U.K. Group Wants DRM'd Media Labeled 244
peterfa writes "The BBC reports that the U.K. 'All Party Parliamentary Internet Group' wants companies to label their DRMed products. Consumers will see a label on the product before they buy. The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media, and what they can and cannot do. This is in response to Sony BMG and their virus-like DRM. The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system."
go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder what their response will be to the request to label their products and how their DRMed, and make it "crystal clear" (nice irony) to the consumers. I propose they go even further.
I've encountered a couple of CDs which had some message to the effect, "while every attempt has been made to ensure an enjoyable experience, blah, blah, blah, ... we cannot guarantee this disc
will play on every and all of your devices." And, all of those
(btw, the print is so small, it's unreadable) actually did play
on my computer, and not in my car, and I had to go through a few
hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".
Since they are knowingly creating a corrupt version of what is or should be a standard format (compact disc), it should be their responsibility to allow the consumer to know positively for sure what devices and manufacturers their product will be guaranteed to play on. This, in addition to the clear and explicit list of how the tracks may be copied, .... all of the other suggestions in the
article.
From the article: "The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system." If that's the case, and it does appear that's the industry's direction, they're changing the rules as they previously existed, even more reason they should list the constraints and restrictions of their product. By visual inspection alone, it is impossible to look at a CD and know whether it is of the "corrupt" ilk.
Does it seem ironic there are laws requiring "explicit lyrics" warnings on CDs, and not information that explains whether or not you can even play the damn things?
(would have posted this a moment sooner, took me a second to find the "Read More..." link. ;-) )
Re:go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:go even further (Score:2)
All carefully explained to the floor walkers trying to keep the kids from sticking the latest sample of the noise they call music into their baggy pants. It of course goes in one ear and out the other as the
Re:go even further (Score:4, Funny)
Don't forget, boys and girls, that when you are dealing with the UK retail trade, the phrase "I'll call in the Trading Standards people" is the magic spell that converts "Sorrimate, not our problem" into "Here is your money back, sir." I have seen this demonstrated on at least one occasion.
Re:go even further (Score:2, Interesting)
Believe it or not I've done this when I wanted to return a copy of Windows XP. It wouldn't load on my system (some sort of motherboard problem).
Anyone else had such luck?
Re:go even further (Score:2)
Threats of the FTC work similarly well in the US, at least in my experience. I've never once had to make good on the threat, and I've no idea how much they'd actually care, but seems no one wants to deal with them. Had to do that once myself when a cell-phone company tried to bill me for over $500 in a month on "roaming", when I'd not used the phone anywhere other then the places I normally did. Called them up, had a few people give me the runaround, got to a supervisor, mentioned "Federal Trade Commission"
Re:go even further (Score:5, Funny)
Re:go even further (Score:2)
Also, I don't know about you, but I never see "CD's" above the music section. It's usually just a marker specifying the genre of the music on that rack.
Re:go even further (Score:4, Interesting)
I think that the DRM sticker would be more welcomed on the face of the CDs than the Explicit Lyrics one, since DRM, as proven by Sony, can be much more damaging to the consumer than swearing in songs.
In many cases, it is actually in the record label's interest to post the "Tipper Tag" (Explicit lyrics label) because it will, quite frequently, boost sales.
The DRM warning, on the other hand, will most likely cut sales, ergo it is not in the label's interest.
Re:go even further (Score:3, Funny)
The DRM warning, on the other hand, will most likely cut sales, ergo it is not in the label's interest.
It seems the solution is simple. Government should mandate that the DRM label contain profanity of the manufacturer's choice before the word "DRM".
Re:Combine DRM-ed and Explicit Language warnings (Score:2)
One of these days all this is going to get so bad that the courts will have to act... hopefully the RIAA and MPAA lobyists don't get more laws that would prevent that from hapening passed.
Re:go even further (Score:2)
The best way to do that would be, IMO, Label all devices capable of playing DRM'd content.... with similar stickers.
Re:go even further (Score:2, Informative)
Especially considering that your DRM might not be compatible with my DRM.
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
I propose the same system for DRM's media. Not less than one third of the front of the box should carry a warning saying one of these things:
Go the opposite way! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Go the opposite way! (Score:4, Informative)
Wouldn't it be better to do just the opposite: "This media is free from DRM" or "Play it anywhere anyhow"?
