Slashdot Mirror


30 Days of DRM

sonofollson writes "Michael Geist, a Canadian law professor, in the middle of a 30 Days of DRM project, which is targeting the planned introduction of the DMCA in Canada. Each day, the project identifies an exception or limitation that is needed to address the danger of anti-circumvention legislation. Issues covered so far include interoperability, privacy, region coding, and reverse engineering. The project is also supporting a wiki version for broader participation."

17 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Great idea by magictiger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a great idea. Unfortunately, the only people likely to find this are those that already know the need for exceptions to DRM laws. I hope the Canadians pass this along to their legislators and that someone actually bothers to read the blog.

    Maybe if we'd had something like this before the DMCA, we could have made it a little less restrictive. (No way in hell the **AAs would have let it die)

    1. Re:Great idea by Deadguy2322 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nope. As a Canadian, I assure you that he cash-grab levy wil continue. Canada, land of no rights, insane taxes and a totally fucking broken electoral system, yet STILL inexplicably full of smug assholes who take any opportunity to bash the USA.

      --
      Check out my foes list to see who is so retarded that they can't use the signature line!!!
    2. Re:Great idea by Safiire+Arrowny · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would prefer to have the blank media tax, and to just be left alone in peace to do what I want with my media.

    3. Re:Great idea by crossmr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've written my MP 3 times.
      Though I'm not sure how much of this is FUD. The Conservative government is in a very precarious position. The wrong move and the victory they let the Liberals screw up so badly for is gone.
      Turning everyone into criminals isn't going to benefit them during the next election when they go for a majority government.

      Which I've reminded my MP of in the last 2 letters.

    4. Re:Great idea by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In other words, abolish property?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  2. the most important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


    DRM doesn't expire, so the media never makes it to the public domain
    by design of course

    1. Re:the most important by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Bullshit. I would be incredibly surprised if analog/not inherently electrical (e.g. tape, paper, film) copies of music, books and films are not kept by studios, publishers etc. Just because something is in a DRMed form does not make it suddenly never public domain, and if you were to crack the DRM on something that was in the public domain I doubt there's a court in the land that would convict you, or a record company in the land that would sue you.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    2. Re:the most important by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if you were to crack the DRM on something that was in the public domain I doubt there's a court in the land that would convict you, or a record company in the land that would sue you.

      I have a bridge to sell you.

    3. Re:the most important by wall0159 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "if you were to crack the DRM on something that was in the public domain I doubt there's a court in the land that would convict you"

      Uh huh - and what happens when your media player *only* accepts DRMd media? where will you be then?

      The way things are going, this will happen - especially as more companies become both vendors of hardware *and* media...

    4. Re:the most important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      if you were to crack the DRM on something that was in the public domain I doubt there's a court in the land that would convict you

      Doesn't matter. The law is very clear. In the United States, it is a violation of the DMCA to circumvent DRM of any kind. Cracking DRM is a criminal act by the clear letter of the law. U.S. websites have had injunctions upheld against them simply for telling others where to go to find information about circumventing DRM. So, your guesses as to what would happen if someone were to be accused of DRM violation do not do one thing to put at ease the minds of those who would like to view public domain content which has been put under DRM seal. But it is good that you believe the public is against this application of the DMCA. Feeling similarly, perhaps you can work to get bad law overturned.

    5. Re:the most important by EsonLinji · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But that's the problem. When you make the act of circumventing DRM a crime, it doesn't matter what content it was protecting. You still break the law by circumventing it. Which is exactly why such laws are bad. You should be able to make a copy of something in the public domain, but you can't. And don't rely on the record companies to let you off easy. It took mass negative media coverage for them to let a dead guy off the hook.

      --
      Considering Phlebas, whoever the hell he is.
    6. Re:the most important by Reziac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree absolutely that DRM on public domain material is inherently an oxymoron, but that doesn't make the law see it that way. IANAL, but I think it would depend on whether there is a sunset provision in the DRM law itself. As it stands now in the US, something could be out of copyright, yet it is (AFAIK) still illegal to crack the DRM. The two facets are, unfortunately, separate legal issues.

