When you discuss “market distortion”, I think you should be very careful to specify that you’re referring to the market distortion of requiring proprietary on a single platform - ie the Microsoft stack. (Non-proprietary standards allow anyone to create software for that format, thus allowing all platforms to equally compete).

I mention this, because the BBC also has critics who talk about “market distortion” in the sense that, by releasing programming for free, funded by a license fee, they are devaluing the commercial market of programming funded directly or through advertising. This is the argument sometimes levelled at the BBC generally, and specifically in the non-DRM Beethoven downloads case. The ORG should either not have a position on this issue (it’s a political one), or should be in favour of a public service broadcaster with the ability to fund content that can be openly licensed.