That exists. It's the old compact disc logo that you don't see on these DRM'd albums. That one already went too court too, the result being that CDs that didn't accurately conform to the standard aren't allowed to use the logo. There was even a Slashdot article [slashdot.org] at the time (beginning of 2002).
The trouble is that the logo doesn't have high enough brand recognition - people will buy silver disks in jewel cases and expect them to work the same as proper compact discs.
Anyway, now that you know, only buy genuine CD-DA disks! Look for the logo!
-- Steve
Re:go even further (Score:5, Insightful)
I think perhaps phrases like "not fit for the purpose for which it was bought" may have been helpful, along with "I'll see what trading standards has to say about that then" if that doesn't work.
It's being sold as an audio CD. You have a reasonable expectation that it will work in your audio CD player(s). If it doesn't, then as far as I'm concerned either the CD or the player(s) is faulty. Assuming your player(s) work(s) with other CDs, the implication would be that it's the CD that's faulty. Therefore, you're entitled to a refund, end of story.
I don't buy very many CDs anymore, but if that happened to me and the store refused to accept the return, I'd definitely be contacting trading standards.
Re:go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, right from the beginning, Philips has made a stand that these copy protected CD's are never sold with the 'CD-Compact Disc [wikimedia.org]' label on it, since they do not comply with the Red Book standard Sony and Philips published back in 1982.
So if you're shopping for a CD and the logo is not on it, it's a good signal to read a the small print. In my experience, you'll often find copyright notices for the copyprotection on there somewhere.
However, it seems to me that right from the beginning this stuff has gone the wrong way. Hackers and pirates are way more inventive that 'regular' consumers, so any copy protection will be cracked (after all, if it was IMPOSSIBLE to get the audio off there, it would never sell), while Joe Average will never get it to play on his car stereo.
I rip all my CD's to my harddisk, since I like variation, and a big harddrive with WinAmp [winamp.com] is a much better CD-changer than a real CD-changer ever will be. I have over time bought several DRM'ed CD's, and none of them have EVER given me much trouble ripping them. Most work was one that required the 'black marker on the outer ring' [interesting-people.org] trick.
My two cents...
Re:go even further (Score:5, Informative)
It's on the rack with the other audio CDs, in a record store. You therefore have a reasonable expectation that it should play.
Despite any labelling, if you didn't notice the labelling (and many copy-controlled discs in the UK - including all of the sample ones I have from Sony BMG UK containing XCP "Aurora" - are NOT labelled as such in any way, other than the absence of the Compact Disc(TM) logo, which also happens on a huge variety of unprotected audio CDs as well), or if you noticed the labelling and queried the retailer and they said it ought to play, then you can return it under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) on the grounds that it's not fit for purpose.
They cannot refuse a refund on the grounds that it has been opened. (After all, you're not psychic, you don't know it was faulty until you try to play it, and it's going to be mighty difficult to do that without opening the case.)
They can offer a refund or replacement - at YOUR option. (They can only refuse one and offer the other if it's highly disproportionate, but no CD costs even remotely enough to bring that argument into play.) Obviously, choose the refund, as of course any replacement would be very likely to be protected as well, and would be no better than the first.
It's a criminal offence to display a sign saying "No Refunds", or to have (and stick to) a no refunds policy.
If you get any problems, threaten to call Trading Standards, and if they persist, do so.
Re:go even further (Score:4, Informative)
Ah, but they get around this by showing the CD "Text" logo... when they print it on the disk, it, to all intents and purposes, looks just like a normal CD logo, but you have to look very closely to see it's really the CD text one... so these disks have a CD logo on them, but they're not audio CDs, they're "text" CDs...
"Content Industry": are you listening? (Score:2)
Dead on. Lost in the **AA's shrieking is a painful truth:
Even the hypothetical airtight DRM + broadcast flag + kitchen sink scheme has to allow the music to play at some point. That crippled DRMy CD player is at some point going to send an audible signal down a wire to a speaker. There it can be picked up. Uber-Pirate.com can burn their master, DRM-free disc there if they have to. And proceed with business as usual.
The casual copying
Re:"Content Industry": are you listening? (Score:2)
If I buy a CD then the people involved in producing that item (artist, record company, CD shop, etc) will all gain financially from the purchase. If I take a copy of the CD from a friend, or download it from the internet then no one has gained financially (except presumably me, because I've not forked out hard-earned wedge for it!).
