David Honig wrote:
At 02:36 PM 6/21/01 +0200, Lars Gaarden wrote:
The DVDCCA license requires that DVD equipment never allow access to the raw digital data. http://www.dvdcca.org/data/css/css_proc_spec11.pdf
If you buy the media (and more importantly, the license to play the content) you can use any hardware/software you like. Period. [1]
That is exactly how it should be, no argument there. However, there are forces that would like to change this. The media and software companies have so far succeeded in getting a couple of bad laws passed (DMCA, UCITA), and are pushing heavily to force hardware manufacturers to add 'copy protection'[2] technology to their devices. Unless we stop this, we might find ourselves in an Orwell'esque world five or ten years down the line.
This ties in nicely with the content manufacturers' dream of a tamed digital environment where neither piracy nor fair use is possible, and everything is pay-per-view, controlled and metered.
Where a remotely-readable meter logs all licensed entertainment that's entered your brainstem each month.
Some of them actually want that kind of world, and seem to have the power, money and know-how to push both legislation and technology in that direction.
[1] That remote-music storage dotcom which required you to have a
meatspace CD before letting you play the content should have needed
*no* license, permit, or blessing from the producers.
A year ago, I would have believed that copyright law was sane, and that the above sentence was correct. Unfortunately, (C) is a rather messy and even internally inconsistent law which does not follow common sense. According to current law, that remote-music storage dotcom (my.mp3.com?) need to produce and store copies of the music. As there is no copyright exemption that applies to this situation, they need to obtain a license (actually, several licenses). Is this the way it should be? imho, no. Does this seem logical to anyone except copyright lawyers? No. Do most laypeople expect that this should be covered by fair use? Yes. To fix this, we need to change copyright law. Unfortunately, the current trend is that (C) is moving in the wrong direction, because most of the lobbyists and most of the money are in the hands of media companies. While DFC and EFF are trying, it seems like we need more - much more. Jessica Litman's 'Digital Copyright' covers a lot of this. Recommended if you haven't read it already. [2] 'copy protection' is a misnomer, just like Intellectual Property is. IP isn't property, it is a limited, temporary, monopoly on an idea (patent) or an expression (copyright). Likewise, 'Copy Protection' is Use Control. CP is carpet-bombing from 20000ft with the expressed intent to stop piracy, while (accidentally, or deliberately) doing lots of collateral damage - including, but not limited to, fair use and the principle of first sale. -- LarsG http://eurorights.org