Jon Johansen Interviewed

wuzfuzzy writes "Depending on your point of view, Jon Lech Johansen is either your hero or adversary. To the copyright industry, Jon Lech Johansen has been a detriment to their policy of control since the advent of DeCSS (Decrypt Content Scrambling System.) To those who cherish freedom, he has been a pillar of hope in an age when DRM (Digital Rights Management) threatens to overtake mainstream media. After two trials, the courts finally ruled in Jon's favor. However, there is much more to Jon Lech Johansen than DeCSS. In this interview, Slyck hopes to bring to light the many facets of Mr. Johansen, and the numerous projects he is involved with."

Comments

Ah yes...

[Sanity]

...I remember the days when everyone loved this guy, that was, of course, until he applied his skills to slashdot's favorite purveyor of DRM.

Thanks Jon, I appreciate your work!

[garcia]

When your DVD player tells you "This operation is not allowed" when you try to skip commercials, it becomes pretty clear that DRM really stands for Digital Restrictions Management.

Exactly! When I buy a DVD (not rent) I expect to have complete control over how I view that content. My DVD player has no right to restrict me from fastfowarding through any part of that media.

Any DVD I purchase that does not allow me to fastfoward any part is immediately ripped, stripped, and burned. That's my right. Thank you Jon!

Re:Thanks Jon, I appreciate your work!

[badfish99]

If the law said you should help to gas the Jews, I'm sure you would work hard to get it changed. But would you obey it while waiting for that to happen?
OK, that's an extreme example. But once you've said "no" to that, you've accepted the principle that you should break some laws because you don't like them. So the only remaining questions is: where do you draw the line?

Re:Thanks Jon, I appreciate your work!

[turnstyle]

"The market determines the features, if someone wants to try to sell a DVD player without FF, they are welcome to do so. Though I doubt it would sell very well without some other really really good feature."

Wrong. The market isn't the only factor. Just look at the iTunes Music Store. If it was just about what the market wants, there wouldn't be DRM.

It's not just about what the market wants -- it's about what the market wants in the context of world in which technology providers and media providers are struggling to find balance (or, to become dominant).

"No one is advocating manufacturers be forced (as in, by law) to do anything."

Wrong again, just look at the broadcast flag.

A pertinent quote!

[Pants75]

When your DVD player tells you "This operation is not allowed" when you try to skip commercials, it becomes pretty clear that DRM really stands for Digital Restrictions Management.

Right On Jon! I already paid for the DVD I don't see why I should be forced to sit though adverts after that.

Just let me navigate the content of my new DVD in the manner I choose thanks very much!

It is just a pity that the studios/player manufacturers are not going to listen to the public on this matter.

Re:A pertinent quote!

[garcia]

It is just a pity that the studios/player manufacturers are not going to listen to the public on this matter.

They aren't going to listen to the minority. The MPAA and RIAA have the power of nearly limitless funding for FUD campaigns against fair-use. Sadly, it's already working.

People accept that DRM will be on digital TV content. "Oh, I don't see why I should be able to timeshift my shows outside of a predetermined timeslot!" "Oh, copying DVDs is wrong!" "Oh, listening to my music on more than three different computers and devices is unncessary!" "I don't need to burn music more than 5 times!"

This is where the road is leading. People will continue to be told that fair-use doesn't exist and they will continue to accept it because there really is no other way (in their eyes).

So the public is going to listen to them on this matter.

Stolen CCS key ?

[amanox]

This paragraph struck me as odd:
"Another myth is that DeCSS is illegal because it uses a "stolen" key. A CSS key is 5 bytes. How anyone can think that it's possible to "steal" 5 bytes is beyond me. 5 bytes do not have any protection under copyright law because it's not an original work. It's probably possible for 5 bytes to be protected under trade secret law, but CSS hasn't been a trade secret since DeCSS was released and mirrored all over the net. Is someone who names their child "Frank" (5 bytes) stealing Frank's name? It's absurd."

If those 5 bytes are a key to unlock something.. ehm.. I think comparing that to someones first name is a bit weird. If someone has my credit-card code, I would say they stole my code.

