Slashdot Mirror
Libraries Say DRM May Harm Their Services
Ernest Adams writes "The BBC is reporting that the British Library is concerned about DRM's effect on its ability to make materials available to the public. Libraries have a legal right to distribute materials under the Fair Use provisions of the copyright law, but DRM systems may block this. Furthermore, they point out that DRM systems don't automatically switch themselves off when a work goes out of copyright. DRM systems may allow copyright holders to retain control over their material longer than they are legally entitled to. Worse yet, if the software no longer exists to unlock a DRM-protected file, its contents may be lost forever -- exactly the thing libraries are intended to prevent." We've discussed stories like this before.
The librarians are making some good points about further flaws in DRM. I'm glad to see the media finally starting to pick up on this and report stories about the dark side of DRM. Now if we could only get more mentions of it on THIS side of the pond, maybe people other than the technically adept will start to get pissed about DRM and force some change.
OK, not likely, but a guy can dream, can't he?
See, here's where we, the nerds and IT folk, need to work with the librarians and support them.
I had the priveledge of speaking with a librarian on a plane ride one time. While not particularly tech saavy, she was quite passionate about information freedom and privacy. It hadn't even occurred to me until that point that the librarians had been working for what so many of us had believed in for a long time. They were the Googles before we had Google.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
I was involved in some video Copy Protection Technology standardisation efforts in Europe and had to sit round the table with the MPAA. ANY attempt to bring an argument along the lines of "how do we put the copyright expiration date into the DRM metadata" was laughed at. None of the technology companies were interested in running with the idea either - the consumers rights could just go hang.
All part of life in the behind-the-scenes world of technology standardisation.
Surely the best solution here is a modification to the law such that any protected digital work must have an unencumbered version of the data lodged with the copyright libraries? This copy is for archive use only until the work falls into the public domain, at which point it is made freely available.
Artists are protected, execs still get the most important part of their wet dream, and most importantly, the public gets it's dues.
The only problem with this approach is that copyright is not a god-given right, but a 18th century founded trade agreement.
The society, with the help of the executive arm - the "Government" - grants temporary rights to help innovation so thus society in general.
That was the theory in the 18th century and it worked sort-of, but in today's world that theory breaks down because of new technologies and that because the content creators don't keep their end of the bargain. They don't contribute back to society as they should.
You can't have your cake and eat it too, its a simple choice:
You either adhere to the _spirit_ of the copyright and use the temporary timeframe given to you while you have "copyright" over something which after the required amount of time becomes public domain OR you are outside the scope of copyright and you receive NO LEGAL PROTECTION if someone else wants to do whatever he wants with the thing you "created".
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Gosh- I would never do it, because I don't get to the library as much as I would like...
But my library has a very extensive CD collection, including a lot of expensive boxed sets that are available for 2 week checkout. They also have a lot of new and mainstream stuff. (When I was younger, the library in my town had a lot of Bob Denver and classical music that I wasn't interested in at the time)
If someone wanted to load up their iPod or iTunes or whatever with thousands of songs, the library would be a good place to utilize.
I wonder how long before the RIAA sues libraries to see who is checking out a lot of music... Or how long before they demand that all media available at libraries is heavily DRM-ed.
Reminds me of Shawshenk Redemption, when Andy says that the songs are in his head, and they can never take them away...
And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
I was recently in a room with a high ranking IT person from the U.S. Library of Congress.
He essentially said the same thing, but here is where it gets interesting.
He remarked (from my imperfect memory) "People don't understand the amount of money thrown at senators and congressman from media companies to get some favorable legislation. It's so political now that we've been instructed by the head of the library of congress to not comment on this issue, so you can see where this is all going".
This is scary. The LOC knows congress is selling us out, but they've been told to keep their big mouths shut.