      Beyond that, one would have to trust to the fairness and common sense of the courts, not always the best bet. :(

      Also, it would be best if such a case went to conclusion and set a precedent (hopefully of "Death to DRM"), rather than being dismissed to be tried another day, possibly with disastrous results.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    7. Re:the most important by megaditto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't worry, in time, Darwin will sort it out.

      DRMed societies will stagnate due to the luck of innovation, restrictions on the exchange and development of ideas, etc. In time, 'North America' will be 'liberated' by a more advanced nation, and while some of our children will lose their lives, we will all be arguably better for it under our technologically superior masters.

      History is full of examples: 16th century Spain stagnating after expelling freethinkers and Jews, middle age Arabs imposing a religious DRM of sorts on mathematics and philosophy (after inventing numberals, discovering monumental laws, etc. they started chopping off people's digits for heresy). Japan 'DMRing' their culture until 1850s. Chinese hiding behind their Great Firewall after initially inventing gunpowder, philosophy, paper/printing, and flight.

      DRM or not, the Human Race will go on (whether it be our children or China's children). Darwin sorts it out in the end.

      I for one welcome our future DRM-free overlords.

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
  3. Region coding? About reducing sales by krell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article: "Region coding is not about copyright, it is about market controls and a loss of consumer property rights. It should not benefit from additional copyright legal protections that would come from anti-circumention legislation."

    How about the idea that region coding is all about reducing sales and increasing unauthorized duplication of DVDs? I run into so many DVDs that are not sold in any form for my region, and will never be sold for my region. That leaves me the options (a) not buying it at all, or (b) buying it and cracking it or perhaps getting a more usable pre-cracked version (barring the ability to get a DVD player that does all regions).

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  4. This DRM experiment is useless by Khyber · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There will always be a way to circumvent the DMCA.

    You cannot close the "analog hole" because we are purely analog-sensory beings. We cannot reliably have digital information put into our brain and decoded into a usable form without reliable biological-neurological wiring. With that simple logic, until neural wetware becomes commonplace (scary world that'll be,) the DMCA is absolute bullshit. I can simply circumvent your protection by going to a friend's house to watch a movie they bought but I never paid for. I can store that entire movie in "memory" (if I'm capable of that type of photo-auralgenic storage like other 'geniuses.') and tell others what the whole movie is about, which may/may not discourage them to see the movie, thus resulting in a loss of profit for the movie, or even after-movie DVD/VCR sales. Kiss your "unauthorized" use clause good-bye. We can hurt the **AA cause thru that means alone, and I'll bet with the current shit crop of movies coming out (Like Talladega Nights, compared to The Descent,) the sales are going to drop even further. I can simply watch a movie, tell everyone what it's all about, and they'll decide for themselves whether or not the movie is worth watching, in their opinion. And speaking technically, I didn't pay for it, so by going to a friend's house to watch a movie they paid for, I'm getting a public performance (because they explicitly state with a sign on their property "This is not private property, whatever happens here is public and sent to the police,") without paying for the rights to view the money. Now what are you going to do, RI/MPAA? Sue me for visiting a friend who happens to be showing a movie they paid for? You've tried twice already, let's go for a third strike so we can wipe you out legally.

    I apologize in advance for potential double-ranting (restating the same rant twice in the same post,) but I felt the need to drive this into people's heads. Even if the general Slashdot crowd knows about this stuff, there are many others that join every day, and are rather ignorant, as I once was before I got some extra education from more knowledgable people on Slashdot. We need to keep this type of information flow happening, in my opinion. Let's keep it up so less knowledgable people have more plain-english definitions for the layman to understand, guys.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  5. Re:Great, more angrying up of my blood. by Zarxrax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, it's true that the best solution would be to simply not have a DMCA at all, but often, this simply isn't possible. The people who don't want it are not as powerful or persuasive as the people who DO want it. Completely stopping something like this can be difficult--but lessening the impact that it has can often be more easily obtainable. Compromise sucks. The side that compromises is the side that loses something. But when it comes down to it, its a lot better to lose something than to lose everything.

  6. Wretched idea by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Uhm, you do realize that the blank media tax would eseentially fund organizations that spend every waking moment finding ways to keep you from being left alone to do what you want with your media, don't you?