<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Freedom for IP &#187; DRM</title>
	<atom:link href="http://freedomforip.org/category/drm/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://freedomforip.org</link>
	<description>Dreaming of Intellectual Prosperity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 02:49:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>DRM Harms Dyslexics: Comment to the Copyright Office</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2009/05/14/drm-harms-dyslexics/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2009/05/14/drm-harms-dyslexics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 18:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dyslexia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/?p=1140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Late last month I made my first official comment to the copyright office.  This comment was in opposition to DRM and took a very personal look at how DRM harms people with dyslexia.  This comment gives a lot of insight into why I founded Freedom for IP a little over four years ago.  Access to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Late last month I made my first official comment to the copyright office.  This comment was in opposition to DRM and took a very personal look at how DRM harms people with dyslexia.  This comment gives a lot of insight into why I founded Freedom for IP a little over four years ago.  Access to knowledge should be a basic human right.  Restrictions on knowledge like DRM always have a negative impact on those who have the least power or economic might in a society.</p>
<p>Here is the full comment to the copyright office:</p>
<p>I am writing to inform the Copyright Office and the World Intellectual Property Organization of the negative impact that extremely ridged copyright law has on my life as a law student and as a father.  I have lived my whole life with dyslexia, a learning disability that severely effects the way I read and write. My form of dyslexia changes the way I read. I must learn each word twice &#8211; once for written text and again for spoken language. I am unable to sound words out beyond a first grade level, and have difficulty expressing my ideas in a written format.  By contrast I am very well spoken and can engage in complex discourse over legal and technical problems in an oral format.  My dyslexia went hidden for most of my life, I nearly failed high school and dropped out of undergrad more then once.  Before the dyslexia was diagnosed, I would interview professors and only take classes that were graded heavily on spoken presentations or class projects like debate or computer programing classes, while avoiding written tests like the plague.</p>
<p>It was not until I started taking classes at the University of Washington in my junior year of college that I was directed to an educational psychologist who diagnosed the dyslexia.  This changed my academic experience and my direction in life, I was allowed accommodations that often include oral exams and alternative requirement for grammar or spelling intensive classes like foreign languages.  My grade point average moved from a mid C to a solid A minus.  After turning my academic career around and earning a Bachelors of Science in Informatics and a Bachelors of Arts in Political Science with minors in philosophy and human rights, I decided to pursue a law degree focusing on intellectual property law.</p>
<p>Reasonable accommodations and technology have enabled me to succeed both professionally and in law school.  As a legal professional it is very important that I understand each word written.  I use text-to-speech software to read statutes, case law, law review articles, memos, and legal books.  Text-to-speech software is an important tool for my legal research and understanding of texts. Without text-to-speech software, my understand of text can be limited.  If text-to-speech software is not available on a work that I need to reference I often have to go to outside help, having a friend or associate confirm the words written which can be time consuming or difficult.  Locking a copyrighted work behind digital rights management (DRM) that does not allow text-to-speech functionality severely reduces my ability to understand the full meaning of the text.</p>
<p>I also use many technical features to improve my use of software.  One example is spell suggest in search options. As a dyslexic it is often be difficult to search sites due to an inability to spell the key terms. Spell suggest allows me to use the search option as if I were not dyslexic.  Copyright right law including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) prevents me from improving or adding features that make my software more accessible.  An improved version of a piece of software may be considered an infringing derivative work, while tinkering with the program directly is often prevented by DRM.  The anti-circumvention criminal penalties in the DMCA mean that I risk serious legal repercussions for trying to customized a work I own to be accessible.  The criminal penalties of the DMCA also discourage professionals with more technical knowledge from helping me make works accessible.  I am a law student and legal scholar. Limited exceptions to the DMCA that allow me to create personal work-around will not solve these problems, as I do not posses the skills to make all work accessible by myself.  I need the support of a community of computer professionals to help create open innovative solutions to gain access to knowledge locked in print formats.</p>
