DOCSLIB.ORG

Happy Birthday (Oct 28, 1998) DMCA! DMCA: the Good, the Bad, the Ugly? DMCA and Chilling Effects Jon Lech Johansen

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Happy Birthday (Oct 28, 1998) DMCA! DMCA: the Good, the Bad, the Ugly? DMCA and Chilling Effects Jon Lech Johansen Happy Birthday (Oct 28, 1998) DMCA! DMCA: The good, the bad, the ugly? Blogs, search engines, e-commerce sites, video and Notice and take down for copyright infringement social-networking portals are thriving today thanks in http://www.ivanhoffman.com/dmca.html large part to the notice-and-takedown regime ushered http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi in by the much-maligned copyright overhaul. A decade ago, when the DMCA was enacted, these To submit a takedown notice, provide: innovations were unheard of, embryonic or not yet Complainant: name, address, e-signature conceived. Now, Google has grown into one of the Where are the infringing materials? Ref/link/id world's largest companies, and its video-sharing site Statement: no legal basis for use of materials YouTube has left an enduring mark on public Statement: act on behalf of copyright holder discourse. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/ten-years-later.html CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.1 CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.2 DMCA and chilling effects Jon Lech Johansen Dmitry Sklyarov, Elcomsoft, 2001 DeCSS Arrested? Conference? How does DVD encryption work? Ed Felten, SDMI, 2001 What is GPL issue with original code? RIAA urges reconsideration Brute force attack on 40-bit key beyond DeCSS http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~prc/Parodies.html Alex Halderman, Sony rootkit Apple, iTunes, Fairplay, DRM Digital Rights Management Ben Edelman and CIPA (children’s internet iPhone protection act) Hacker Jon Research, tools, distribution, “just sue” CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.3 CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.4 P2P: origins and current state Napster, copyright, law Shawn Fanning Napster was centralized, file-sharing/p2p Napster, 1998-99 Why was it centralized? Under 20, mp3, … What did centralization mean? Where are files? Centralized server Rupture, EA $15 million Napster started just after DMCA, court cases new Justin Frankel A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. Winamp, 98-99 Direct, contributory, vicarious infringement What about Grokster? See http://www.grokster.com Just 20, mp3, … AOL, $50+ million Microsoft, RIAA, Mark Cuban, … Unanimous Supreme court, but Universal v Sony Gnutella CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.5 CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.6 Gnutella and distributed, p2p software Bittorrent Originally a software package, pulled by AOL Started by Bram Cohen, http://bitconjurer.org Protocol used in Limewire, 40% of p2p today? Distributed p2p Soon to die? (Lawmeme) Meta-data, torrent, tracker All clients are equal, but some are more equal You must cooperate to download than others, e.g., supernodes 20-30% of all Internet traffic “Bad actors” can affect the network, an actor is a Files are split up and downloaded in pieces client, e.g., Xolox in 2002, others today? “bandwidth-hog/bandit” Advantages? Disadvantages? Seeder, swarm, clients Bittorrent, eDonkey, Kazaa, … “optimistic unchoking” compared to tit-for-tat Why do we have different protocols/programs? CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.7 CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.8 Brian Fox Bittorrent meets DMCA and RIAA GNU Bash Shell (developer) Indirect Swarm detection Buddycast (co-developer) In swarm? Liable “each person has a sweet spot — a NAT, other IP address place where they are incredibly productive and at their happiest “in-the-wild” experiment while doing so — okorians spend their lives living there — the okori False positives sweet spot is the realization of the concept, the delivery of the Direct harder impossible, from the germ of the Man-in-the-middle idea to the instantiation of it” No Encryption http://www.theokorigroup.com/sweet_spot CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.9 CPS 82, Fall 2008 14.10 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Peer-To-Peer Systems and Massively Multiplayer Online Games
