Re: [dvd-discuss] Microsoft's DRM OS Patent

[Dan Steinberg <synthesis(at)videotron.ca>]

I think Jim said it best when he indicated the depth of his knowledge of
patent challenges.....


microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:

> I think there's enough talent here technically and legally to mount a
> formidible patent challenge. While the USPS fee for patent
> challenges is $2000 which is a bit much for a private individual,
> collectively it's lunch money for a day per person. The real cost is
> the preparation and putting it in the right legal terminology.Jim,
> Wendy, Peter, Robin,  (anyone else with legal backgrounds) what
> are the ground rules? What does the patent office want or not want
> to see in a patent challenge? What is decisive? How should the
> technical analysis proceed? What form of documentation is
> needed?
>
> As for cracking it....that might get amusing...can one patent a
> circumvention device?
>
>
> >
> > Yes.  Let's do it.
> >
> > But a failure-is-not-an-option approach.
> >
> > Who has the spirit and will?
> >
> > I'm not financially well-endowed, but will organize.
> >
> > Let's see if we can't shape something up.
> >
> > Seth Johnson
> > Committee for Independent Technology
> >
> >
> > Michael A Rolenz wrote:
> > >
> > > You know...this one might be interesting for the community to
> > > "crack" or formally challenge the validity of it ($2000 filing fee
> > > and EFF provides the legal representation)....it looks pretty
> > > vacuous  after just a brief scan of it
> > >
> > > Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org>
> > > Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
> > > 12/12/01 11:05 PM
> > > Please respond to dvd-discuss
> > >
> > >
> > >         To:     dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
> > >         cc:
> > >         Subject:        [dvd-discuss] Microsoft's DRM OS Patent
> > >
> > > Following are my comments to Dave Farber on the recently unveiled
> > > Microsoft Software Patent for a Digital Rights Management Operating
> > > System.
> > >
> > > Seth Johnson
> > > Committee for Independent Technology
> > >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 01:46:42 -0500
> > > From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
> > > To: dave@scripting.com
> > >
> > > Dave:
> > >
> > > In the essay at the bottom of this post, you asked what Microsoft
> > > gave up in a deal you felt they had to have reached with the Bush
> > > Administration.
> > >
> > > I think we see it right here.  Microsoft didn't have to give up
> > > anything -- Microsoft just had to own the patent on a DRM OS,
> > > providing the Government with an almost absolutely assured
> > > trajectory toward establishing the terms by which exclusive right to
> > > digital information would be policed.
> > >
> > > The real kicker is right here:
> > >
> > > > The digital rights management operating system
> > > > also limits the functions the user can perform on the
> > > > rights-managed data and the trusted application, and
> > > > can provide a trusted clock used in place of the
> > > > standard computer clock.
> > >
> > > The ability to use information freely is now going to be policed at
> > > the most intricate level, in the name of exclusive rights and to the
> > > detriment of the most fundamental Constitutional principles of our
> > > society.
> > >
> > > Whereas The U.S. Constitution assures that every American citizen
> > > has the full freedoms accorded to the First Amendment, we see here
> > > the trappings of the final phases of the legislative demarcation of
> > > the public into a mass of information consumers.
> > >
> > > Seth Johnson
> > > Committee for Independent Technology
> > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: [C-FIT_Community] MS Patent for Digital Rights Management
> > > > OS Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 01:17:07 -0500 From: Seth Johnson
> > > > <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
> > > >
> > > > AAcckk!!
> > > >
> > > > It's a LOGIC DEVICE, not a consumer appliance!!
> > > >
> > > > Okay, so we can stop Microsoft from establishing that this kind of
> > > > OS is legally required on our machines, right?  *RIGHT??*
> > > >
> > > > Seth Johnson
> > > >
> > > > (Forwarded from Law & Policy of Computer Communications list,
> > > > CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM)
> > > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:18:08 -0800
> > > > From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft's patent for a Digital Rights Management
> > > > Operating System was awarded yesterday:
> > > >
> > > >   http://cryptome.org/ms-drm-os.htm
> > > >
> > > > Abstract
> > > >
> > > > A digital rights management operating system protects
> > > > rights-managed data, such as downloaded content, from
> > > > access by untrusted programs while the data is loaded
> > > > into memory or on a page file as a result of the
> > > > execution of a trusted application that accesses the
> > > > memory. To protect the rights-managed data resident in
> > > > memory, the digital rights management operating system
> > > > refuses to load an untrusted program into memory while
> > > > the trusted application is executing or removes the
> > > > data from memory before loading the untrusted program.
> > > > If the untrusted program executes at the operating
> > > > system level, such as a debugger, the digital rights
> > > > management operating system renounces a trusted identity
> > > > created for it by the computer processor when the
> > > > computer was booted.  To protect the rights-managed data
> > > > on the page file, the digital rights management
> > > > operating system prohibits raw access to the page file,
> > > > or erases the data from the page file before allowing
> > > > such access.  Alternatively, the digital rights
> > > > management operating system can encrypt the
> > > > rights-managed data prior to writing it to the page
> > > > file.  The digital rights management operating system
> > > > also limits the functions the user can perform on the
> > > > rights-managed data and the trusted application, and
> > > > can provide a trusted clock used in place of the
> > > > standard computer clock.
> > > >
> > > > ******************************************************************
> > > > **** For Listserv Instructions, see
> > > > http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia Off-Topic threads:
> > > > http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot Need more
> > > > help? Send mail to: Cyberia-L-Request@listserv.aol.com
> > > > ******************************************************************
> > > > ****
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dave@scripting.com (DaveNet email)
> > > > Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 18:49:31 GMT
> > > > Subject: You're free to think
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ***The right to think
> > > >
> > > > No matter where you live, in what time period, no matter who you
> > > > work for, you can think for yourself. We don't need a Constitution
> > > > or a First Amendment to guarantee the right to think. This is a
> > > > point worth noting as our freedoms are whittled, controlled and
> > > > choked, for good reasons or bad.
> > > >
> > > > ***The right to speak
> > > >
> > > > Now the right to speak is a whole other matter.
> > > >
> > > > In Nazi Germany, or Stalin's Russia, had you spoken out, you would
> > > > have been killed.
> > > >
> > > > That's how extreme it gets some times in some places.
> > > >
> > > > ***The fear of government
> > > >
> > > > Even the US government under a Democrat president was scared of
> > > > the Internet [1]. Perhaps with good cause, I'll give them that
> > > > much, it's a powerful communication medium, and it can be used
> > > > equally well by scientists, thinkers and people doing good as it
> > > > can be used by terrorists, racists, abusers of children, and
> > > > promoters of hate.
> > > >
> > > > However silly it may seem, we made a historic decision [2] in the
> > > > US, in the 18th century, to take the bad with the good. In the US,
> > > > the right to speak is something the government, by design, has
> > > > very little power to regulate.
> > > >
> > > > ***What did Microsoft give up?
> > > >
> > > > It's a fact, Microsoft made a deal with the US government. No
> > > > theorizing necessary there, it's not a matter of probability, it's
> > > > a certainty. The deal was announced. Ashcroft spoke. Gates spoke.
> > > > We all know it happened.
> > > >
> > > > But what was the deal? What did Microsoft give up to get full
> > > > control of the Internet?
> > > >
> > > > What did the government want from Microsoft, and what did
> > > > Microsoft give them?
> > > >
> > > > Was it merely a campaign contribution in the 2000 election?
> > > >
> > > > Or did Microsoft promise to provide the government with access to
> > > > all the information they accumulate in the Hailstorm database?
> > > >
> > > > Did Microsoft give the government the power to censor websites
> > > > they think are being used by terrorists? With that power will they
> > > > be able to shut down sites like the NY Times or the Washington
> > > > Post if they say things that compromise the government's war
> > > > effort?
> > > >
> > > > Will Microsoft support an Internet tax?
> > > >
> > > > What else? These are just the ideas that occurred to me as I
> > > > thought about the possibilities this morning. I'm sure there are
> > > > others I haven't thought of.
> > > >
> > > > ***And who did they sell out?
> > > >
> > > > At a certain level I'm just beginning to understand how powerful
> > > > Microsoft has become.
> > > >
> > > > They own the chokepoint for most of the electronic communication
> > > > over email and the Web.
> > > >
> > > > Now, they have to get people to upgrade to Windows XP -- that's
> > > > the final step, the one that fully turns over the keys to the
> > > > Internet to them, because after XP they can upgrade at will,
> > > > routing through Microsoft-owned servers, altering content, and
> > > > channeling communication through government servers. After XP they
> > > > fully own electronic communication media, given the consent
> > > > decree, assuming it's approved by the court.
> > > >
> > > > Here's how it works. Because their operating system is a monopoly,
> > > > so is their bundled Web browser. If one day my site were not
> > > > reachable through MSIE I'd lose most of my readers. They could
> > > > shut down any site they want to, and with their new partnership
> > > > with the US government, they could have justification, if not
> > > > moral, at least legal and pragmatic. The government has law on its
> > > > side, and the FBI, CIA, NSA, FAA, FDA, the Army, Navy, Marines and
> > > > Air Force. Nukes and biological weapons. They're a powerful
> > > > partner, and a now, a Friend of Bill.
> > > >
> > > > The rest of us are totally cut out of this deal. We're taken for
> > > > granted, we're dumb, fat and happy, supposedly, and the future no
> > > > longer looks so bright. The fat period is over. Microsoft had a
> > > > lot of power to offer to the government. The government has been
> > > > granted new electronic surveillance power [3] by Congress. Now how
> > > > do they implement it? Microsoft can help. In my mind I'm not so
> > > > naive to believe this was an arms-length deal, I'm certain there
> > > > are aspects to the partnership between Microsoft and the US
> > > > government that we can't see.
> > > >
> > > > If this scares you -- good. I think we've got a problem, and the
> > > > government and Microsoft are not likely to help us.
> > > >
> > > > ***Your freedom will persist
> > > >
> > > > No matter what happens to the Internet, remember you are free to
> > > > use your mind.
> > > >
> > > > Dave Winer
> > > >
> > > > PS: In my heart I cling to the hope that the Bush Administration
> > > > really doesn't understand the Web, and that Microsoft really
> > > > doesn't want the power to control what is said on the Internet. In
> > > > my dream they wake up and say "Holy shit we didn't see that we
> > > > were accumulating this much power."
> > > >
> > > > PPS: Failing that, I pray for the integrity of the Judicial branch
> > > > of the US government. Gotta love those checks and balances.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----- (c) Copyright 1994-2001, Dave Winer.
> > > > http://davenet.userland.com/. "There's no time like now."
> > > >
> > > > C-FIT Community Discussion List
> > > > List Parent: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org
> > > > C-FIT Home:  http://RealMeasures.dyndns.org/C-FIT
> > > >
> > > > To Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Send "[Un]Subscribe C-FIT_Community" To
> > > > Listserv@RealMeasures.dyndns.org
> >

--
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca