30 Days of DRM 170
sonofollson writes "Michael Geist, a Canadian law professor, in the middle of a 30 Days of DRM project,
which is targeting the planned introduction of the DMCA in
Canada. Each day, the project identifies an exception or
limitation that is needed to address the danger of anti-circumvention
legislation. Issues covered so far include interoperability,
privacy,
region
coding, and reverse
engineering. The project is also supporting a wiki version for
broader participation."
Cool movie (Score:5, Funny)
Great idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe if we'd had something like this before the DMCA, we could have made it a little less restrictive. (No way in hell the **AAs would have let it die)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, if DRM and the equivalent of the DMCA is introduced in Canada, effectively eliminating their equivalent of Fair Use, will the levies on blank media be repealed?
Re:Great idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Wretched idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Right now they get both of those. Why step down?
Re: (Score:2)
I would prefer to have the blank media tax, and to just be left alone in peace to do what I want with my media.
And let me subsidize your music and movies? Tempting, but no thank you...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Great idea (Score:5, Informative)
This is wrong. There are levies on blank CDs, because they are commonly used to record music, whether they are "CD-audio" or not.
See the current rates here. [cpcc.ca]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That store is doing one of two things. They're not paying the levy or the
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The only difference between the discs is a simple flag specifying the type. It is allegedly illegal to sell an audio CD recorder (non-computer peripheral) here that allows recording onto a non-taxed disc.
If it
Re:Great idea (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great idea (Score:4, Informative)
In order to avoid paying this levy, you have to be an eligible organization (e.g. businesses who legitimately don't use it for ripping CDs, churches, NGOs, etc.). You then have to pay a $60/year ($15/year for non-commercial) registration fee with the CPCC, and you can only buy levy-free CDs from CPCC-certified manufacturers and distributors (NOT retailers).
So essentially, either you pay the levy to the CPCC, or you pay the CPCC other money so that you don't pay them the levy. Either way, you're paying more, and they're getting your money, all because they preemptively convict you of stealing music.
(Organizations for the perceptually disabled can get a rebate on their levy from the CPCC.)
Source: www.cpcc.ca [www.cpcc.ca]
- RG>
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, you also have the option of using media with no levy, e.g. DVDs, or the disk in your MP3 player.
"they're getting your money, all because they preemptively convict you of stealing music"
No, that's not why you pay. You pay in order to have the right to make private copies. If you do that, you're not stealing, you're making legal copies. If you use the discs for something else, you'
Re: (Score:2)
That said it all right there. A Purchased Right is an oxymoron.
Re: Rights are goods (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are some rights that shouldn't be bought and sold, and that's what those guys were talking about. But contracts specify rights all the time. If you buy a ticket, you have a right to go in and see a movie. If you rent out a room in your house, your tenant has a right to use it in certain ways.
Perhaps legal jargon has some adjective to distinguish between the two kinds of rights, but saying that rights obtained in exchange for payment aren't rights is just dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't think of a better adjective. A longer description would be "pedantic, but incorrect".
Re:Great idea (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great idea (Score:4, Informative)
Lastly, if the manufacture of these discs ever ceases, I am stuck with a play-only unit in my stereo rack. Nice, eh?
Sure hope somebody reverse engineers these and starts manufacturing them independently one of these days. I'd actually pay *more* for a product if a portion of its cost supported anti-DRM organizations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say there's a good chance that the Private Copying right will go, because the multinationals don't like it any more. I think the Private Copying levy will go at the same time, because it is specifically put in place to reimburse copyright holders for the Private Copying right.
Personally, I like Private Copying, and think the levy is a reasonable rate to pay for it. However, I don't think it's really sustainable in the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy_g
Re:Great idea (Score:5, Informative)
Wikipedia has a nice discussion [wikipedia.org] of the differences between fair use and fair dealing.
