Berners-Lee Speaks Out Against DRM, Advocates Net Neutrality

narramissic writes "Speaking before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Tim Berners-Lee advocated for net neutrality, saying that the Web deserves 'special treatment' as a communications medium to protect its nondiscriminatory approach to content. Berners-Lee's more controversial statements came on the topic of DRM, in which he suggested that instead of DRM, copyright holders should provide information on how to legally use online material, allowing users the opportunity 'to do the right thing.' This led to an odd exchange with Representative Mary Bono who compared Berner-Lee's suggestion to 'having a speed limit but not enforcing the speed limit.'"

Comments

Speed Limit Analogy

[hey!]

My knee jerk reaction to the "speed limit" analogy was "Oh, god, here come the tubes again."

But actually it's a pretty interesting analogy.

You don't have to have cars engines cut out, you just have to require governors be installed that limit the speed to, say , 65MPH. If you visited a place like Montana, you could have the governor adjusted upward. If you were driving on a private speedway, you could set it as high as your car would go. But if you were caught driving over the governor limit on a public road, you'd be subject to severe penalties.

What makes this interesting is that the argument for installing governors on cars is stronger than the argument for enforcing DRM.

WHAT IS ACCOMPLISHED:
DRM enforcement: increase copyright holder's profits.
Speed governors: saves lives, reduces strategic dependence of foreign oil, reduces insurance costs.

COSTS:
DRM enforcement: restricts users from doing some things that they have a legal right to do.
Speed governors: restricts users from doing things ONLY if they are clearly illegal.

IMPACT ON FREEDOM:
DRM enforcement: restricts fair use of information for critical, educational and political purposes
Speed enforcement: prevents police from arbitrarily stopping/fining people.

I'm not saying I'm for putting speed limiters on cars. I'm just saying anybody who sees DRM as an appropriate way of enforcing the law should also be for limiting how fast cars can go.

Re:Flawed analogy

[mmurphy000]

Wish I had points to mod you up. Instead, I'll just extend your edition of the analogy, as it'd be like...

• ...if major car manufacturers had lobbied Congress to create the Driving Millennium Conformance Act (DMCA), which made it illegal for people to modify their limiters to actually drive within the speed limit but higher than the limiter-imposed 15 MPH.
• ...if major car manufacturers were lobbying Congress actively to require 15 MPH limiters on all cars regardless of manufacturer (let alone actual speed limits).
• ...if Motor Car Association of America (MCAA) were suing people who didn't own cars for driving over the speed limit.

Re:Flawed analogy

[darkonc]

I'd say that DRM is more like having a limiter on your car that presumes that:

1. It knows what the speed limit is, and:
2. it is illegal to go either over the speed limit or more than 15MPH below the speed limit.

In other words:

• once you hit a highway with a speed limit of 65MPH, you would be forced to go between 50MPH and 65MPH. If traffic forced you to go below 50MPH, your only option would be to come to a complete and immediate stop.
• Note that in the city (where speeds near 30MPH are more common), this will mean that you will be allowed to go betwwen 15MPH and 30MPH.
• If weather, road conditions and/or visibility problems would otherwise require that you drive below the normal, stated speed, it would still prevent you from 'breaking the law' (read: drive at a safe speed).
• Once you chose the 0MPH option out of the 50/0 option, it would immediately slam on the brakes and bring you within the law (i.e. stopped) as quickly as possible. (If you are towing a trailer, it had better have good brakes or you're gonna be fishtailing all over the road ... the RIAA's solution to this will probably be to ban all trailers [[ which will cause serious problems for the trucking industry]]).
• When you decide to resume a "legal" speed, the governor will floor the gas, and attempt to (once again) bring you in compliance with (it's interpretation of) the law. If you do not achieve 50MPH within 15 seconds (e.g. towing a heavy load up a hill), it will then slam on the brakes again.

Some results:

• Have you ever heard of stop/go traffic.... well, b-b-b-baby, y-y-y-you just ain't seen n-n-n-n-nothin' yet!
• although technically legal, towing trailers will disappear because of safety concerns.
• monster bumpers will become the norm.
• Tire manufacturer stocks will go through the roof.
• Body repair shops will experience massive market growth.
• parallel parking (especially) will require zen-like concentration
• The art of 'cruising' will disappear.
• sub-compact cars will disappear (into the pavement).
• The RIAA (Road Improvement Association of America) will lament the sudden downturn in national driving skills.
• Insurance rates (and deductibles) will skyrocket.
• etc., etc., etc.