    Peer-to-Peer Systems and Massively Multiplayer Online Games Speaker: Jehn-Ruey Jiang CSIE Department National Central University P2P Systems Client/Server Architecture GET /index.html HTTP/1.0 HTTP/1.1 200 OK ... Server Clients 3/66 Peer-to-Peer Architecture Gateway Server Peers 4/66 The architectures Server-based architecture Client-Server / Server-Cluster Problems： Limited resources All loads are centered on the server Server-based architecture has low scalability. The setup and maintenance cost is high. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) architecture Advantages： Distributing loads to all users Users consume and provide resources P2P architecture has high scalability. The setup and maintenance cost is low. The Client Side Today‟s clients can perform more roles than just forwarding users requests Today‟s clients have: more computing power more storage space Thin client Fat client 6/66 Evolution at the Client Side DEC‟S VT100 IBM PC PC @ 4-core 4GHz @ 4.77MHz No storage 300GB HD 360k diskettes „70 „80 2008 7/66 What Else Has Changed? The number of home PCs is increasing rapidly Most of the PCs are “fat clients” As the Internet usage grow, more and more PCs are connecting to the global net Most of the time PCs are idle How can we use all this? Peer-to-Peer (P2P) 8/66 What is peer-to-peer (P2P)? “Peer-to-peer is a way of structuring distributed applications such that the individual nodes have symmetric roles. Rather than being divided into clients and servers each with quite distinct roles, in P2P applications a node may act as both
    [Show full text]
  • 04. Peer-To-Peer Applications
    Internet Technology 04. Peer-to-Peer Applications Paul Krzyzanowski Rutgers University Spring 2016 February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 1 Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Application Architectures • No reliance on a central server • Machines (peers) communicate with each other • Pools of machines (peers) provide the service • Goals client server – Robustness • Expect that some systems may be down – Self-scalability • The system can handle greater workloads as more peers are added peers February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 2 Peer-to-Peer networking “If a million people use a web site simultaneously, doesn’t that mean that we must have a heavy-duty remote server to keep them all happy? No; we could move the site onto a million desktops and use the Internet for coordination. Could amazon.com be an itinerant horde instead of a fixed central command post? Yes.” – David Gelernter The Second Coming – A Manifesto See http://edge.org/conversation/the-second-coming-a-manifesto February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 3 Peer to Peer applications • P2P targets diverse solutions – Cooperative computation – Communications (e.g., Skype) – Exchanges, digital currency (bitcoin) – DNS (including multicast DNS) – Content distribution (e.g., BitTorrent) – Storage distribution • P2P can be a distributed server – Lots of machines spread across multiple datacenters Today, we’ll focus on file distribution February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 4 Four key primitives • Join/Leave – How do you join a P2P system?
    [Show full text]
  • You Are Not Welcome Among Us: Pirates and the State
    International Journal of Communication 9(2015), 890–908 1932–8036/20150005 You Are Not Welcome Among Us: Pirates and the State JESSICA L. BEYER University of Washington, USA FENWICK MCKELVEY1 Concordia University, Canada In a historical review focused on digital piracy, we explore the relationship between hacker politics and the state. We distinguish between two core aspects of piracy—the challenge to property rights and the challenge to state power—and argue that digital piracy should be considered more broadly as a challenge to the authority of the state. We trace generations of peer-to-peer networking, showing that digital piracy is a key component in the development of a political platform that advocates for a set of ideals grounded in collaborative culture, nonhierarchical organization, and a reliance on the network. We assert that this politics expresses itself in a philosophy that was formed together with the development of the state-evading forms of communication that perpetuate unmanageable networks. Keywords: pirates, information politics, intellectual property, state networks Introduction Digital piracy is most frequently framed as a challenge to property rights or as theft. This framing is not incorrect, but it overemphasizes intellectual property regimes and, in doing so, underemphasizes the broader political challenge posed by digital pirates. In fact, digital pirates and broader “hacker culture” are part of a political challenge to the state, as well as a challenge to property rights regimes. This challenge is articulated in terms of contributory culture, in contrast to the commodification and enclosures of capitalist culture; as nonhierarchical, in contrast to the strict hierarchies of the modern state; and as faith in the potential of a seemingly uncontrollable communication technology that makes all of this possible, in contrast to a fear of the potential chaos that unsurveilled spaces can bring.
