FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Books, dissertations, abstract

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 3 | 4 || 6 | 7 |

«Hal Abelson Ken Ledeen Harry Lewis Upper Saddle River, NJ • Boston • Indianapolis • San Francisco New York • Toronto • Montreal • London ...»

-- [ Page 5 ] --

Imagine that the 1984 Supreme Court ruling in the Sony case had gone the other way, and the Court had declared Sony liable for copyright infringement for selling VCRs. Would VCRs have disappeared? Almost certainly not— consumers wanted them. More likely, the electronics industry would have cut a deal with the motion picture industry, giving them control over the capabilities of VCRs. VCRs would have become highly regulated machines, regulated to meet the demands of the motion picture industry. All new VCR features would need to be approved, and any feature the MPAA didn’t like would be kept off the market. The capabilities of the VCR would be under the control of the content industry.

That’s the kind of world we are living in today when it comes to digital media. If a company manufactures a product that processes digital information, it needs to be concerned about copyright infringement, even without the DMCA. This is a big concern, especially after Grokster. But suppose the device could not be used for copyright infringement. Even then, if the digital information is restricted by DRM, the product must abide by the terms of the DRM restrictions. Otherwise, that would be circumvention, so the product couldn’t be legally manufactured at all. The terms of the DRM restrictions


are completely at the whim of the content provider. Once Fortress Publishers installs DRM, they get to dictate the behavior of any device that accesses their material.

In the case of DVDs, DVD content is encrypted with an algorithm called the Content Scrambling System (CSS), developed by Matsushita and Toshiba and first introduced in 1996. As mentioned in Chapter 5, that algorithm was quickly broken—a textbook violation of Kerckhoffs’s Principle—and underground decryption programs are today readily found on the Internet. The censored six lines of text earlier in this chapter is one such program.

Although CSS is useless for realistic copy protection, it is invaluable as an enabler of anti-competitive technology regulation. Any company marketing a product that decrypts DVDs needs a license from the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA), an organization formed in 1999. The license conditions are determined by whatever the CCA decides. For example, all DVD players must obey “region coding,” which limits them to playing DVDs made for one part of the world only, and an individual player’s region can be changed no more than five times. Region coding has nothing to do with copyright. It is there to support a motion picture industry marketing strategy of releasing movies in different parts of the world at different times. The varied license restrictions include some that companies are not even permitted to see until after they have signed the license.

The Face of Technology Lock-in Suppose you are a company with an idea for an innovative DVD product.

Maybe it is a home entertainment system that lets people copy and store DVDs for later watching, and you have worked out a way to do this without encouraging copyright infringement. This is an actual product. Kaleidescape, the California start-up that makes it, was sued by the DVD CCA in 2004 for violating a provision of the CSS license that forces DVD players to be designed to work only when there is a physical disk present. In March 2007, a California court ruled in Kaleidescape’s favor, on the grounds that the license wasn’t clear enough, but the case is being appealed. In any case, the CCA can change the license at any time. The legal wrangling has kept the company under a cloud for three years. Another start-up working on a similar product at the same time folded when it failed to get venture funding, “in part due to the threat of legal action from the DVD CCA.” The DVD technology lock-in has been in place since 2000. A similar lockin is being implemented for high-definition cable TV. A campaign to extend the lock-in to all consumer media technology is being promoted in Washington as the broadcast flag initiative. And more trial balloons keep 218 BLOWN TO BITS being floated in the name of protecting copyright. A bill was introduced in Congress to ban home recording of satellite radio. NBC urged the Federal Communications Commission to force Internet service providers to filter all Internet traffic for copyright infringement (that is, to compel ISPs to check packets as they are passed around the Internet and to discard packets deemed to contain unauthorized material). In 2002, Congress considered a breathtakingly broad prohibition against any communications device that does not implement copyright control—a bill that had to be redrafted after it became apparent that the first draft would have banned heart pacemakers and hearing aids.

So, in the United States today, a technology company is free to invent a new garage-door opener without needing its design approved by the garagedoor makers. It can manufacture cheaper replacement toner cartridges without approval from the printer companies. It cannot, however, create new software applications that manipulate video from Hollywood movie DVDs without permission from the DVD CCA. It cannot in principle create any new product or service around DRM-restricted digital content without getting permission, often from the very people who might regard that new product as a competitive threat.

This is the regulatory posture at the present juncture in the copyright wars.

People can debate the merits of this position. Some say that the DMCA is necessary. Others claim that it has been largely ineffective in curtailing infringement, as the continuing calls for ever more severe copyright penalties demonstrate.

The anti-circumvention But whatever its merits, the anti-circumapproach is poisonous to vention approach is poisonous to the innothe innovation that drives vation that drives the digital age. It the digital age. hobbles the rapid deployment of new products and services that interoperate with existing infrastructure. The uncertain legal risks drive away the venture capital needed to bring innovations to market.