I could have said "Canada has no equivalent of Fair Use. Our Fair Dealing is quite different.", but the private copying levy has nothing to do with fair dealing.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Though I'm not sure how much of this is FUD. The Conservative government is in a very precarious position. The wrong move and the victory they let the Liberals screw up so badly for is gone.
Turning everyone into criminals isn't going to benefit them during the next election when they go for a majority government.
Which I've reminded my MP of in the last 2 letters.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha ha ha "MP3" I get it!
Re: (Score:2)
I've posted it on Slashdot several times, so dig it up here or on my blog. Just search for "Garry B."
the most important (Score:2, Insightful)
DRM doesn't expire, so the media never makes it to the public domain
by design of course
Re:the most important (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a bridge to sell you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:the most important (Score:5, Insightful)
Beyond that, one would have to trust to the fairness and common sense of the courts, not always the best bet.
Also, it would be best if such a case went to conclusion and set a precedent (hopefully of "Death to DRM"), rather than being dismissed to be tried another day, possibly with disastrous results.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the key point is cracking it without the copyright holder's permission. If it's in the public domain, then there is no copyright holder, and hence, no violation of the DMCA.
Disclaimer: IANAL, and I don't play one on TV.
Re: (Score:2)
>still illegal to crack the DRM.
Ehh, the circumvention applies to works that are protected under the copyright act. If it is out of copyright, the circumvention part doesn't apply either.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
DRMed societies will stagnate due to the luck of innovation, restrictions on the exchange and development of ideas, etc. In time, 'North America' will be 'liberated' by a more advanced nation, and while some of our children will lose their lives, we will all be arguably better for it under our technologically superior masters.
History is full of examples: 16th century Spain stagnating after expelling freethinkers and Jews, middle age Arabs imposing a religious DR
Re: (Score:2)
I guess we'll never find out [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Two methods:
Re: (Score:2)
(see: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_conseque n ces.html [eff.org] for more info).
The DMCA was and is a bad law. It is vaguely worded and exceptions in it are few. A violation of the DMCA is a felony in its own and shouldn't be taken lightly.
B.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh huh - and what happens when your media player *only* accepts DRMd media? where will you be then?
The way things are going, this will happen - especially as more companies become both vendors of hardware *and* media...
If I am the copyright owner (Score:3, Interesting)
If I am the owner of copyright in a work, why don't I have the authority to apply true and correct copyright management information to the work? Or are you basing this on yerricde's hypothesis that it is impossible to create an original musical work [slashdot.org]?
Re:If I am the copyright owner (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine an ipod in the future. The ipod doesn't play mp3s anymore - it *only* plays Apple's DRMd music. I'm a musician, and record my band playing music, but I can't put it on my ipod directly - I have to implement DRM on the music for the ipod to play it.
This could happen.
"If I am the owner of copyright in a work, why don't I have the authority to apply true and correct copyright management information to the work?"
I don't know exactly what you mean by this, but I think you're looking at it the wrong way around. If I pay you to experience your creation, by what right to you seek to regulate the way I experience it? Will you try and tell me what colour shoes I may wear, for example?
Note that there are two issues here. The first is artist renumeration. This is important, because without it people will be less inclined to produce art. The second is control, and it has nothing to do with renumeration for the artist. Instead it's about power for the distributers of the art - power over both the artist and those who wish to experience their art.
Remember that copyright is not a 'right' per se - it's a TEMPORARY incentive given by the government to help people to profit from their creations, thereby encouraging creation for the benefit of humanity.
Re:If I am the copyright owner (Score:4, Interesting)
I challenge this concept. Nowhere has it been proved. In fact, there are several studies that show that those things that are pirated also enjoy a higher profit margin. To say that all media content will dry up if copyright didn't exist flies in the face of logic as well as human nature. The only one that benefits from copyright is the distributors.
I'll go one step further....