    [Show full text]
  • Get Real: Print This
    Get Real: Print This http://www.corante.com/getreal/archives/032237print.html from Get Real by Marc Eisenstadt January 11, 2005 BitTorrent, eXeem, Meta-Torrent, Podcasting: "What? So What?" SUMMARY: The index that facilitates the sharing of files on a large scale is also the Achilles heel of peer-to-peer file-sharing, because it is vulnerable to litigation and closure. So what happens if the index is itself distributed? I try to get my head around the latest in peer-to-peer file sharing, and explain a bit about what I've learned, including the fact that BitTorrent's power rests in its 'swarm' distribution model, but not necessarily in your end-user download speed. What has this got to do with podcasting? (Answer: invisible P2P plumbing helps the podcasting wheel go round). [Warning: lengthy article follows]. First, some history (skip ahead to the next section if you're already bored with the Napster, Gnutella, KaZaa, and BitTorrent saga). Napster opened our eyes to the power of distributed file sharing on a massive scale. But it was closed down by lawsuits to stop it from listing copyrighted works for which the owners would naturally have preferred to collect royalties (there are thousands of commentaries on the pros and cons of such royalties, but that's not the focus of this posting). Successive generations of tools such as Gnutella, KaZaa, and now BitTorrent have created their own buzz, their own massive followings, their own headaches, and their own solutions to others' headaches. Here's my rundown of the 'big ideas' (and the people behind them): Napster (Shawn Fanning): This was the Mother of big-time peer-to-peer (P2P) file transfers, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Title: P2P Networks for Content Sharing
    Title: P2P Networks for Content Sharing Authors: Choon Hoong Ding, Sarana Nutanong, and Rajkumar Buyya Grid Computing and Distributed Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Australia (chd, sarana, raj)@cs.mu.oz.au ABSTRACT Peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies have been widely used for content sharing, popularly called “file-swapping” networks. This chapter gives a broad overview of content sharing P2P technologies. It starts with the fundamental concept of P2P computing followed by the analysis of network topologies used in peer-to-peer systems. Next, three milestone peer-to-peer technologies: Napster, Gnutella, and Fasttrack are explored in details, and they are finally concluded with the comparison table in the last section. 1. INTRODUCTION Peer-to-peer (P2P) content sharing has been an astonishingly successful P2P application on the Internet. P2P has gained tremendous public attention from Napster, the system supporting music sharing on the Web. It is a new emerging, interesting research technology and a promising product base. Intel P2P working group gave the definition of P2P as "The sharing of computer resources and services by direct exchange between systems". This thus gives P2P systems two main key characteristics: • Scalability: there is no algorithmic, or technical limitation of the size of the system, e.g. the complexity of the system should be somewhat constant regardless of number of nodes in the system. • Reliability: The malfunction on any given node will not effect the whole system (or maybe even any other nodes). File sharing network like Gnutella is a good example of scalability and reliability.
    [Show full text]
  • The High-Definition Multimedia Interface
    technology High-Defi nition Multimedia Interface It’s the interconnect that sorts out a lot of problems we thought we had and a few that we didn’t; it’s the High-Defi nition Multimedia Interface. NIGEL JOPSON discovers a new digital connector that has all sorts of implications for the future — including the forced deactivation of analogue outputs. just 15% of new sets sold this year will include it and be able to deliver the full 1080 high resolution picture that these devices are being sold on. Unlike the disparate disc formats that have polarised manufacturers into two camps, the HDMI connector has cross-industry support. The founders include electronics manufacturers Hitachi, Matsushita Electric (Panasonic), Philips, Sony, Thomson (RCA), Toshiba, and Silicon Image. Digital Content Protection LLC (a subsidiary of Intel) is providing High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) for HDMI. In addition, HDMI has the very partisan support of major movie producers Fox, Universal, Warner Bros and Disney, and system operators DirecTV and EchoStar (Dish Network) as well as CableLabs and Samsung. So HDMI is an industry-supported, uncompressed, all-digital audio/video interface. The small connector provides the interface between any compatible digital audio/video source, such as a set-top box, DVD player or AV receiver and a compatible digital audio and/or video monitor. It was conceived as a sort of digital SCART, primarily a point-to-point connector; HDMI grew out of DVI and the picture side is backwards compatible (providing that copy protection is implemented). HDMI adds support for component video, multichannel audio, the so-called universal CD control, and the concept of auto-confi guration.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Idea of Fair Digital Rights Management an Oxymoron? The
    Royal Holloway Series Fair Digital Rights Management Fair digital rights management HOME THE BIRTH OF DIGITAL RIGHTS Is the idea of fair digital rights management an oxymoron? The MANAGEMENT music industry has been turned upside down by the Internet, and UNFAIR DIGITAL RIGHTS has tried various methods to protect its profits. But many of its MANAGEMENT actions have been either futile or heavy-handed. Christian Bonnici A DIGITAL RIGHTS and Keith Martin examine various approaches to see which would DILEMMA be most effective and fair to all parties. A COMPROMISE SOLUTION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 1 Royal Holloway Series Fair Digital Rights Management HERE ARE FEW issues more provocative than that THE BIRTH OF DIGITAL of the management of rights to digital content. RIGHTS MANAGEMENT For some consumers the internet is seen as an We will frame our discussion around music HOME Tagent of digital freedom, facilitating free and media, which is one of the most high profile types THE BIRTH OF easy access to digital content such as music and of digital content. FIGURE 1 (page 3) shows a sim - DIGITAL RIGHTS films. For some digital content providers the ple timeline indicating some of the milestones in MANAGEMENT internet has been seen as a technology that has the development of music media. The publication UNFAIR damaged their ability to earn money from selling of the MP3 music compression algorithm in 1991 DIGITAL RIGHTS their products. represents the most significant development with MANAGEMENT The solution to providers’ fears has been vari - respect to digital rights to music media, and this A DIGITAL ous attempts to control access to digital content event is pivotal to our discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Price Discriminiation, Rootkits and Flatrates