<p>I am also the father of a seven-year-old girl who is learning to read.  As a parent I understand how important it is to her development to read with her and help her on homework.  Fortunately she appears not to have dyslexia &#8211; reading for her is a much easier task then it was for me as a child. Teaching her to read is a challenge for a dyslexic parent, she can already sound out words that I can only memorize.  I can not help her sound out many words.  Text-to-speech software can be very helpful in reading with her, it enables me to check the pronunciation of words and help her learn to read.  Text-to-speech software can also be used as a tool for my daughter to check her own reading.  Without technology that enables disabled parents to teach their children, there is a a real threat that these children will not learn the basic skills they need.</p>
<p>In the future please allow for comments to be submitted in an audio or video formats.  For many people with dyslexia it is a real challenge to put thoughts and ideas in a written format.  More people with print based disabilities are likely to comment if you enable comments in alternative formats.  This letter was written and edited with the assistance of an editor, many people with dyslexia do not have access to a personal editor.  Please feel free to contact me for future comments on this issue.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p><a href="http://BrianRowe.org">Brian Rowe</a><br />
3L Seattle University Law &#8211; Graduating May 2009<br />
Founder &#8211; <a href="http://freedomforip.org/">Freedom for IP</a><br />
Washington State Access to Justice Technology Committee Member</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2009/05/14/drm-harms-dyslexics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AntiDRM Book: The Pig and the Box V2</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2009/01/28/antidrm-book-pig-and-a-box-v2/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2009/01/28/antidrm-book-pig-and-a-box-v2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/?p=1050</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My favorite AntiDRM books for children (and possibly only AntiDRM book for children) has just been re-released, I have even read it to Gwen, in a new version: The new version has only minor changes including a new cover and is designed to make the book a little more mass consumable. For example, “He nearly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My favorite AntiDRM books for children (and possibly only AntiDRM book for children) has just been re-released, I have even read it to Gwen, in a new version:</p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-1052" title="pig-and-a-box-v21" src="http://freedomforip.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/pig-and-a-box-v21-300x156.png" alt="pig-and-a-box-v21" width="300" height="156" /></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><br />
The new version has only minor changes including a new cover and is designed to make the book a little more mass consumable. For example, “He nearly peed his pants” becomes “He nearly danced like an orang-utan”.  All new words have been 6-year-old approved as being stupidly funny. ( I hope I still have a copy for the original version on my last laptop.  If i do I will post a link to it)</span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">The <a href="http://books.1889.ca/pig_and_the_box">Pig and the Box is available at 1889 Books</a>, in DRM-free PDF format.  (Note the work is under a CC-BY-SA License which means if fans translate or digitize them they can share them)<br />
</span></strong></p>
<p>Physical copies are avalible at<strong> </strong><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><a onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/article/http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0978152743');" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0978152743">Amazon</a> or </span></strong> <strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><a onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/article/http://powells.com/biblio?isbn=978-0978152741');" href="http://powells.com/biblio?isbn=978-0978152741">Powell’s</a> I am ordering a few for the<a href="http://freedomforip.org/2009/01/08/fcc-coming-to-seattle-topic-drm/"> upcoming Seattle FTC hearing on DRM</a>. The first person to ask me for a copy at the Seattle event can have one for free.<br />
</span></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2009/01/28/antidrm-book-pig-and-a-box-v2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ZUNE Commits Suicide</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/31/zune-commits-suicide/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/31/zune-commits-suicide/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zune]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/?p=1004</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[from /. : &#8220;There are multiple reports springing up all over the internet of a mass suicide of Microsoft 30GB Zune players globally. Check Zune forums, Gizmodo, or other such sites; the reports are spreading rapidly, except apparently to the Microsoft official Zune site.&#8221; At this point the cause of the failure is not clear, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>from /. :</p>
<blockquote><p><em>&#8220;There are multiple reports springing up all over the internet of a mass suicide of Microsoft 30GB Zune players globally. Check <a href="http://www.zuneboards.com/forums/gen-1/38114-zune-frozen.html">Zune forums</a>, <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5121311/30gb-zunes-failing-everywhere-all-at-once?skyline=true&amp;s=x">Gizmodo</a>, or other such sites; the reports are spreading rapidly, except apparently to the <a href="http://www.zune.net/en-US/support/default.htm">Microsoft official Zune site</a>.&#8221;</em></p></blockquote>
<p>At this point the cause of the failure is not clear, it is tough to find the issue and resolve it with a closed system.  All users are at the mercy of Microsoft, if the platform was open source we could look at it and try to solve the problem.  Why should computers with DRM be different from watches or cars that allow anyone to open them up and fix problems?   </p>
<p>I think <a href="http://copyfight.corante.com/archives/2008/12/31/why_proprietary_locked_media_are_bad.php">Copyfight </a>puts it well with:</p>
<blockquote><p>This should be a clarion warning that using proprietary hardware or software (DRM) to restrict peoples&#8217; ability to manage their legally owned content is a bad plan. We are all at the mercy of whatever bugs and bad business plans lie behind these locks.</p></blockquote>
<p>PS: From the Zune Release 2006 <a href="http://freedomforip.org/2006/11/12/dont-get-zuned/">Don&#8217;t get ZUNED</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><em>In honor of Freedom for IP’s partnership with <a href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org/">Defective by Design</a> to crash tomorrow’s Zune release party in Seattle, I’ve composed a little consumer warning to hand out to all the eager music fans who clearly haven’t been warned about getting zuned….</em></p>
<p><a href="http://freedomforip.org/2006/11/12/dont-get-zuned/"><strong>DON’T GET ZUNED</strong></p>
<p>Remember the 8-track? Neither does anyone else under 30&#8230;. </a></p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/31/zune-commits-suicide/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>XKCD Knows Copyfighters too Well</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/01/xkcd-know-copyfighters-too-well/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/01/xkcd-know-copyfighters-too-well/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[XKCD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/?p=910</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Click on the image to go to XKCD&#8217;s website and read the mouse over text.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://xkcd.com/511/"><img class="alignnone" title="sleet xkcd" src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/sleet.png" alt="" width="740" height="201" /></a></p>
<p>Click on the image to go to XKCD&#8217;s website and read the mouse over text.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/12/01/xkcd-know-copyfighters-too-well/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>XKCD: Steal this Comic /fight_DRM</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/10/13/xkcd-steal-this-comic-fight_drm/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/10/13/xkcd-steal-this-comic-fight_drm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:01:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DMCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/?p=814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another amazing comic by xkcd: I fully agree with this comic. Fighting with DRM is a nightmare. I gave up on itunes for this very reason and I am unlikely to go back until the remove all DRM and starts using public licenses. Note: James Grimmelmann has a good point legal point xkcd Understates the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another amazing comic by <a href="http://xkcd.com/488/">xkcd</a>:</p>
<div id="attachment_815" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://freedomforip.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/steal_this_comic.png"><img class="size-medium wp-image-815" title="steal_this_comic" src="http://freedomforip.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/steal_this_comic-300x282.png" alt="I spent more time trying to get an audible.com audio book playing than it took to listen to the book.  I have lost every other piece of DRM-locked music I have paid for." width="300" height="282" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">I spent more time trying to get an audible.com audio book playing than it took to listen to the book.  I have lost every other piece of DRM-locked music I have paid for.</p></div>
<p>I fully agree with this comic.  Fighting with DRM is a nightmare.  <a href="http://itunes.com">I gave up on itunes</a> for this very reason and I am unlikely to go back until the remove all DRM and starts using public licenses.</p>
<p>Note: James <span class="entry-author-name">Grimmelmann has a good point</span> legal point <a href="http://xkcd.com/488/" target="_blank">xkcd Understates the Case for Piracy</a></p>
<div class="entry-body">
<div>
<div class="item-body">
<div>
<p>Garden-variety downloading opens you up to civil liability, but it doesn’t make you a criminal.  You’re <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506" target="_blank">only a criminal if</a> you (a) infringe for profit, (b) infringe more than $1,000 worth over a 6-month period, or (c) put a pre-release copy online.</p>
<p>The same is basically true of the DMCA (<a href="http://www.chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/faq.cgi#QID124">chillingeffects.org</a>):</p>
<p><strong>Question:</strong> <strong>What are the penalties for violating the DMCA&#8217;s anti-circumvention provisions?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Answer</strong>: The DMCA allows for both civil remedies and criminal penalties for violations under the anti-circumvention provisions. If the violations are determined to be willful and for commercial purposes or private financial gain, the court can order significant fines and/or imprisonment.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/"><img style="border: medium none;" src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/static/somerights20.png" alt="Creative Commons License" /></a></p>