There is a financial loss from such behaviours and this could easily be construed as "harm" if it is you that is no
Re:Look for the logo (Score:5, Insightful)
I look for the Philips Compact Disc logo. If it's missing, then the product may be incompatible. I wish more people refused to buy stuff without the logo. It would enforce a standard upon the industry. Use the logo or don't sell.
The logo use requires technical standards to be met. When the standards are met, then it should play with no issues an any compliant device.
Look for the logo. Get the clerk to help you look.
Re:Look for the logo (Score:2)
Sad thing is, this was the standard for a long time! But I have the impression big corporations very happy with standards, as it enables the consumers to buy media players from other producers as well, etc. etc. Think the fuss M$ makes about OpenDocument, java, etc. It's a general trend, but the smaller corporations do win from standards, so there is some hope.
CD specific, there isn't much change the big producers will go back to the old standard, as it's so
Hmm, what to name that program... (Score:2)
Well I've got a great name for the effort - "Plays For Sure"!
And sell it under a misleading, standard name... (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortuately that's not disproportionate by their own standards: There are countries where (for several years already) one could not go (or take one's kids!) to the movies without being exposed to media companies' threats of detention and rape [heise.de].
Re:go even further (Score:3, Insightful)
Interestingly, CDs (and other digital media) are exempt from the returnability requirements of a few laws (e.g. the Distance Selling Regulations, which require you to be able to return within 28 days for a full refund just about anything you buy online or via mail order) because of the possibility that you can copy them. Clearly this exclusion should not be extended to DRM-laden discs.
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand, no goods are exempted from the Sa
Re:go even further (Score:3, Informative)
If you buy something you reasonably expect is a CD, then try to play it in your standards-compliant cd-player in your car, and it fails. Then the product is faulty. It's unfit for the purpose for which it was bougth, and for
Re:go even further (Score:2)
As it is now, they want the consumer to take a gamble on
Re:go even further (Score:2)
Re:go even further (Score:2)
Don't worry so much, Microsoft has taken care of the problem. There is a label on music players you should look for, it says PLAYS FOR SURE, and if you buy music from a PLAYS FOR SURE store, then it plays for sure. Until you copy it to another computer the wrong way. Or onto another MP3 player. Or hold your nose wrong. Or you don't download their license file. Or your hard drive crash
It's about time. (Score:2)
Re:It's about time. (Score:2)
Yep: the industry can sell its content in unhelpful forms if it wants, but it should be required to be up-front with the public about what they are (and aren't) buying.
This response was pretty much exactly what I proposed in my own submission to the Gowers Review, so it's nice to know that others thought it was reasonable too.
Labelling suggestions... (Score:3, Interesting)
2. "Statutory warning: DRM is injurious to your sense of fair-play".
etc... and meanwhile:
Why not label devices and products that support DRM? That would be a more effective step to 'inform' consunmers, one would've thought...
-
Re:Labelling suggestions... (Score:2)
Hmmm... maybe I'll just print a bunch of these up...
Crack information (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Crack information (Score:2)
Re:Crack information (Score:2)
Another key combo that they will outlaw - just like CTRL-C!
Seriously, I bought Meds from Placebo... no BY Placebo, and only noticed afterwards that it has some DRM on it. Without Autorun, it's completely useless because as long as you don't execute what's in the data track, you can rip the whole album to mp3 without the slightest problems.
There are lots of postings on the net about that album, and most don't fail to mention that "I cant rip it to play on my IPod".
Re:Crack information (Score:2)
Demand a refund. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything with DRM should have a message on it similar to the "WARNING: SMOKING KILLS" warning. I don't want a small label I have to search for - it should be big, clear, and standardised. The exact same logo/warning message should appear on every product. Something like "Warning: This product uses Digital Rights/Restrictions Management" would do the job.
Anyway, if anyone accidentally buys a product with DRM, they should be entitled to a refund. It is for all intents and purposes a defect, if you thought the product you were buying was a movie/music that you could use however you like.