I say to fix the copyright problem, disallow the transfer of copyright except to the public domain. All rights to a work belong to the originator of that work. Then what the **AA is touting (namely that artists suffer when copyright is violated) would be true. Make it so that the only place an artist can relinquish copyright to is the public domain which is the purpose of copyright to begin with.
This is just my take on it. Reality differs dramatically.
B.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly I fail to see how that would help. Transfers would just be replaced with exclusive licenses, and nothing would really change. In fact, I think it'd make things more annoying in that transactions would be somewhat more complicated for no good reason.
Frankly, there's no single magic answer. Good copyright reform is going to require us to make sweeping changes throughout copyright. And because it accompl
Re: (Score:2)
"In fact, there are several studies that show that those things that are pirated also enjoy a higher profit margin."
I have never seen studies linking profit margins to piracy rates. Can you post a cite to one of them? Profit margins on a product-by-product basis are often closely guarded secrets (ie. Adobe will tell you their end of year profit margin, as they are a publicly traded company, but good luck learning the profit margin on PhotoShop) so I would love to see the methodology of said studies.
Re: (Score:2)
Responsibility cannot be legislated. Laws can only be used to harm, never to help. Laws can't give you a big hug if you're nice. However, th
Disclaiming digital restrictions (Score:2)
Such a situation is unlikely to come about unless and until Apple has a complete monopoly on pocket digital audio players. The current lockout situation in video game consoles is due to Nintendo having the monopoly in North America from 1985 to 1989.
And what would prevent you from
Re: (Score:2)
The price, of course. You can't allow people to just record sound to the DRM'd format on their own, since that allows for the analog hole; no, you're going to need to have Apple sign it. And both Apple and the RIAA will benefit from making the signing price high: Apple in the form of increased profits, the RIAA from locking out competition.
Re: (Score:2)
And Apple will make a Happy Fun conversion utility to turn those nasty MP3 files into ACC for use on any iPod player. Suckers will eat it up like candy.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Vista's PVP only applies to already DRMed videos.
2) Apple already has that happy fun conversion utility. It converts MP3s and CDs into un-DRMed AAC, which can be played on many players, many devices and many operating systems. "Suckers" already do eat it up like candy, because AAC offers better sound quality than MP3 (at least when ripping from CD).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, copyright terms are limited to a specific duration. DRM that does not include a sunset provision is, therefore, incompatible with US copyright law. It effectively grants a perpetual copyright... something that is wrong on so many levels that even the Supreme Court would agree.
In Canada, your mileage may vary.
Re: (Score:2)
>include a sunset provision is, therefore, incompatible with US copyright law.
What makes you think that? Circumvention for example applies to a work protected under the copyright act. It doesn't apply to something not under copyright. Hence, when the copyright runs out, that no longer applies.
Circumvention device (Score:2)
But a circumvention device suitable for a DRM copy of a work whose copyright has expired is also useful for a DRM copy of a work whose copyright has not expired. If you make a circumvention device and use it to crack a DRM copy of a PD work, then the work's publisher will likely sue you for manufacturing a circumvention device capable of cracking a DRM copy of a different work,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Doesn't matter. The law is very clear. In the United States, it is a violation of the DMCA to circumvent DRM of any kind. Cracking DRM is a criminal act by the clear letter of the law. U.S. websites have had injunctions upheld against them simply for telling others where to go to find information about circumventing DRM. So, your guesses as to what would happen if someone w
Re: (Score:2)
>circumvent DRM of any kind. Cracking DRM is a criminal act by the clear letter of the
>law.
No, it is not, the law is quite clear that it has to protect a "work protected under this title". If there is no longer any copyright to the work, the DMCA doesn't apply any longer.
Re:the most important (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
>was protecting.
Yes it matters, it must be a "work protected under this title".
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, what's copyright up to now
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright is not just for the authors, Copyright was at one point designed partly for the public benifit, to encourage authors to release their works instead of keeping them secret, locked away in coded books or vaults.