    Of Price Discriminiation, Rootkits and Flatrates Volker Grassmuck Helmholtz-Zentrum für Kulturtechnik, Humboldt-University Berlin 19 February 2006 DRAFT VERSION – final version is slated for print publication Licensed under Creative Commons Share-Alike Germany 2.0 „Copyright owners continue to be ambivalent about the Internet. On the one hand, it represents a fantastic new medium for distribution; on the other, many in the publishing industry see it as one ‚giant, out of control copying machine.‘ ... The very technological advances that make rights management more difficult – the dramatic reduction in costs of copying and distribution – also offer a fantastic opportunity for owners of intellectual content.“1 Without scarcity there is no market. Information by its nature is a public good.2 Copyright law artificially creates scarcity by granting exclusive rights to it for a limited time. Media technology so far helped enforcability of those rights because the means of production and the means of distribution of informational goods were expensive and therefore scarce. The digital revolution does away with this scarcity. PC and Internet bring to virtually everyone the power of the printing press and the recording studio. Only now, information‘s defining qualities of non-rivalrousness and non-excludability come to full bearing. Zero cost for reproduction and distribution is indeed a fantastic value proposition for information vendors. Alas, it is undermined by the fact that for consumers the cost of copying and distribution is zero as well. Peer-to-peer networks show that transporting bits from A to B is now such a low-cost service that users can effortlessly provide it to each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Doesn't Want to Be Free Cory Doctorow
    Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free Laws for the Internet Age Cory Doctorow Copyright © 2014 Cory Doctorow Cover design by Sunra Thompson. All rights reserved, including right of reproduction in whole or in part, in any form. McSweeney’s and colophon are registered trademarks of McSweeney’s, a privately held company with wildly fluctuating resources. Printed by Thomson-Shore in Michigan. ISBN 978-1-940450-28-5 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 www.mcsweeneys.net v FOREWORDS Neil Gaiman viii Amanda Palmer xii 0. INTRODUCTION Detente xviii 0.1 What Makes Money? xx 0.2 Don’t Quit Your Day Job—Really xxii 1. DOCTOROW’S FIRST LAW Any Time Someone Puts a Lock on Something That Belongs to You and Won’t Give You the Key, That Lock Isn’t There for Your Benefit 1 1.1 Anti-Circumvention Explained 4 1.2 Is This Copyright Protection? 7 1.3 So Is This Copy Protection? 12 1.4 Digital Locks Always Break 14 1.5 Understanding General-Purpose Computers 21 1.6 Rootkits Everywhere 23 1.7 Appliances 26 1.8 Proto-Appliances: The Inkjet Wars 28 1.9 Worse Than Nothing 31 2. DOCTOROW’S SECOND LAW Fame Won’t Make You Rich, But You Can’t Get Paid Without It 37 2.1 Good at Spreading Copies, Good at Spreading Fame 41 2.2 An Audience Machine 43 2.3 Getting People to Care About Your Work 49 2.4 Content Isn’t King 51 2.5 How Do I Get People to Pay Me? 53 2.6 Does This Mean You Should Ditch Your Investor and Go Indie? 64 2.7 Love 66 2.8 The New Intermediaries 69 2.9 Intermediary Liability 75 2.10 Notice and Takedown 77 2.11 So What’s Next? 80 2.12 More Intermediary Liability, Fewer Checks and Balances 82 2.13 Disorganized Channels Are Good for Creators 87 2.14 Freedom Can Be Expensive, but Censorship Costs Us the World 90 vi FOREWORDS 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind
    37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page i The Public Domain ___-1 ___0 ___ 1 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page ii Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813, p. 6. -1 ___ 0 ___ 1 ___ 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page iii James Boyle The Public Domain Enclosing the Commons of the Mind Yale University Press ___-1 New Haven & London ___0 ___ 1 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page iv A Caravan book. For more information, visit www.caravanbooks.org. Copyright © 2008 by James Boyle. All rights reserved. The author has made an online version of this work available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. It can be accessed through the author’s website at http://james-boyle.com. Printed in the United States of America. ISBN: 978-0-300-13740-8 Library of Congress Control Number: 2008932282 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48–1992 (Permanence of Paper). It contains 30 percent postconsumer waste (PCW) and is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) -1 ___ 0 ___ 1 ___ 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page v Contents Acknowledgments, vii Preface: Comprised of at Least Jelly?, xi 1 Why Intellectual Property?, 1 2 Thomas Jefferson Writes a Letter, 17 3 The Second Enclosure Movement, 42 4 The Internet Threat, 54 5 The Farmers’ Tale: An Allegory, 83 6 I Got a Mashup, 122 7 The Enclosure of Science and Technology: Two Case Studies, 160 8 A Creative Commons, 179 9 An Evidence-Free Zone, 205 10 An Environmentalism for Information, 230 ___-1 Notes and Further Readings, 249 ___0 Index, 297 ___ 1 v 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page vi -1 ___ 0 ___ 1 ___ 37278_u00.qxd 8/28/08 11:04 AM Page vii Acknowledgments The ideas for this book come from the theoretical and practical work I have been doing for the last ten years.
