Slashdot Mirror
Digital Restrictions Management for P2P Systems
Anonymous Coward writes "Digital restrictions management for an open-source peer-to-peer network. Researchers at the Georgia Tech Information Security Center have created a content protection system that is a plug-in for LimeWire/Gnutella. The paper argues that DRM is beneficial to everyone including independent musicians and end-users."
. . . how this so-called "restriction" manager will recognize the compression/encryption method du jour. But if it gives the "content industry" a false sense of security and takes some of the legislative heat off of P2P and the general purpose computer, I'm all for it.
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
they do this. They will have this out for about 20 minutes before someone figures out how to bypass it. Sure, some of the non savvy people will be restricted, but this is just another case of keeping the honest people honest. I think.
It's all about the balance of our rights against the rights of content owners to protect their investment and realize their returns in the open market. Building in DRM where it's needed most as opposed to just dumping it into every piece of consumer electronics on the market seems quite sensible and reasonable. I'm certain people who have been getting a free ride off of the artists won't appreciate it, but I believe that besides cutting off an avenue of exploitation this will also help return the Internet to a responsive state as well as encourage the media giants to finally embrace this medium without hesitation.
It's got to end sometime, folks -- otherwise, we're gonna kill the golden goose.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Why would anyone want to do that ?
If you havn't installed the plugin, or any DRM plugins, you must be a thief!
If you aren't doing anything wrong, then why don't you install it?
(Maybe now all the people that made that idiotic argument in the past in regards to every sapping of our rights will wake up a little)
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
As an employee of GT College of Computing, I'd like to reiterate that Paul's opinions don't reflect those of many of us here.
Just like many other places in the world, we have dissenting opinions running around the office, too.
Maybe I'm young and naive, but it seems to me that the entire notion of "content" is offensive. Like the music or pr0n videos or what have you was simply items in a box, with no regard for what's inside.
Though I suppose you could fairly call Britney Spheres, Backdoor Boys, and We'Stync to be nothing more than worthless coporate content, I cannot equally call the 405 short, Mudhens, Indigo Girls, or a great number of other independant, thoughtful works "content."
It's their blood & sweat, not a packaged good.
The notion of content is what allows them to call copyright infringement "piracy", what makes them want to license every listening. The music/videos/whatever are cheap, taiwan-made products to be whored around as much as possible for the greatest profit.
What they're really exchanging is ideas, peoples feelings, and as Jefferson once said (paraphrasing) 'When I give an idea to you, I am not deprived of it's possesion, but we are both richer for it'
I'm not saying anything about the entire legality of it, or what I think of this paper (Gee, I didn't know academics were whoring themselves to the entertainment industry lately) but this talk of 'content' is cheapening to the work serious musicians, directors, and artists perform.
Just venting. thank you for yer time.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
>DRM in itself isn't bad, because if the artist wishes to release their song in that format, that is their right.
Sorry, can you explain to me what exactly the rights of artists are? And why those rights are relevant to the artist given that 98% of the copyright in the western world is owned by corperations?
The artist is obligated to ensure that, upon claiming protection via copyright, his work is freely accessible 20 years after his death. Should he DRM-ize all his songs to expire after 6 months, and never publish them again, it is the artist that is breaking copyright law (by not making his work available to the commons after his copyright protection has expired.)
"Old man yells at systemd"
I believe this may be what some people refer to as a 'proof-of-concept'.
If a company uses the app to spy the contents, they are in voliation of the EULA and you sue
But then you'll set an EULAs-are-good legal precedent that M$ would just love to exploit...
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
Go ahead, argue all you like. White is still white, black is still black, two and two still make four.
"We argue that the lack of content protection is currently hindering the introduction of richer content systems." Yeah, right... and here I thought the INTRODUCTION of Napster and AudioGalaxy had been VERY successful.
"Content owners will not make content available in the variety, quantity, and format that users want until adequate protection measures are in place." Bullpuckey. I own a Rocket eBook (= REB1100) which has hardware-based DRM locked to a serial number in the device. When I go on a trip I like to load it up with nice easy-reading current mainstream books. And, you know what? They're mostly not available. Never have been, even before the whole eBook scene died. I recently did a check--of about 44 titles on Oprah's book club, which I think is a good test since they're good books, widely distributed, have been out long enough to give plenty of time for conversion, etc.
In eBook format, with good DRM, about 6 titles are available.
In audiobook (cassette tape) format--with no DRM, and a much more expensive production process, about 35 titles are available.
So don't tell me that DRM will increase the choices available to me. It exists, and it doesn't.
Indeed, one of the whole premises behind the Rocket eBook/REB1100 was good hardware-based DRM. Why did it fail? It was (and is) a pretty good device from a techical, UI, and product point of view. The screen is a lot more pleasant to read than a Palm; it's a lot more portable than a laptop; I can settle in and have a fine "immersive" reading experience with it.
It failed BECAUSE of a) lack of content--I have more choice in the average airport bookstore than I do in the online "bookstore" for my device; b) overpriced content; and, c) BECAUSE of DRM.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Well actually there is no obligation coded into law. They could continue to release DRM after the copywrite expires, its just that your not going to get into trouble for spreading the non DRM version around. NOW here is the problem. the DMCA (BOOO!) makes it illigal for you to convert out of DRM to standard format even after copywrite expires. But there is some working on getting that changed. But seriously an artist can use whatever means of distribution that artist wants to in my opinion. Obviously nowadays its the record company making that decision and that is pretty sickening. But just as a painter has his/her right of the medium of their painting so does a musical artist. I'm not going to be the one to tell them that their music has to be released in format X with tempo Y or any of that.
"If you aren't doing anything wrong, then why don't you install it?"
Because I'm lazy? I've not installed the latest DRM-enabling patch for Windows Media Player either, but its only because I can't be bothered to download several megabytes of information over a 42kb/s connection when it doesn't actually do me much in the way of good.
Sure I'll do it if I'm legally required to. Sure I'll do it if the benefits outweigh the problems by enough. But I won't spend my own time, effort and money to install something that only helps a business I've no particularly good feelings about.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"