[dvd-discuss] Re: Call for Input on Content Control

[Seth Johnson <seth.johnson(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org>]

Tom:

Can you put together some sort of roadmap, some URLs and
citations showing this pattern at work?  Don't make a
production out of it; just give us a more specific picture
-- maybe a production could be made out of it.  Definitely
worth considering.

Seth Johnson

tom poe wrote:
> 
> Hi, Ruben:  Do me a favor. You have a group of
> activists itching to get this thing short-circuited.
> I think it would be terrifically helpful, if you
> could organize a "think tank" and tear Bruce Lehman's
> "White Paper" apart
> http://www.geog.ubc.ca/~acitpo/copyright/clinton_whitepaper.html
> 
> Hollings, and RIAA are quoting this thing verbatim,
> without the required copyright acknowledgements! And
> they're doing it on a daily basis. What is coming out
> as news stories, and new developments can be found
> word-for-word in that document, written in 1995.
> 
> In other words, that's a road-map as to where we're
> going with this DRM stuff. With stops like, libraries
> will be able to make three electronic copies, then
> have only one available for checkout at any given
> time, and for most stuff, will be subscribing, rather
> than purchasing, so that each view is pay-per-view.
> You mentioned the Adobe schoolbook fiasco? Well, it
> was laid out in the "White Paper".
> 
> What we need, is some organization that can tie that
> paper to what's going down now, and certainly show
> where we're headed. Right? Let me know, if I can help.
> Thanks,
> Tom Poe
> Reno, NV
> 
> Ruben I Safir wrote:
> > DMR violates Fair Use by violating the 4th Ammendment
> >
> > On 2002.07.01 12:09 tom poe wrote:
> >
> >>Hi: DRM and Fair Use are contradictory concepts. Has there been one
> >>example of DRM discussion that permits discussion of Fair Use features?
> >>
> >>Has there been one example of DRM that provides interoperability with
> >>Open Source software? Without establishing and reconciling such apparent
> >>conflict, how can the academic community even begin to participate?
> >>
> >>It's a crying shame, and those that continue to pursue the concept of
> >>DRM should be held accountable for their embracement of oligopoly and
> >>total abandonment of Democratic ideals. Traitor may not be a strong
> >>enough word to describe them.
> >>Thanks,
> >>Tom Poe
> >>Reno, NV
> >>--
> >>Seth Johnson wrote:
> >>
> >>>(Forwarded from Digital Copyright list,
> >>>digital-copyright@lists.umuc.edu)
> >>>
> >>>-------- Original Message --------
> >>>Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:12:51 -0500
> >>>From: "Charles E. Jones" <cejo@midway.uchicago.edu>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Forwarded at the request of the undersigned.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 07:51:55 -0400
> >>>>From: Patrick Durusau <pdurusau@emory.edu>
> >>>>
> >>>>Greetings,
> >>>>
> >>>>I deeply appreciate Robin Cover's post to the list
> >>>>requesting DRM requirements and would urge the
> >>>>academic community to response appropriately, even
> >>>>given the rather short deadline for requirements
> >>>>(7 August 2002).
> >>>>
> >>>>In terms of deciding to devote summer hours to
> >>>>this task, please consider the membership of this
> >>>>TC:
> >>>>
> >>>>Hari Reddy, Chairperson ContentGuard
> >>>>Carlisle Adams, Entrust
> >>>>Bob Atkinson, Microsoft
> >>>>Thomas DeMartini, ContentGuard
> >>>>John Erickson, H.P.
> >>>>Brad Gandee, Secretary ContentGuard
> >>>>Bob Glushko, CommerceOne
> >>>>Thomas Hardjono, Verisign
> >>>>Hal Lockhart, Entegrity
> >>>>M. Paramasivam, Microsoft
> >>>>David Parrott, Reuters
> >>>>Harry Piccariello, ContentGuard
> >>>>Peter Schirling, IBM
> >>>>Xin Wang, ContentGuard
> >>>>
> >>>>While I am sure all the members of the TC will
> >>>>try to develop a standard that represents the
> >>>>interests of everyone affected by the DRM
> >>>>standard, I fail to see any representation of
> >>>>the academic, library or other communities.
> >>>>That is not to imply any fault on the part of
> >>>>the TC or OASIS, as a community academics have
> >>>>tended to absent themselves from such
> >>>>discussions.
> >>>>
> >>>>The interests of the academic community in
> >>>>issues such as "fair use" and allowing free
> >>>>(or at least non-commercial) use of texts and
> >>>>research will not be well served by a standard
> >>>>that protects the commercial rights in the
> >>>>"Lion King" and similar artifacts. Our
> >>>>requirements are different and any standard
> >>>>for DRM should not attempt a one size fits all
> >>>>solution. I am sure that the TC would welcome
> >>>>academic input that would lead to a more
> >>>>nuanced standard that meets a wide range of
> >>>>needs, one of the hallmarks of a successful
> >>>>standard.
> >>>>
> >>>>Note that a DRM standard will eventually find
> >>>>its way into hardware/software and it will be
> >>>>too late to complain at that point that it
> >>>>does not meet the needs of the academic
> >>>>community.
> >>>>
> >>>>Please forward Robin's note (and my comments
> >>>>if you think appropriate) to anyone you know
> >>>>who is interested in "fair use" or more
> >>>>generally access to academic materials, since
> >>>>a DRM standard will deeply affect both issues.
> >>>>
> >>>>Patrick
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 06:40:20 +0100
> >>>>>From: Robin Cover
> >>>>>Subject: Request for DRM Requirements
> >>>>>
> >>>>>An OASIS Rights Language Technical Committee
> >>>>>[1] has been established to "define the
> >>>>>industry standard for a rights language" that
> >>>>>would govern many application domains,
> >>>>>including (potentially) digital libraries and
> >>>>>archive projects.  The TC has is using an
> >>>>>XrML markup language specification from
> >>>>>ContentGuard (Xerox and Microsoft) as the
> >>>>>basis for defining this common standard.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Requirements are now being collected as input
> >>>>>to the standard's design. A request is hereby
> >>>>>made for input from the academic community,
> >>>>>(digital) libraries, museums, archive centers
> >>>>>[etc], including persons affiliated with ALA
> >>>>>or RLG.  The relevant OASIS subcommittee will
> >>>>>collect requirements through August 7, 2002.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Current legislative proposals for
> >>>>>incorporating DRM technology and usage
> >>>>>policies into computer hardware, operating
> >>>>>system software, and applications level
> >>>>>software raise the stakes for the humanities
> >>>>>community, especially as traditional notions
> >>>>>of fair use are being challenged as too
> >>>>>burdensome to implement in DRM systems.  The
> >>>>>Creative Commons Project [2] exemplifies the
> >>>>>attempt of one group to counter this trend,
> >>>>>but the effects of a government-mandated
> >>>>>universal DRM technology are of concern to a
> >>>>>growing number of technologists [3].
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Any interested party having access to DRM
> >>>>>specifications or implementations, or
> >>>>>otherwise motivated to help in the submission
> >>>>>of 'rights management' requirements for
> >>>>>humanities computing applications is invited
> >>>>>to send email expressing this interest.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Robin Cover
> >>>>>robin@isogen.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>[1] http://xml.coverpages.org/oasisRightsLanguage.html
> >>>>>[2] http://www.creativecommons.org/
> >>>>>[3] http://xml.coverpages.org/patents.html
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>Patrick Durusau
> >>>>Director of Research and Development
> >>>>Society of Biblical Literature
> >>>>pdurusau@emory.edu

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html