<p>This work (the xkcd comic) is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License</a>. <!-- <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"><Work rdf:about=""><dc:creator>Randall Munroe</dc:creator><dcterms:rightsHolder>Randall Munroe</dcterms:rightsHolder><dc:type rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage" /><dc:source rdf:resource="http://www.xkcd.com/" /></p>
<license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/" /></Work><br />
<License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/"></p>
<permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Reproduction" />
<permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Distribution" /><requires rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Notice" /><requires rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Attribution" /></p>
<prohibits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/CommercialUse" />
<permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/DerivativeWorks" /></License></rdf:RDF> &#8211;></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/10/13/xkcd-steal-this-comic-fight_drm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tell HarperCollins to Free &#8220;American Gods&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/03/16/tell-harpercollins-to-free-american-gods/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/03/16/tell-harpercollins-to-free-american-gods/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[File Sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HarperCollins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neil Gaiman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/2008/03/16/tell-harpercollins-to-free-american-gods/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HarperCollins wants your feedback: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=_2byu40J8QdlbaaA5Iar6hvQ_3d_3d Say no to DRM and Yes to Sharing here is my comment: &#8220;Let us share. It is tough to get traditional offline readers interested in works if you can not download and print. Everyone I know who is exposed to Gaiman&#8217;s works is interested in owning their own copies. Distributing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <span style="font-style: italic">HarperCollins wants your feedback:  <a href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=_2byu40J8QdlbaaA5Iar6hvQ_3d_3d">http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=_2byu40J8QdlbaaA5Iar6hvQ_3d_3d</a></span></p>
<p>Say no to DRM and Yes to Sharing</p>
<p>here is my comment:</p>
<p>&#8220;Let us share.  It is tough to get traditional offline readers interested in works if you can not download and print.  Everyone I know who is exposed to Gaiman&#8217;s works is interested in owning their own copies.  Distributing viral copies through file sharing and printing is like giving people the first hit of an addictive drug for free.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/03/16/tell-harpercollins-to-free-american-gods/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HaperCollins Screws Up American Gods with DRM</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/28/hapercollins-screws-up-american-gods-with-drm/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/28/hapercollins-screws-up-american-gods-with-drm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 06:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HarperCollins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neil Gaiman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/28/hapercollins-screws-up-american-gods-with-drm/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two weeks ago I blogged about how great it was that Neil Gaiman&#8217;s publisher was going to release one of his books for free. I didn&#8217;t think it was possible to fuck this up. Great writer, great books, the only result I could imagine was positive for Neil&#8217;s popularity and sales&#8230;. I was wrong. HarperCollins [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://neilgaiman.com" title="NeilGaiman.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://freedomforip.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/drmgods.JPG" alt="American Gods" align="left" height="495" width="276" /></a>
<p>Two weeks ago I blogged about how great it was that <a href="http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/10/free-gaiman-download-you-choose/">Neil Gaiman&#8217;s publisher was going to release one of his books for free</a>.  I didn&#8217;t think it was possible to fuck this up.  Great writer, great books, the only result I could imagine was positive for Neil&#8217;s popularity and sales&#8230;.
</p>
<p>
I was wrong. <a href="http://www.harpercollins.com/services/browseinside/browseinside.aspx?isbn=9780060558123&amp;WT.mc_id=biHTMLWidget7091eda1-eb96-416a-b6f4-45c43dca4809" target="_blank">HarperCollins released American Gods online with terrible DRM</a> with no download options.  I voted for American Gods because it is a great book, but it is LONG and not a good choice for online only reading.  With the DRM:</p>
<ul>
You can&#8217;t download it.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t read it without an internet connection.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t tag it or link to cool stuff in it.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t cut and paste text.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t send people a chapter to try and get them interested.
</ul>
<p>
If I had known it was going to be online-only I would have voted for a shorter book and not been so excited.