If something is registered and properly Copyrighted, it does not need any protection mechanisms to allow the author to file suit against infringers. Making software that bypasses DRM illegal is an unneeded burden on public resou
Re: (Score:2)
Do some research about all the irreplacable old movies, etc. that are deteriorating into nothingness while sitting in un-climate-controlled warehouses becasue they're "too expensive" to save, and prepare to be surprised!
Re: (Score:2)
This will only increase when Disney sees fit to buy another Congress. Orrin Hatch call your office.
At the rate this is going, I can see Senators having to use scientific notation for something other than how much money they are squandering.
Re: (Score:2)
More stuff these days is being shot direct to digital, as it's far easier to get it into editing suites and post production that way. Also, film and paper decay, media goes obsolete, etc.
Just because a studio or publisher retains a copy, do you really think that they're planning on hanging on to it for ninety years and then digging out that copy and saying "here, this is in the public domain now, it's all yours". I doubt it. Ninety years is a long time, and storage space cos
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Although you are being sarcastic you are also telling the truth. Jack Valenti the head of the MPAA, has stated, "The constitutional definition of "limited time" to me means the end of the universe minus 30 seconds". He has also stated that if people want to back up their copies, they can damned well buy the backup. Another gem from him is his belief
Re: (Score:2)
Region coding? About reducing sales (Score:5, Insightful)
How about the idea that region coding is all about reducing sales and increasing unauthorized duplication of DVDs? I run into so many DVDs that are not sold in any form for my region, and will never be sold for my region. That leaves me the options (a) not buying it at all, or (b) buying it and cracking it or perhaps getting a more usable pre-cracked version (barring the ability to get a DVD player that does all regions).
DVD players: collect all 6 (Score:4, Funny)
(c) DVD players: collect all 6 while supplies last!
De-regionalize your DVD player (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My wife loved Shadow-Hearts. (the PS2-game). The day after renting the first one to try it out, she was in the shop, and happily paid top-dollar (well, euro, but you get the point) for the game. We had v2 -- covenant -- on release-day and again paid full retail, happily.
Now there's v3 -- "from the new world". Not sold in europe. Guess what motivated us to get a chipped PS2 ? (that in itself legal in our jurisdiction) Guess how motivated she was this time of paying full
This is great, but.... (Score:2)
How does one get the general public to care? From what I've seen, most computer users are short-sighted, datawise. "This DVD/Song/Program works right now, so it'll work forever, right?" How do we get everyone else to read this?
CAPTCHA: signify. How appropriate.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is great, but.... (Score:5, Informative)
Michael Geist writes a weekly column [thestar.com] on law and technology for the Toronto Star, Canada's largest newspaper. The Star is a significant venue because its middle brow (not tabloid, but not the New York Times), and always has a populist favour.
He is also frequently called on as a commentor on CBC radio (the public broadcaster, which by law can be heard by Canadians anywhere in the country). CBC radio recieves no ads and no coporate sponsorship (unlike PBS), so is generaly balanced on controversial issues.
In Canada at least, someone like Geist has a greater chance of reaching Jaques Six-Pack than he might have elsewhere.
Reverse Engineering ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Different standards exist for reverse engineering. For example, reverse engineering a binary is illegal, while reverse engineering a protocol (for compatibility purposes) isn't.
But the real question to ask is, a .doc a binary file or a protocol ?
(and then there are EULAsGreat, more angrying up of my blood. (Score:5, Interesting)
In a way it feels like he's discussing ways to make a noose more comfortable and less abrasive to the victims throat.
The thing is, whenever DRM is discussed I cannot help by attempt to prognosticate into the deep mysterious future. Imagine a future (not too distant perhaps) in which we have direct brain interfaces of some sort. How would it be to have certain thoughts blocked? How would it be to not be able to think something?
Thoughtcrime - in other words. Oh, it's disgusting to me.
After all, DRM is basically a way of locking-down information. But information is so close to just thought. It's one step away from a pure idea.