    [Show full text]
  • Hackere / Crackere
    UNIVERSITETET I OSLO Institutt for informatikk Hackere / Crackere Masteroppgave (60 studiepoeng) Ørjan Nordvik 1. februar 2006 Sammendrag Denne masteroppgaven går kort sagt ut på å finne ut hva som karakteriserer hackere og crackere. Det er viktig å klargjøre så tidlig som mulig i oppgaven hvordan jeg tolker disse to termene. I kapittel tre vil jeg gå grundig igjennom dette, men først vil jeg her kort oppsummere hvordan jeg kommer til å bruke begrepene hacker og cracker. Hackere er dataeksperter som holder seg på den riktige siden av loven, mens crackere er de som bryter loven. For å kunne diskutere de sentrale begrepene har jeg gjort en litteraturstudie som resulterte i kapittel tre, samt en empirisk undersøkelse ved å intervjue dataeksperter, hackere og crackere. Det er den empiriske undersøkelsen som består av en rekke kvalitative intervjuer, og data fra sekundærlitteraturen som danner datagrunnlaget i denne oppgaven. Hackere og crackere er etter min mening ikke homogene grupper som lett lar seg beskrive med få setninger. Det finnes et utall av motiver som ligger bak deres handlinger enten de er hacker eller cracker. Måten de arbeider på avhenger ofte av hvilket ferdighetsnivå de har. Det klassiske bilde av hackere som kvisete, coladrikkende fjortisser med tykke briller er en myte. Hackere og crackere finnes i alle samfunnslag og er like gjerne 30 som 15 år. Forord Denne masteroppgaven inngår som en del av mastergraden min ved Institutt for Informatikk, Universitetet i Oslo våren 2006. Området for forskningen er innen Informasjonssystemer oppgaven fokuserer på karakteristikker av hackere og crackere. Oppgaven er av «lang» type og gir 60 studiepoeng.
    [Show full text]
  • Essay the Evolution and Revolution
    Essay The Evolution and Revolution of Napster* By PETER JAN HONIGSBERG** As I TURNED the corner onto Seventh Street from Mission Street in San Francisco on that Monday morning, October 1, 2000, I knew I was watching history unfold. The satellite dishes, the neon-bright lights set atop the media vans, and members of the press fidgeting anxiously had replaced the homeless who usually encamp near the main en- trance to the Federal Court of Appeals building. As many as two hun- dred members of the national and international media had arrived that day, some as early as 4:15 A.M., although the music industry's law- suit against Napster was scheduled to begin at 11:00 A.M.I A television reporter was interviewing a balding man in a blue striped suit, the artificial lamps barely making a dent in the gray, dull natural light. I. Piracy-the Word of the Day While I watched the reporters lining up at the door to the court- house, I could not help but see the "P" word flashing overhead. The five major record companies ("the majors") and the Recording Indus- try Association of America ("RIAA")-the association that represents the companies-had paid their publicity agents and lawyers well. Piracy was the word of the day. Actually, at least where Napster was concerned, it was the word of the entire millennium year of 2000, and continued to be the word after the Ninth Circuit issued its unanimous * Just like the technology upon which this essay is based, the essay itself will be out of date the moment the typing stops.
    [Show full text]