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:3, Insightful)
Except you can't. Re-read the copyright disclaimer when you play a DVD. By buying it, you have paid for the right to watch it, that is all. Even then you can only watch it in certain circumstances (less than 20 of you, not on an oil rig or in a pub etc...). The DVD disc may be be yours to do with what you want, but the data on it is not, and never has been. DRM is sim
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:5, Insightful)
Whatever conditions appear when you play the disc are not part of your agreement to buy the disc. You bougth one copy of the DVD, you own it. No question about it.
It's still true that you cannot do everything you migth like with it. But that's because of copyrigth-law, and not because of any legal-sounding bullshit on the disc itself.
Copyrigth-law prevents you from, among other things perform the work in public and make new copies of the work.
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:2)
There is a distinction between the disk and it's content. You own the disk, but you license the content. You are free to do whatever you wish with the disk because you own it, but you cannot use the disk to redistributed the content because you don't own it.
True, there is not license agreement when you buy a DVD, but there isn't a transfer of ownership agreement for the disk (or anything you buy in a high street shop for that matter). These th
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:2)
You're confused. Really. Or if you're not, you word yourself extremely poorly.
The main thing you have to realize is that there's a difference between owning one copy of a copyrigthed work, and owning the copyrigth.
You *do* own one copy of a copyrigthed work. You do not "license" it. We both agree that you do not own the copyrigth.
Unless by "license" you mean: "own, but usage is restricted by copyrigth law", which is a very strange way to define license.
I stand by what I said: You
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:2)
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:2)
Re:Demand a refund. (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow! I can't remember how long it's been since I've heard from someone who has never bought a single DVD (CSS).
Or any digital audio recorders (SCMS).
Never owned any videogames.
Doesn't subscribe to digital cable or satellite TV...
etc.
label (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd suggest a color coded advisory system.
Whoopsiedoodles (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Whoopsiedoodles (Score:2)
IFPI [ifpi.org], I believe. Locally in Norway we have TONO [www.tono.no] as well.
Nice idea (Score:5, Insightful)
This reminds me of a prediction I made about the iTMS - I think a lot of people are OK with paying $.99 per song *now*, but in a few years when perhaps they've gone through a couple more computers, and the iPod isn't as in-style as it is now, there will be a backlash of customers realizing that they paid for something they cannot easily use on "other" players (the burn-to-CD-and-rerip technique notwithstanding). I can visualize a similar diffculty with these crippled CDs - they will want to play them in a laptop or similar device that won't handle the DRM gracefully, and only then will they discover they paid for something only to find that it doesn't provide the value expected. It makes sense to notify the customer of what they are buying up front, rather than hiding it and hoping they never notice (obviously, some never will).
But, as my sister told me when we discussed this, they will likely chalk it up to "technology has moved on" and view it the same way they view VHS as not playing in DVD players, and simply rebuy the same movie/album, again. I sure hope that doesn't become the mainstream attitude - it will give the record companies and movie studios yet-another-reason to implement DRM any chance they get.
Or tapes (Score:4, Interesting)
Another even closer example is cassette tapes, many people had huge collections when the switch to CD's was made...
I'm not sure either how consumers will respond to the natural evolution of digital music. With ITMS stuff they would still be able to play it on a computer even if a newer kind of non-iPod came along that people really wanted, so in a way it's not as lost as tapes were after players were really phased out.
The question I have though is what would really come along that would be compelling enough to supplant the iPod for the market at large? The iPod grew because you could rip CD's and easily get them on your iPod where they are more accessible... and now the library grows through ITMS purchases (for many people, not all). So that would indicate that in the future the iPod lockin effect Apple seeks would indeed grab hold as many people's whole music libraries are digital now and they'd be more likley to buy a player that would work with it, probably a lot more likley. Between tapes and CD's you had the change to random access, but what is compelling about a change from one digital format to another? With video you can go with quality but with audio a lot of people really can't tell if an MP3 is better or worse than FLAC and so efforts for improved digital audio formats are stillborn, like SACD.
Once in digital form I don't see any given player offering so much of an advantage that it overcomes the simple ability to use all the music you already have. The only way for anyone to break Apple's hold on the market is to start selling all music in MP3's, then that allows people to choose whatever player they like and possibly have even more players, some of them more specialized. But the music industry itself is steadfast in actions that ensure Apple will remain at the helm - and they've just given Apple a few more years by contract to work on pulling the noose tighter.