</p>
<p>For more on the evils of DRM, see <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org/" target="_blank">Defective by Design</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/28/hapercollins-screws-up-american-gods-with-drm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Beyond Fair Use Panel at Columbia Law</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/11/beyond-fair-use-panel-at-columbia-law/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/11/beyond-fair-use-panel-at-columbia-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CLE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fair Use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jessica Litman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/blog/2008/02/11/beyond-fair-use-panel-at-columbia-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week Columbia Law hosted a conference on Fair Use. The panelists included several scholars I respect. Here are some highlights from the third panel of the conference. For a more in-depth report check out Rebecca Tushnet&#8216;s reports at 43(B)log. Jessica Litman: We’re asking fair use to do too much. If we think that unauthorized [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.law.duke.edu/magazine/2006fall/features" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.law.duke.edu/images/magazine/2006fall/comic2.jpg" alt="Fair Use Comic Duke" align="left" height="230" width="500" /></a>Last week <a href="http://www.kernochancenter.org/Fair%20Use%20Symposium.htm" target="_blank">Columbia Law hosted a conference on Fair Use</a>.  The panelists included several scholars I respect.   Here are some highlights from the third panel of the conference.<br />
<span id="more-191"></span><br />
 For a more in-depth report check out <a href="http://www.tushnet.com/" target="_blank">Rebecca Tushnet</a>&#8216;s reports at <a href="http://tushnet.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">43(B)log</a>.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www-personal.umich.edu/%7Ejdlitman/" target="_blank">Jessica Litman</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>We’re asking fair use to do too much. If we think that unauthorized use of works is always infringing, we end up relying on fair use to get us out of any problems that arise. It’s hard for fair use to do what we ask it without expanding it, but if we want to confine its boundaries, we should redefine its tasks. The problem is not §107 but §106 – an essentially nonstatutory expansion, since Congress hasn’t revisited the key issues in 30 years, but judicial and business understandings of the rights have expanded.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Current fair use doctrine is not optimized for Google Book Search, no matter how you want it to turn out, or for individual personal consumptive uses, though it is optimized for <em>The Wind Done Gone</em>.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Note from Brian Rowe: Parody has strong protection under fair use, but that protection is not mentioned in the copyright act.  This is part of what makes the law confusing to those who only read the text of the law without examining the relevant case law</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>&#8220;We need to reexamine our complicity in the sloppy and unbounded expansion of §106 into an unbounded use right.  The Copyright Act should be understand to grant rights to readers etc., not just copyright owners and their assignees. &#8220;</strong> (Emphasis mine)</p></blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">Note from Brian Rowe: *Cheer* These are the  types of changes we need to restore balance to the copyright act.  Rights  to<strong> use, share and remix</strong>.  With life plus 70 we need proactive use rights sooner rather than later.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.timwu.org/" target="_blank">Tim Wu</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p> Tolerated use: slightly different from fair use&#8230; technical infringements of copyright law that are not subject to enforcement action, but are tolerated.  [Y]ou look at these uses and say “maybe fair, maybe infringing.” <br />
Example: <a href="http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Main_Page" target="_blank">Lostpedia</a>, a fan-created encyclopedia for <em>Lost</em>. The site is notable for sheer volume: 3 million changes. The details accumulated for one character, Kate Austen, involve a huge amount of work – and her entry is longer than the entries of most presidential candidates on Wikipedia. There are pages and pages of theories about <em>Lost</em> as well. And it would be hard to analyze Lostpedia for fair use – pictures seem possibly infringing, but there’s commentary that seems like traditional fair use. There are also transcripts for every show. Almost everyone would agree the transcript is a violation of the reproduction right of the underlying script. Yet there’s been no legal action against this site. Every once in a while, the show actually advertises on this site. Is this an implied license? Probably not, but definitely a tolerated use.<br />
Another example: Guyz Nite’s <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTyw6cq86kY" target="_blank">video</a> celebrating <em>Die Hard</em>. The lawyers for the studio sent a takedown notice, but then the marketing department wanted to pay Guyz Nite to put it back up because it was good promotion; the band says it has no formal license for the footage.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
Note from Brian Rowe: Lawyers are living in yesterday while marketers are living in tomorrow.  Lawyers too often do not get web 2.0.</p>
<blockquote><p>Three ways in which the law is or will be adapting to these mass quantities.<br />
(1) The rise of systems of opt-in copyright. To activate statutory rights, copyright owners have to give some type of notice to the putative infringer before that person actually becomes liable in some way.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Note from Rebecca Tushnet: What I have called <a href="http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2007/09/informal-formalities.html" target="_blank">informal formalities</a></p>