When I hear DRM I think "Idea Stopping" - and being an idealist as I am, this is deeply disturbing to me.
DMCAs are so prehistoric to me - they seem to hail from the time in the past when the distribution of information required printing presses and tape-duplication facilities. When information distribution liked physical mediums for distribution.
In those ancient times of the 20th century only the wealthy could afford these behemoth machines. There was no way a consumer could copy a novel and send it to 20 or 100 of their closest friends.
Of course nowadays I can find the entire works and easily distribute them without all that mucking about with the physical constraints that plagued the old.
DRM and DMCAs seem analogous to a cart and buggy and wagon industry forcing automobile owners to not drive faster than the horse-drawn carriages because of their "right" to the road.
It is old-world philosophy being artificially forced into the modern mindset.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is more true than you realize. Let's think back to the last time there was such a major shift in our society...
To the 1860s. In addition to disputes over the morality of slavery, there was a tremendous economical divide between the northern US and
Cold Mexico just doesn't get it (Score:2, Interesting)
This DRM experiment is useless (Score:5, Insightful)
You cannot close the "analog hole" because we are purely analog-sensory beings. We cannot reliably have digital information put into our brain and decoded into a usable form without reliable biological-neurological wiring. With that simple logic, until neural wetware becomes commonplace (scary world that'll be,) the DMCA is absolute bullshit. I can simply circumvent your protection by going to a friend's house to watch a movie they bought but I never paid for. I can store that entire movie in "memory" (if I'm capable of that type of photo-auralgenic storage like other 'geniuses.') and tell others what the whole movie is about, which may/may not discourage them to see the movie, thus resulting in a loss of profit for the movie, or even after-movie DVD/VCR sales. Kiss your "unauthorized" use clause good-bye. We can hurt the **AA cause thru that means alone, and I'll bet with the current shit crop of movies coming out (Like Talladega Nights, compared to The Descent,) the sales are going to drop even further. I can simply watch a movie, tell everyone what it's all about, and they'll decide for themselves whether or not the movie is worth watching, in their opinion. And speaking technically, I didn't pay for it, so by going to a friend's house to watch a movie they paid for, I'm getting a public performance (because they explicitly state with a sign on their property "This is not private property, whatever happens here is public and sent to the police,") without paying for the rights to view the money. Now what are you going to do, RI/MPAA? Sue me for visiting a friend who happens to be showing a movie they paid for? You've tried twice already, let's go for a third strike so we can wipe you out legally.
I apologize in advance for potential double-ranting (restating the same rant twice in the same post,) but I felt the need to drive this into people's heads. Even if the general Slashdot crowd knows about this stuff, there are many others that join every day, and are rather ignorant, as I once was before I got some extra education from more knowledgable people on Slashdot. We need to keep this type of information flow happening, in my opinion. Let's keep it up so less knowledgable people have more plain-english definitions for the layman to understand, guys.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For christ's sake, don't give them any ideas!
Talking about DRM... FairUse4WM strips WMA/WMV (Score:2)
Well just go for it -> [url]http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/25/fairuse4w
Dodge this Microsoft!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They had a few download links for a day or so as well. I do know the program works. I wonder how long it will be until Microsoft fixes it? More importantly, can they make it stop working without making people install an update?
Last election (Score:5, Interesting)
This reminds me of hydroponics dealers... (Score:2)
...who will discuss just about everything about their equipment except its suitability for growing pot.
I dislike intrusive and prohibitive DRM as much as everybody else, but it's clear to me that if the magic wand were waved tomorrow and DRM disappeared, the immediate effect is that people would be pirating a lot more.
Alternatives to DMCA (Score:2, Informative)
There are plenty of different things we can do - from an email only approach to face to face talking to people.
Tell people and po
it's over (Score:2)
Easy, but flawed (Score:2)
OP, if you only purchased one DRMed song, you'