[WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] [A2k] Re: [Wsis-pct] IP Justice Comment to IGF on Top Policy Issues forAthens

[Philippe Aigrain]

Jamie,

I dare to disagree. The term DRM was developed to emphasize total usage 
control and pay per usage. DRMS (the S is for systems which tells you a lot) 
are worse than TPMs not better. They only claim to be TPMs for benefitting 
from the outlawing of circumvention. It is not accurate to say that the GPL, 
Creative Commons or free software licenses such as Apache or Berkeley are in 
any manner DRMs. Some of them (the GPL and Creatvie Commons) are even 
explicit about NOT managing rights, but only stating them. This is called 
"rights expression" or "rights information" or even simpler "permission 
notices".
For a detailed analysis see my text "DRMS and free 
software" (http://www.debatpublic.net/Members/paigrain/blogue/DRMS#english)
or from a copyright law perspective Julie Cohen's papers 
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/jec/publications.html) emphasizing how 
the transfer of the judgment on the legitimacy of usage from an a posteriori 
judicial decision to an a priori technology implementation is a major danger 
for intellectual freedoms.

Best,

Philippe Aigrain

Le Mardi 4 Avril 2006 16:44, James Love a écrit :
> I am wondering if the emphasis on the term DRM is the wrong one.   I
> believe the objections are partly about technical protection measures
> (TPMs), which make it impossible to access works.   The various
> versions of the GPL are themselves types of DRMs, as are the creative
> commons, Apache or Berkley licenses.    The problems I think people
> are most concerned about are the technical enforcement of DRM
> licenses, particularly if these are driven into the hardware of
> computers and other devices.   Also, within the DRM area, the problem
> are what might be considered "unfair" or "anticompetitive" terms in
> licenses, and the efforts by some to make non-negotiated instruments
> enforceable as contracts.
>
>    Jamie
>
> On Apr 4, 2006, at 9:29 AM, Milton Mueller wrote:
> > This seems to me to be the correct approach. I think Norbert has it
> > right here.
> > --MM
> >
> >>>> Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> 04/03/06 3:36 AM >>>
> >
> > Those who like DRM are still free to use it, but I am able to
> > prevent them from _redistributing_ _my_ work, or a derivative
> > work thereof, as part of a DRM scheme to which try to subject
> > third parties.
> >
> > When I release a program that I have written as Free Software,
> > I want this activity to increase the amount of freedom which
> > exists in the world, and I want to take precautions against
> > my work having unintended effects of actually decreasing the
> > freedom which exists in the world.
> >
> > In other words, because the GPLv3 draft has been created, I
> > have gained the ability to do what I want (thank you, FSF),
> > while pro-DRM people retain the ability to do what they want.
> >
> > Of course I hope that over time, a social consensus will
> > emerge that DRM (in the sense of allowing anyone to impose
> > restrictions on what someone else's computer may be programmed
> > to do) is not acceptable in any form or shape.
> >
> > In the meantime, those who are in favor of DRM vote with
> > their actions for their opinion, by using some kind of DRM
> > system for those creative works concerning which they control
> > copyright-related rights.  It's only fair when we who are
> > opposed to DRM can also vote with our actions for our opinion,
> > by using DRM-incompatible licensensing for our creative works.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Norbert
> > _______________________________________________
> > governance mailing list
> > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > governance mailing list
> > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
> ---------------------------------
> James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love at cptech.org /
> tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
> "If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks."  Bill Walton
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k at lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------------ Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par
> l'anti-virus mail. Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete
> detecte.

-- 
Philippe Aigrain
(message personnel)