Perhaps if eMusic really takes off we'd see more record companies finally wake up and sell MP3's (like Werkshop). If enough major labels did that it would free up the logjamm, and then Apple could release an official version of JHymn to unlock all the ITMS music so it would just be straight-up AAC.
Re:Nice idea (Score:2, Interesting)
Which is why I stopped buying from iTunes once JHymn stopped working (although apparently you can install iTunes 5, open a new account, never upgrade the software, and JHymn will still work).
Hmmm...maybe I should just try that.
Re:Nice idea (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, that works. Older iTunes versions downloadable here [oldapps.com]. I went back to iTunes 4.9 myself, I think the Search features went downhill in iTunes 5 and later (e.g. search for Composer disappeared).
JP
Re:Nice idea (Score:2, Interesting)
Just my 2p, but I found that when you actually explain what DRM is and how it restricts bought music content to a new us
Re:Nice idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Take a lesson from our Canadian friends... (Score:4, Funny)
Reminds me... (Score:2)
Re:Reminds me... (Score:2)
Re:Reminds me... (Score:2, Funny)
Evil geinus 101: Market it right (Score:2)
Yeah, I can see those assholes rubbing their hands together now... (petting white fluffy cat is optional)
Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right (Score:3, Insightful)
What's so cool about...
1. Rated R? Because it's what only adults can see.
2. Explicit Lyrics? Because it's how only adults can talk.
3. DRM? Because it's, um.. adults can, um...
I'm sure they'll try, though.
Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right (Score:5, Funny)
"my juice is flowin' like a man with a mission / my words are blowing your minds into a submission /
you can't copy my style 'cuz you ain't an original / DRM on my record 'cuz my lyrics aren't replaceable"
Of course, there are reason why I am not a rapper... or a poet...
Three-Pronged Evaluation (Score:5, Interesting)
I thought about this idea some time ago, and came up with a system where the media's friendliness was measured according to three aspects:
The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter duplication, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter redistribution, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
Usage of the media should not be monitored, metered, or compromise the user's privacy or usage habits in any other way, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such monitoring.
Each aspect would represent one leg of an iconic triangle. The triangle logo (and sub-permutations thereof) would be trademarked so it could only lawfully be used by the authority performing the evaluations. So all you'd have to do to know which media were safe would be to look for a complete triangle.
Schwab
Re:Three-Pronged Evaluation (Score:3, Interesting)
You have to see it from their POV too. Campaigning for total freedom to distribute music as you see fit will get you nowhere. Campaigning for restrictions on fair use is totally fine, but under no condition is sharing your CD with 6000 people accr
Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:3, Insightful)
Notice, however, that genetically modified food is not labeled. That was accomplished by corrupting the U.S. government. Probably that will happen in the case of DRM, too.
Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:2)
There are many people who claim to be Republicans who are only angry.
It was definitely government corruption that the public was never allowed to participate in the dialogue about the genetic modification of food. Now perhaps 30% or more of food in the U.S. has bee
Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:2)
The reason it's difficult to distinguish between what you mean by genetically modified and not, is because the distinction is much less clear cut than you realise. This is what the "GMO argument" (as you put it) is trying to explain. There is much more of a sliding scale of how much technical interference is required to produce changes in an organisms genome than you acknowlege.
Personally I think most objections to GM food are pretty much luddism - I've looked
Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:2)
As for the use of DNA taken from other organisms, that's just the way it works. Like the way the
AllofMp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)
Now I just obtain unrestricted mp3's wherever I can eg AllofMp3.com. They say the return royalties to the artist, and that's good enough for me. I'm sure the RIAA etc.. are more than willing to sue if they think they have a case
I'll buy from the labels when they make media that's usefull to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Knowledge is power (Score:5, Interesting)
- Peter Lee, Disney executive [economist.com]
Re:Knowledge is power (Score:3, Interesting)
At least with ogg or even mp3 you have a chance of preserving your record collection. Still the best way to get around DRM is to record off free-to-air mu
Labal proposed (Score:2)
"It can induce heart disease, nerve breakdown, breakage of furniture such as chairs, and ultimate humiliation from friends, after the content within crashes you computer into miserable useless mess...."
Upholding the law? (Score:2)
"That's an exemption thwarted by DRM systems," she said. "The technologies are extending beyond the law they are supposed to uphold."