In essence, the DMCA has enlisted the force of criminal law in the service of the lock-in shenanigans invited Public Knowledge (publicknowledge. by DRM. It has introduced antiorg) is a Washington DC public- competitive regulation under the interest group that focuses on policy guise of copyright protection. By issues concerning digital information. outlawing technology for circumSee their “issues” and “policy” blogs venting DRM, the law has, in the to stay current on the latest happen- words of one critic, become a tool ings in Washington. for “circumventing competition.”


Copyright Koyaanisqatsi: Life Out of Balance 1982 marked the release of an astonishing film called Koyaanisqatsi. The title is a Hopi Indian word meaning “life out of balance.” The film, which has no dialogue or narration, barrages viewers with images at once hauntingly beautiful and deeply disturbing, images that juxtapose the world of nature with the world of cities. The relentless message is that technology is destroying our ability to live harmonious, balanced lives.

In the first decade of the twenty-first century, we inhabit a world of copyright koyaanisqatsi. Virtually every salvo in the copyright war, Congressional bill introduced, lawsuit filed, court ruling issued, or advocacy piece trumpeted, pays homage to the “traditional balance of copyright” and the need to preserve it. The truth is that the balance is gone, toppled in the digital explosion, which is likewise shattering the framework for any civil consensus over the disposition of information. The balance is gone for good reason.

Copyright (at least in the United States) is supposedly a deal the government strikes between the creator of a work and the public. The creator gets limited monopoly control over the work, for limited times, which provides the opportunity to benefit commercially. The public gets the benefit of having the work, and also gets to use it without restriction after the monopoly has expired. The parameters of the deal have evolved over the years, generally in the direction of a stronger monopoly. Under the first U.S. copyright law, enacted in 1790, copyright lasted a maximum of 28 years. Today, it lasts until 70 years after the author’s death. In principle, however, it’s still a deal.

It is an enormously complex deal, and it is easy see why. Today’s copyright law is the outcome of 200 years of wrangling, negotiating, and compromising. The first copyright statute was printed in its entirety in two newspaper columns of the Columbian Centinel, shown in Figure 6.3. As the enlarged text insert shows, the law


covered only maps, charts, and books, and granted exclusive rights Digital Copyright by Jessica Litman to “print, reprint, publish, or vend.” (Prometheus Books, 2001) recounts The period of copyright was 14 the evolution of U.S. copyright law years (with a 14-year renewal). as a series of negotiated comproToday’s statute runs to more than mises. The Citizen Media Law Project 200 pages. It’s a Byzantine stew (www.citmedialaw.org) offers usepeppered with exceptions, qualifi- ful information to online publishcations, and arcane provisions. You ers—not just about copyright, but can’t make a public performance of other legal matters as well.

a musical work unless you’re an 220 BLOWN TO BITS agricultural society at an agricultural fair. You can’t freely copy written works, but you can if you’re an association for the blind and you’re making an edition of the work in Braille (but not if the work is a standardized test).

A radio station can’t broadcast a recording without a license from the music publisher, but it doesn’t need a license from the record company—but that’s only if it’s an analog broadcast. For digital satellite radio, you need licenses from both (but there are exceptions).

Harvard University Library.

FIGURE 6.3 The first U.

S. copyright law—“An Act for the Encouragement of Learning.” It was printed as the first two columns of the July 17, 1790 edition of the Columbian Centinel. Note George Washington’s signature on the bill at the bottom of the second column.

It is a law written for specialists, not for ordinary people. Even ordinary lawyers have trouble interpreting it. But that never mattered, because the copyright deal never was about ordinary people. The so-called “copyright balance” was largely a balancing act among competing business interests. The


evolution of copyright law has been a story of the relevant players sitting down at the table and working things out, with Congress generally following suit. Ordinary people were not involved, because ordinary people had no real ability to publish, and they had nothing to bring to the table.

Late to the Table The digital explosion has changed all that by making it easy for anyone to copy and distribute information on a world-wide scale. We can all be publishers now. The public is now a party to the copyright deal—but the game has been going on for 200 years, and the hands were dealt long ago.

When people come to the table with their new publishing power, expecting to take full advantage of information technology, they find that there are possibilities that seem attractive, easy, and natural, but for which the public’s rights have already been “balanced” away. Among the lost opportunities are copying a DVD to a portable player, making the video clip equivalent of an audio mixtape, placing a favorite cartoon or a favorite song on a Facebook page, or adding your own creative input to a work of art you love and sharing that with the world.

People resent it when acts like these are denounced as theft and piracy. As a contributor to a computer bulletin board quipped, “My first-grade teacher told me I should share, and now they’re telling me it’s illegal.”