<blockquote><p>
 It’s like the exceptions for certain public performances that exist in the statute and allow nonprofit performances so long as the copyright owner doesn’t object. Section 512 is like that, pending the outcome of the Viacom case. Orphan works proposal: flip the duty to object to the rights owner. Google Book Search also has that pattern, where Google wants an opt-out system.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Note from Rebecca Tushnet: Wu suggests teaching a course called “Google,” which I thought about too.</p>
<blockquote><p>His purpose here is not normative, but descriptive: the law seems to be dealing with these developments by establishing opt-in. The traditional answer to mass violations of copyrights, or claimed violations, was compulsory licensing. The alternative emerging solution to transactions costs is opt-in.<br />
(2) In reaction to something like Lostpedia, there may be more pressure on interpretation of the adaptation right and perhaps a narrowing. There are two lines of cases, mostly unreconciled, about what counts as an adaptation. The Seventh Circuit has left more white space, in Litman’s terms – not everything you do with a work makes it a derivative work. A Beanie Baby guide is not a derivative work of a Beanie Baby.<br />
(3) Perhaps companies like ABC want to encourage things like Lostpedia. They might consider clear No Action Policies about what they’re not going to act on. This is different from licensing because such policies could change. If they think it’s good for business – which Wu thinks it probably is – they could make the rules clearer. Since people are doing it anyway, that might not be all that important, but perhaps signaling makes a difference.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/picker" target="_blank">Randy Picker</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>
 There is no fair use right! It’s important to distinguish use and access rights. We understand the rules for owning a piece of paper. But composing a poem on a piece of paper doesn’t change the ownership regime for the piece of paper. Creating the poem doesn’t create an access right to it, and it’s hard to get to a use right without an access right. </p></blockquote>
<p>
Note from Rebecca Tushnet: I’m pretty sure I disagree, at least as to works that have been voluntarily disclosed. Wendy Gordon wrote about this extensively in her <a href="http://www.jstor.org/view/00440094/ap030790/03a00020/0" target="_blank">Yale piece</a>.  Fair use doesn’t trump otherwise applicable law. The statute merely says that a fair use isn’t an infringement; other laws may apply, like obscenity.</p>
<blockquote><p>It used to be true that disclosing a work necessarily involved surrendering control. But it’s now possible to distribute works digitally and still exercise control at a distance.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Note from Brian Rowe: he is talking about DRM, and he is wrong on two counts: DRM fails both technically, you can always hack it, and philosophically, people hate it.  DRM only causes rancor in fans</p>
<blockquote><p> So the question is what copyrighted work “locks” we are going to respect.   <br />
The ProCD case allows the contract to be enforced. DRM is another option. Adding it on to an existing medium, like CDs, generally failed, but integrating it into a new product, as with DVDs and iTunes, has generally been successful.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Note from Brian Rowe: I strongly disagree, see my <a href="http://freedomforip.org/blog/category/drm/">DRM posts</a> for more information. </p>
<blockquote><p>The importance of incremental investment in copyrighted works: publisher won’t do the Mandarin translation until it’s seen whether the English version is a success.  You get market feedback on the value of the work before you make more investments. Authors are overoptimistic about the commercial appeal of their works.   </p></blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">Note from Brian Rowe: I do not think I agree with any of Picker&#8217;s points.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unlike the rest of this blog, which is in the public domain, this post is under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/">Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License</a>. The original post was written by <a href="http://www.tushnet.com/" target="_blank">Rebecca Tushnet</a> on <a href="http://tushnet.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">43(B)log</a>. Edits by <a href="http://brianrowe.org/" target="_blank">Brian Rowe</a> including <a href="http://freedomforip.org/blog/2007/10/25/westlaw-kills-findlaw-remove-your-links/">moving links away from FindLaw for ethical reasons</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/02/11/beyond-fair-use-panel-at-columbia-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Copyright Debate: Cotton v. Wu</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/14/copyright-debate-cotton-v-wu/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/14/copyright-debate-cotton-v-wu/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Cotton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tim Wu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/blog/?p=169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times is hosting a debate on copyright issues and technology between Rick Cotton, general counsel of NBC, and Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School. This should be a a very interesting event. Wu is working to expand access the public domain through programs like AltLaw, while Cotton is a copyright [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.freedomforip.org/uploaded_images/DRM-War-759104.JPG"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://www.freedomforip.org/uploaded_images/DRM-War-759102.JPG" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />The <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/bits-debate:-copyright/">New York Times</a> is hosting a debate on copyright issues and technology between <a href="http://www.nbcuni.com/About_NBC_Universal/Executive_Bios/cotton_rick.shtml">Rick Cotton</a>, general counsel of NBC, and <a href="http://www.timwu.org/about.html">Tim Wu</a>, a professor at Columbia Law School.  This should be a a very interesting event.  Wu is working to expand access the public domain through programs like <a href="http://altlaw.org/">AltLaw</a>, while Cotton is a copyright maximalist who has helped NBC fight for stronger copyright laws and more DRM on video content.</p>
