[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] A TPM without use limitations -- thoughts?

And if the P2P networks can find it then so can the Copyright holders. So 
what's to stop the copyright holders from automating the process? Nothing. 
At that point it becomes an old fashioned detection problem. What is the 
probability of detection vs that of false alarm? The detection threshold 
determines both. The Copyright holders want to have Pd =  0.99999...[large 
number of 9s] so few evil doers escape capture and punishment.  Society 
wants Pfa = 0.0[large number of 0s]01 so that it doesn't have to deal with 
zillions of C&D letters and lawsuits ("your honor....these are Not scenes 
from Star Wars. This animated cartoon was done by my client's son using 
his Star Wars Action Figures...".."oh..yes I can see that...you can see 
the hip joint in the stormtrooper...."

BTW - Consider THAT as a derivative copyright....They have the rights to 
derivative works - toys being one. As the toys get more realistic, who's 
to say that kids don't make their own action cartoons with them AND put 
them on the internet. Now is that fair use of something derived from 

"John Zulauf" <johnzu@ia.nsc.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
10/31/2002 02:20 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] A TPM without use limitations -- thoughts?

"Peter D. Junger" wrote:

> But isn't converting to another format, which in many cases will be
> protected as fair use, going to strip out the fingerprint?  Especially
> if the new format is a compressed one?

As others have written, the fingerprints are designed to survive any
transformation that leaves the audio signal generally intact.

The other objection is "what if the P2P users encrypt the content".  If
so either the key have to be public (and have public metadata that links
them to the original files) or private, in which case the trading is no
longer public and the copyright holder can't see and doesn't care (as
much) about it.  In the former case it add an inconvenience to the user
(is off the PoLR) which reduces use, and thus becomes automated in the
client (negating the effect).  In any case the content webcrawlers would
certainly automate the association of key and encrypted content with no
less efficiency than an automated P2P client, and much more so compared
to some "go to xyz.net to get your key for" manual process. 

This is Zulauf's 1st Axiom: Any file sharing system public enough to
potentially damage a copyright holder is public enough to be found by
that rights holder, with a detection probability in direct proportion to
the potential damage to the rights holder.

Corollary: If a copyright holder cannot find content on the web, neither
can the copyright holders potential customers. Any such content is not
an infringing copy as it has no impact on the "market value" of the

It is in part based on the "Equal visibility Assertion" -- copyright
content in any public forum is equally visible to the copyright holder
as to the potential infringing copier"


.002's two rules of arguments: (and formula for household piece)

(1) Never argue about anything you can look up, just look it up.
(2) Never argue about anything you can't look up, as it cannot be
resolved beyond opinion.

For items not covered above:
"The lot puts an end to contentions, and decides between the mighty." 
                 Proverbs 18:18