TO Of course, you can easily copy CDs to your computer hard drive: There are dozens of software packages designed to do just that, and millions of people do it regularly. Yet the legal issues in CD copying are both murky and confusing—a striking example of the mismatch of copyright law and public understanding.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 3 | 4 || 6 | 7 |

Similar works:

«¨˙ Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.14, NO.1 2006, c TUBITAK Computational Sciences: At the Intersection of Science and Engineering–Case Study for Academic and Research Programs ˙ Menas KAFATOS, Peter BECKER, Zafer BOYBEYI School of Computational Sciences, George Mason Univesrity Fairfax, VA 22039, U.S.A. e-mil: mkafatos@gmu.edu Computational Sciences in the 21 st Century 1. Computational Science can be simply defined as the performance of science using computers. However, this elementary...»

«LATVIJAS UNIVERSITĀTES RAKSTI 700. SĒJUMS Pedagoģija un skolotāju izglītība SCIENTIFIC PAPERS UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA VOLUME 700 Pedagogy and Teachers’ Education SCIENTIFIC PAPERS UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA VOLUME 700 Pedagogy and Teachers’ Education LATVIJAS UNVERSITĀTE LATVIJAS UNIVERSITĀTES RAKSTI 700. SĒJUMS Pedagoģija un skolotāju izglītība LATVIJAS UNVERSITĀTE UDK 37(082) Pe 100 Galvenā redaktore prof. Dr. habil. paed. Irēna Žogla Galvenās redaktores vietniece prof. Dr....»

«2 012 ANNUAL REPORT cubic corporation | $125 Cubic Corporation S&P 500 Index $100 Peer Group Index $75 $50 STOck PERfORmANcE gRAPh fOR cUbic cORPORATiON the chart assumes that $100 was invested on october 1, 2007 in each of cubic corporation, the s&p 500 index and the peer group index, and compares the cumulative shareholder return on investment as of september 30th, of each of the following 5 years. the return on investment represents the change in the fiscal year-end stock price plus...»

«SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, DC 20549 FORM 10-K [√] Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the fiscal year ended: December 31, 2002 [] Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Commission file number: 0-6511 O. I. CORPORATION (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Oklahoma 73-0728053 (State of Incorporation) (IRS Employer Identification No.) 151 Graham Road, Box...»

«Open End Zertifikat auf den Emirates Property & Infrastructure TR Index Partizipieren an den Großprojekten in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Katar und Kuwait Inhalt Die Emirate im Aufwind – Bauboom ohne Grenzen? 03 Der Emirates Property & Infrastructure TR zieht an Investmentchance aus Tausend und einer Nacht? 04 Langfristig hoher Ölpreis 05 Sehr stark wachsende Einwohnerzahl 06 Aktuelle Großprojekte in der Golfregion Emirates Property & Infrastructure TR Index 08 Anforderungen an die Unternehmen 09...»

«FA 170 / June 1997 SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS AND THE INCIDENCE OF FIRE Federal Emergency Management Agency United States Fire Administration National Fire Data Center SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS AND THE INCIDENCE OF FIRE June, 1997 Federal Emergency Management Agency United States Fire Administration National Fire Data Center FA 170 / June 1997 This publication was produced under contract EMW-95-C-4717 by TriData Corporation for the United States Fire Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency....»

«SUMMARIES OF EU COURT DECISIONS RELATING TO DATA PROTECTION 2000-2015 PREPARED BY LARAINE LAUDATI OLAF DATA PROTECTION OFFICER 28 JANUARY 2016 10TH EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION DAY Introduction In honour of the celebration of the Tenth European Data Protection Day on 28 January 2016, I have prepared this document in order to help OLAF management, investigators, and other staff to have easy access to the judgments of the European Union courts concerning data protection. The judgments span a period...»

«Epitaxial Growth of Ge-Sb-Te based Phase Change Materials D I S S E R TAT I O N zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat) im Fach Physik eingereicht an der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät I Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin von M.Sc, M.Tech Karthick Perumal Präsident der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin: Prof. Dr. Jan-Hendrik Olbertz Dekan der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät I: Prof. Stefan Hecht PhD Gutachter: 1. Prof. Dr. Henning...»

«Frank Scholzen Vereinigte Arabische Emirate Erfahrungsbericht Einleitung In dem vorliegenden Erfahrungsbericht möchte ich allen Interessierten einen Einblick in meine Studienzeit in den Vereinigten Arabischen Emiraten geben. Dabei war es mir besonders wichtig einen lebendigen Bericht zu schreiben, der eine Stadt und ein Land zeigt, die bei uns in Europa mit ihren Eigenarten doch recht unbekannt sind. Daher führe ich zunächst ein wenig in das Umfeld selber ein. „Eine Welt voller...»

«Terms and Conditions • for Suncorp Bank Accounts • for Continuing Credit Accounts Effective Date: 11 May 2016 Suncorp-Metway Ltd ABN 66 010 831 722 AFSL 229882 Australian Credit Licence 229882 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1.1 About this Document 1.2 Acceptance of Terms and Conditions 1.3 Definitions and Interpretation 1.3.1 Reading Down and Severance Clauses 1.4 More Information 1.5 Privacy Statement 1.6 Interception and recording of communications 1.7 Problems and Complaints 1.8...»

<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.book.dislib.info - Free e-library - Books, dissertations, abstract

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.