Hollywood Still Thinks That The Industry Needs DRM; Tech Dirt, 7/30/09

Mike Masnick via tech Dirt; Hollywood Still Thinks That The Industry Needs DRM:

"A bunch of folks have sent in various versions of how the entertainment industry is trying to convince the Copyright Office not to grant a special DMCA exemption for breaking DRM in the very limited -- but quite real -- scenario where a DRM server goes dark, taking away access to content people thought they had legally purchased. This seems like a perfect example of a reasonable DMCA exemption (people legally bought something, and they can no longer access it without getting around the DRM). On top of that, the music industry especially has finally come to terms with the fact that DRM not only doesn't work, but decreases the value of the music and makes people less willing to buy. So you might think that they wouldn't put up much of a fight. But, you'd be wrong."

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090730/0212125709.shtml

Amazon Faces a Fight Over Its E-Books; New York Times, 7/27/09

Brad Stone via New York Times; Amazon Faces a Fight Over Its E-Books:

"A growing number of civil libertarians and customer advocates wants Amazon to fundamentally alter its method for selling Kindle books, lest it be forced to one day change or recall books, perhaps by a judge ruling in a defamation case — or by a government deciding a particular work is politically damaging or embarrassing.

“As long as Amazon maintains control of the device it will have this ability to remove books and that means they will be tempted to use it or they will be forced to it,” said Holmes Wilson, campaigns manager of the Free Software Foundation.

The foundation, based in Boston, is soliciting signatures from librarians, publishers and major authors and public intellectuals. This week it plans to present a petition to Amazon asking it to give up control over the books people load on their Kindles, and to reconsider its use of the software called digital rights management, or D.R.M. The software allows the company to maintain strict control over the copies of electronic books on its reader and also prevents other companies from selling material for the device.

Two years after Amazon first introduced the Kindle and lighted a fire under the e-books market, there is increasing awareness of how traditional libraries of paper and ink differ from those made of bits and bytes. The D.R.M. in Amazon’s Kindle books, backed up by license agreements with copyright holders, prevents customers from copying or reselling Kindle books — the legal right of “first sale” that is guaranteed to owners of regular books.

D.R.M. has created a new dynamic between consumers and the vendors of digital media like books and movies. People do not so much own, but rent this media. And the rental agreement can be breached by the manufacturer at any time, sometime with little or no notice.
People are also worried that the very architecture of network-connected devices like the Kindle, TiVo or iPod give tech companies unprecedented control over digital media and by extension, the free exchange of ideas.

Once upon a time, retailers sold customers a product and then walked away after the transaction. Today’s specialized devices often keep an umbilical cord to their vendor, loading updates and offering convenient ways to make purchases. These devices also limit the extent to which people can load independent software and customize their experiences.

Such tethered systems provide significant advantages to the consumer. Companies can keep their own records of what people buy and restore the content if it is inadvertently lost. Device software can be kept up to date, and vendors can track what people buy and make personalized recommendations for new material they might like.

Randal C. Picker, a law professor at the University of Chicago, says he thinks Amazon was right to delete the improperly sold versions of “1984” and argues such systems can also allow companies to better enforce copyright laws. He notes that the harm to the Orwell book buyers was minimal, since their money was refunded after copies were deleted from their Kindles.

“Because copyright infringement was poor and lax in the offline world, it should also be that way in the online world? I don’t understand that logic,” Mr. Picker said. “The whole point of moving online is that it creates new opportunities.”

But critics say that any device capable of interfering with how its owner uses media is potentially dangerous. “I worry that systems like these tethered appliances are gifts to regulators,” said Jonathan Zittrain, a professor at Harvard Law School and author of the book, “The Future of the Internet — and How to Stop It.” Mr. Zittrain predicts that governments in some parts of the world will want to use it “like a line item veto for content,” removing objectionable sentences or chapters in some books.

“It could happen first in jurisdictions like the United Kingdom, where there isn’t as rich a First Amendment tradition and where libel suits happen much more frequently,” he said.

Whether or not people are bothered by these possibilities may in part be a function of their age, as a new generation grows up with an implicit understanding of the rules around these networked devices and learns to live with them.

“I’d like to live in a perfect world where I own this content and can do whatever I want with it,” said Justin Gawronski, a high school student whose copy of “1984” was erased by Amazon, but who recently declined when a lawyer asked him to join a class-action lawsuit over the incident. Mr. Gawronski said, “This is probably going to happen again and we just have to learn to live with it.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/technology/companies/27amazon.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=e-books&st=cse

Site Lets Writers Sell Digital Copies; The New York Times, 5/18/09

Brad Stone via The New York Times; Site Lets Writers Sell Digital Copies:

"The Scribd Web site is the most popular of several document-sharing sites that take a YouTube-like approach to text, letting people upload sample chapters of books, research reports, homework, recipes and the like. Users can read documents on the site, embed them in other sites and share links over social networks and e-mail.

In the new Scribd store, authors or publishers will be able to set their own price for their work and keep 80 percent of the revenue. They can also decide whether to encode their documents with security software that will prevent their texts from being downloaded or freely copied...