<p>Round 1:<br />Topic: DRM, Digital Rights Management, creating a war with users or a useful tool?</p>
<p>Cotton starts round one by acknowledging the major concern that artist want to get paid and that copyright law allows the use of DRM.  Then he stumbles by overstating the purpose and the usefulness of DRM as a silver bullet that will solve distribution problems through noninvasive solutions.</p>
<p>Wu responds by pointing out the problems with overzealous DRM like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal">Sony Root Kit</a> and the fact that most DRM prevents features that users want such as moving their own movies between devices they own.    Wu also points out that DRM is being used to cling to outdated distribution models and prevent fans from remixing.</p>
<p>Outcome: Slight edge to Wu.  I hope that as the week goes on issues like user generated content and free speech will take center stage.</p>
<p><a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/bits-debate-is-copy-protection-needed-or-futile/?hp">Full text of round 1</a></p>
<p>My Response:<br />The only message DRM sends is &#8220;we do not like or trust our customers&#8221;.  DRM views the public as the enemy.  For those of us on the ground, fighting DRM is a war and consumer rights are the casualties.  Get involved in the fight &#8211; visit <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org/">Defective by Design</a>.</p>
<p>To speak much is one thing, to speak well, another.<br />-Sophocles</p>
<p>Round 1 word count:<br />Cotton 844<br />Wu 449</p>
<p>Related FFIP articles:<br /><a href="http://www.freedomforip.org/2007/10/tolerated-lawbreaking-and-copyright-by.html#links">Tim Wu &#8211; &#8220;tolerated lawbreaking&#8221; and Copyright</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/14/copyright-debate-cotton-v-wu/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sony Misses the Point of DRM Free Downloads</title>
		<link>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/08/sony-misses-the-point-of-drm-free-downloads/</link>
		<comments>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/08/sony-misses-the-point-of-drm-free-downloads/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM-free]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sony]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freedomforip.org/blog/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sony made an announcement last week that it will now sell DRM free music. However, they&#8217;ve managed to make it as unfriendly to consumers as possible. To obtain the Sony DRM free tracks, you have to first have to go to a retail store to buy a Platinum MusicPass, a card containing a secret code, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.freedomforip.org/uploaded_images/sonybgm-746298.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://www.freedomforip.org/uploaded_images/sonybgm-746293.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a>Sony made an announcement last week that it will now sell DRM free music.  However, they&#8217;ve managed to make it as unfriendly to consumers as possible.  To obtain the Sony DRM free tracks, you have to first have to go to a <span style="font-weight: bold;">retail store</span> to buy a Platinum MusicPass, a card containing a secret code, for a suggested retail price of $12.99. Once you have scratched off the card&#8217;s covering to expose the code, you will be able to download one of just 37 albums available through the service including Britney Spears&#8217; &#8220;Blackout&#8221; and <span class="highlighted1">Barry</span> Manilow&#8217;s &#8220;The Greatest Songs of the Seventies&#8221; (both universally recognized as among the 37 best albums of all time).</p>
<p>Almost no selection, a higher price point than iTunes and you have to show up to a store.</p>
<p>Amazon.com offers 2.9 million DRM-free tracks in MP3 format from:<br />EMI Group<br />Warner Music Group<br />Universal Music<br />Independent record labels</p>
<p>Apple&#8217;s iTunes Store has around 2 million DRM-free albums for $9.99</p>
<p>I am not sure what Sony is thinking, but DRM-free distribution that requires people to go to a store to buy downloads is not a step forward.   The Platinum MusicPass sounds like an over priced glorified gift card.  Sony did state that online sales are part of their &#8220;ultimate plan&#8221; but have not released any further information.</p>
<p>Sony Listen Up:<br />If you wants to make real waves in the music industry you should consider something <span style="font-weight: bold;">better</span> than what everyone else is already offering.   How about an online retail site where ALL Sony&#8217;s music is DRM-free and users get to pay what they think the music is worth.  Radiohead has proven that this model is workable for famous artists and <a href="http://magnatune.com/">Magnatune</a> is making it work for new artists. I would be a lot more likely to open my wallet for that format!  </p>
<p>Press:<br /><a href="http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/01/07/Sony-BMG-to-sell-DRM-free-music-downloads-through-stores_1.html">InfoWorld  with full Details on the Sony DRM free program</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://freedomforip.org/2008/01/08/sony-misses-the-point-of-drm-free-downloads/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
