needs a personalised copy.
2) Rely on the honour system. This works surprisingly well.