Trying to address the piracy problem, Scribd is building a database of copyrighted works and using it to filter its system. If a publisher participates in the Scribd store, its books will be added to that database, the company said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/technology/start-ups/18download.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=scribd&st=cse

From Siva Vaidhyanathan "My initial take on the Google-publishers settlement", Siva Vaidhyanathan's Blog, The Googlization of Everything, 10/28/08

From Siva Vaidhyanathan, Via Siva Vaidhyanathan's Blog, The Googlization of Everything: "My initial take on the Google-publishers settlement":

"My major criticisms of Google Book Seach have always concerned the actions of the university libraries that have participated in this program rather than Google itself. Companies should always do what is best for them. But the university libraries have a different, much higher mission. And they have clear ethical obligations. So I now turn to them.

From the beginning, this has seemed to be a major example of corporate welfare. Libraries at public universities all over this country (including the one that employs me) have spent many billions of dollars collecting these books. Now they are just giving away access to one company that is cornering the market on on-line access. They did this without concern for user confidentiality, preservation, image quality, search prowess, metadata standards, or long-term sustainability...

At the core of this settlement is this fact that university libraries much confront: For the first time, elements of library collections will be offered for sale in widespread manner via a private contractor. Perhaps this is only a shift of degree. Perhaps it is a major mission shift. It's worth a good argument, no?

Ultimately, I have to ask: Is this really the best possible system for the universal spread of knowledge? I think we can do better. Watch this space to see how."

http://www.googlizationofeverything.com/2008/10/my_initial_take_on_the_googlep.php

Want to Copy iTunes Music? Go Ahead, Apple Says, New York Times, 1/7/09

Via New York Times: Want to Copy iTunes Music? Go Ahead, Apple Says:

"The music companies are hoping that their eagerly awaited compromise with Apple will give a lift to digital downloads. They will be able to make more money on their best-selling songs and increase the appeal of older ones.

And with the copying restrictions removed, people will be able to freely shift the songs they buy on iTunes among computers, phones and other digital devices.

Technologically sophisticated fans of digital music complain that D.R.M. imposes unfair restrictions on what they can do with the tracks they have bought. For example, the protected files from iTunes do not work on portable players made by companies other than Apple.

“I think the writing was on the wall, both for Apple and the labels, that basically consumers were not going to put up with D.R.M. anymore,” said Tim Bajarin, an analyst with Creative Strategies, a market research company."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/technology/companies/07apple.html?scp=1&sq=copy%20itunes%20song%20go%20ahead&st=cse

DRM-Free iTunes Seems Unlikely, Despite Report, Wired.com, 12/9/08

Via Wired.com: DRM-Free iTunes Seems Unlikely, Despite Report:

"French technology site ElectronLibre claims that Apple will remove DRM from every song in the iTunes store today. We're not so sure...

If ElectronLibre's information (translation) is accurate, the deadlock between Apple and the three largest record labels has broken, and Apple can finally start selling music from all the world's labels without its Fairplay copyright protection. That is an enormous "if," and the signs don't point to it."

http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/12/drm-free-itunes.html

EU bashes DRM, won't support "three strikes" rules, ARS Technica, 11/24/08

Via ARS Technica: EU bashes DRM, won't support "three strikes" rules:

"Try as they might, the French simply cannot seem to get the rest of the EU to go along with their favored measure for handling Internet piracy. The French, responding to requests from the content industry, have decided that illicit file-swapping demands a "graduated response," a euphemism for a three-strikes approach that would ultimately see ISPs cut off the Internet access of repeat pirates. The rest of Europe remains largely uncomfortable with this approach, and has managed to keep graduated response out of the EU's formal conclusions for dealing with online content and cultural material."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081124-eu-bashes-drm-wont-support-three-strikes-rules.html

Wal-Mart's DRM Nightmare Just Won't End - Wired.com, 10/10/08

Wal-Mart's DRM Nightmare Just Won't End:

"Wal-Mart has decided to keep the music that it sold wrapped in a layer of copyright protection playable, following a flurry of customer complaints about legally purchased music becoming unplayable...

An e-mail sent to Wal-Mart digital music store customers said the company will continue to support the DRM-ed song files sold on walmart.com starting in 2003. The e-mail reversed last month's announcement that Wal-Mart would shut down the servers that authenticate the copyright protected music it no longer sells. Unfortunately, doing so would render all protected music purchased from the store in the past five years unplayable."
http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/10/wal-mart-will-c.html

Key senators oppose DRM, ISP filtering in secret ACTA treaty - ars technica, 10/3/08

Key senators oppose DRM, ISP filtering in secret ACTA treaty:
"Most of the concerns are about the limits ACTA could put on "Congress's ability to make constructive policy changes in the future." But the concerns are compounded by "the lack of transparency inherent in trade negotiations" and the "speed with which the process is moving.""
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081003-key-senators-oppose-drm-isp-filtering-in-secret-acta-treaty.html