Uhh.. I was under the silly impression that it was the duty of the police and the courts to uphold the law. If you're going to start talking about DRM as "upholding the law" then shouldn't the government be doing it? Ahh shit, I just made
Re:Upholding the law? (Score:2)
Re:Upholding the law? (Score:2)
You say that like it's a bad thing. You see, government-mandated DRM would be the equivalent of no DRM. The specs would have to be available to all, and so anyone could implement it, including me. I would have no problem at all with DRM if I was allowed to implement it myself, and it only limited me to things that I wasn't legally allowed to do anyway. Why? Because my implementation would just remove the DRM layer, and
At least someone is thinking about the consumer... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's better that the consumer be forewarned about what they can and can't do with the movie/music that they bought, than to buy it first, and then frustratingly run into it later.
But are there going to be different versions of the same CD?
1. Paul Oakenfold, with DRM copy protection
2. Paul Oakenfold, without DRM copy protection
Are they going to be the same price? If so, then what incentive would a consumer have to buy the DRM version?
Maybe what will happen is that ONLY the DRM version is
Re:At least someone is thinking about the consumer (Score:5, Interesting)
Major Artist - New Album
Doesn't actually work in the office CD player due to "rights management". So we've no idea. The boxart is nice, though.
0/5
and so on.
I have a suggestion for the label. (Score:4, Funny)
Like smoking warnings (Score:2, Funny)
DRM labels could be bad (Score:2, Funny)
This is what the DRM labels are intended to be like: "Warning! This media has DRM on it. It may not be able to play on all devices and is restricted so you cannot transfer the media to a portable music player"
This is what DRM labels could look like after industry lobbyists change the law: "This media is certified Copyright Safe with DRM technology. Enjoy your media with DRM!"
And this is what DRM labels could loo
Re:DRM labels could be bad (Score:2, Insightful)
Their Website (Score:3, Informative)
Launch of the APIG report on DRM (Score:5, Informative)
The All Party Internet Group will launch its report on Digital Rights Management at the British Library on Monday June 5th. A press release with the key aspects of the report's findings will be available on the day and will also be posted on the APIG website at that time, along with the report itself and all of the written and oral evidence received by the inquiry.
If you can not wait till 12:00pm UK time the Open Rights Group [openrightsgroup.org] (Think UK EFF) have a lot of information about the APIG DRM Public Inquiry [openrightsgroup.org] here.
More information on the press conference:
Balancing Opportunities in a Digital Age
Keynote speech: Derek Wyatt, Launch of the All Party Internet Group report on Digital Rights Management
10.00 - 12.00pm, 5th June 2006
British Library, Euston Road
Speakers Include:
As well as launching the All Party Internet Group report on Digital Rights Management, this seminar will look at the different opportunities, and threats, digitisation and new media provide for content creators and information providers, both public and private.
The great promise of the internet is to provide us with all the information and learning materials we might need. Free internet access is now within walking distance of close to 100% of the UK. In many senses, digital inclusion is no longer about access to technology but access to content.
Libraries and archives across the world are currently involved in a number of digitisation initiatives, enabling wider access to the works of cultural and historical importance they stores. At the same time, commercial content and information providers are seeing threats to their existing business models emerge. On the one hand, they wish their content to reach as wide an audience as possible, on the other the commercial model for providing such information is potentially undermined by both content aggregators and consumer demand for 'free' information.
Publishers and libraries both fulfil an important function in our democracy,widening access and inclusion to democratic debate and adding greatly to the public sphere. But all have commercial imperatives to consider, and intellectual property rights to enforce or comply with.
Why is it that... (Score:2)
Its apparently 'Bad' to mandatory tag internet sex sites, as been adult.
Both things are to enable the consumer to make a informed choice, before proceding with purchase / viewing.....
Re:Why is it that... (Score:2)
It is good, because some legislations forbid copying DRMed media even for private purposes, but not non-DRMed media. Therefore, labeling DRMed media clearly may become prerequisite for such legislations.
Re:Why is it that... (Score:2, Insightful)
WARNING: Will NOT play on iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
"Contains ENHANCED DRM" will also be undersood by 99% of the population
So where's this leave "Plays For Sure"? (Score:2)
This needs to be serious (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This needs to be serious (Score:3, Insightful)
"Consumers Music Resource Center" (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:never thought I'd see the day... (Score:2)