For the record, as I do not want this thing to be flooded with "Great , go ahead and support DRM", I'm 100% against DRM. They have been spending a thousand times more on DRM-development than what they claim they have lost by illegal copies. DRM is only good if you want to finance the legal department and throw money out of the window, because no DRM will be 100% safe, and all DRM-schemes that I've seen passing by were broken, sometimes even before their official release. Not to mention they cause enormous headaches with their paying customers, and I don't think paying customers are the kind of people they want to piss off.

Re:Stolen CCS key ?

[bleckywelcky]

I think you missed the point. The number inherently has no protection with it. If your CC number is 1234 5678 9101 1121 and I have that number written down on a piece of paper, then I have done nothing wrong. The number itself is not something that can be stolen. The number is not copyrighted. It is not patented. It is not trademarked. And if I wanted to use that number as a transaction identifier for my own purchases, I have done nothing wrong. However, the moment I use that number to access your financial assets, then I have done something wrong. But not because I used that number, but because I accessed your financial assets without your permission.

So the number thing is straight. But the grey area is once you have a piece of software or hardware that you have bought, and you use that key to do something with either, is that wrong?

Personally, I would say no. Because I believe in having total and complete access to everything in your possession. And I believe in the individual's ability to reverse-engineer anything that they can understand. A good analogy would be the differential on a RWD vehicle. Let's say all we had was limited-slip differentials on the market (no locking diffs), and someone came around to developing a locking diff and sold it. But they were the only ones that knew how to build a locking diff, so they sealed the diff inside a casing that required a key to open. If the end user found the key, they should be able to use it to open up the diff. Then they can look inside to see how it works, and build their own if they so choose. And they should be able to share that information with whomever they choose.

However, the protection for the company comes with their patent on the locking diff ... so the moment anyone tries to start selling locking diffs instead of just building them for personal use, they can hit them with patent infringment and collect royalties (or shut them down, whatever).

Tinkering should never be outlawed ... it is basically a suppression of one's freedom, their freedom to think anything they want and to learn anything they choose. The laws should start at redistributing the content for financial gain.

Hero or adversary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do things have to be so black and white? I don't care one way or the other. DeCSS Jon is marginally better than Mitnick, because Jon actually produces something and is Fighting the Power (TM) and Sticking it to the Man (TM)... and that's a good thing. I don't agree with all that he does, but at least he's out there in the proverbial trenches doing what he thinks is right rather than just stealing music (or credit card numbers, like Mitnick) just because he can. He's also not a famewhore like Mitnick, trying to turn a moment of dubious fame into 3) profit!!! Mitnick proves that Scott Adams is right: people get promoted because management knows their name, and one only gets one's name known when it's attached to some disaster. Thus, companies hire criminals like Mitnick as "security experts" because they've heard the man's name.
I put Jon into the same category as Linus... someone pushing the boundaries of the electronic world, and our rights therein. Someone has to be the pioneer, if mainstream society is to struggle with the issues brought up by the envelope-pusher.

You've summed up the problem nicely

[Weaselmancer]

But DRM like iTunes' is the most liberal there is

And that's the problem. People don't balk at iTunes DRM. They simply say that it's the best out there, so they're happy. Kind of like saying having a brick dropped on your foot is better than having a bowling ball dropped on your head. People keep forgetting the fact that both options suck.

Re:quit high school

[tomstdenis]

For me the paper was largely useless to start with. The point is people really are asshats and will simply stroke you off for not being comformant with "the list".

I have companies like IBM, Sony, BitMover, etc... using my software and yet I'm unfit to work for them... That basically tells you that the people who "do work" and the people who "do hiring" are not the same and don't talk.

Not trying to ride on JJ but if he's trying to be hip by saying "school is useless" ... well it proves how immature he is. School is as useful as you make it. If you just treat it as a 9-5 it can be very ineffective. But if you treat is as playground of knowledge and use the time to learn as much as possible you leave school with the ability to pick up new things, etc, etc, etc..

Tom

Re:Melodrama in submission?

[grasshoppa]

You paint a picture of an evil corporate-controlled society with black helicopters and spotlights swarming in the night to take away your cherished freedoms.

Have you even been paying attention to the crap congress is up to?

Sure, no black helicopters and spotlights, but only because it's not as effective as passing laws in congress.

Re:Melodrama in submission?

[gurutechanimal]

You paint a picture of an evil corporate-controlled society with black helicopters and spotlights swarming in the night to take away your cherished freedoms. But DRM like iTunes' is the most liberal there is, and you can easily use its loopholes for things like infinite CD burning (just recreate the playlist).

You might have said that sarcastically, but a lot of people think this way. This kind of worldview emerges if you follow the current trend of relentless corporate-goverment culture restrictions policies to their logical conclusion.

Separately, I offer two analogies based on the last sentence in your comment:

He's a guy whose making it harder to get the record labels to embrace online downloading as their business model.

1) The fact that record labels will not consider selling music online without onerous restrictions underscores Jons point.

2) Saying that iTMS has the least restrictive DRM scheme is a lot like the difference between the Minimum Security wing of a prison (iTMS), and the Maximum Security wing of a prison (the goal of the labels); in the end, you're still in prison.

the write-up

[monkease]

To those who cherish freedom, he has been a pillar of hope in an age when DRM (Digital Rights Management) threatens to overtake mainstream media.

Okay, this is bad.

Have we degenerated to the level of the government that we must use overblown rhetoric, that we don't question such rhetoric?

This is classic Loyalty Oath type stuff--"You Love Freedom, Yes?" "Um.. yeah..." "Then You Love Senator McCarthy."

I have the highest respect for those whom I can view as "pillars of hope", but I also have the highest respect for our language, and shit like this is, at best, abuse, at worst, propoganda.

Agreed

[bogie]

Drives me nuts. I especially can't stand the Apple DRM fanboys. Oh how I disklike them. Thank God for people like Jon.

The music industry survived for years and years with NO copy restrictions at all. Tapes and CD's could be copied at will. And best of all at the height of "Copyright infringement" and P2P, the record companies are making record profits.

Any yet now we are supposed to accept these lockdowns and be grateful at all for their services? Because as the parent pointed out that's already happening. Let's look at what Apple has done with the power of DRM to brainwash users. Restrict from Internet streaming to local streaming. Restrict from unlimited Lan to 5 users a day. Restrict from 10 burns of a playlist to 7(IIRC), and finally as someone else had pointed out disabled features on Itunes and the Ipod to lock out competitors.

And still Apple DRM fanboys and people ignorant of how damaging DRM can be talk about how great it is . Well from here it sure as heck looks like real world DRM implementation suck and are only getting worse. Itunes 5.0 is going to be locked down so tight you can only listen to your songs in a locked room in the presense of an authorized Apple Rep.

btw I should mention I have no problem with Itunes and besides the Ipod being expensive have no problem with it either. This prasing of DRM and accepting your software being locked down has to stop.

My view on DRM

[BytePusher]

Ok, I've kept pretty silent about the whole DRM issue for a long time, because it doesn't really affect me. Since when was the "right to be entertained" a fundimental human right? I'm tired of hearing people whine, "I should be able to do whatever I want with my DVD." You bought a liscense, because that is what was sold to you. Just because I buy a book does not mean I can "do whatever I want with it." I can't copy it 50,000 times and sell it. I can't distribute it all over the internet. If you don't like what you're buying, stop buying it. Stop it with the childish ranting which is really rooted in your inability to break the entertainment-addiction.
most of you sound something like this, "my entertainment dealer won't let me steal entertainment(drugs) from him for myself or to give to my friends. So, I'm really mad at him and I'm gonna find all sorts of creative ways to steal from him anyway."
Whew, that said, I'm all for the freedom to develop and test new technologies. I just think there are better ways to stop DRM. Don't buy their liscenses. Don't buy anything from them until they sell exactly what you want. Otherwise, don't whine.