DOCSLIB.ORG

DRM) Technology in Contemporary Copyright

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DRM) Technology in Contemporary Copyright The Role of Digital Rights Management (DRM) Technology in Contemporary Copyright Joseph Straus Munich International Forum on the Centennial of Chinese Copyright Legislation Renmin University of China, Beijing October 15, 2010 © J. Straus 2010 -1- Points to Consider • Copyright & technology – two old companions – dialectic relationship • Technology promoter of (re)production and distribution of works & challenge of copyright • Digitization – new quantitative & qualitative challenge • Legal & technical response • Where is the right balance of interests: creators & publishers v. users, hardware manufacturers, etc. → social progress? © J. Straus 2010 -2- Copyright & Technology – Two Old Companions China, the Technological Frontrunner • 105 AD - Lun Cai invents paper manufacturing technique • 1041 AD – Sheng Bi invents movable type printing • No legal impact – due to social/intellectual environment [no revolution] and due fragmented to agricultural economy [Chao Xu] © J. Straus 2010 -3- Copyright & Technology – Two Old Companions Europe – the Late(r) Commer • 1439 – Johannes Gutenberg invents movable type printing • 1469 – Johann von Speyer granted printing privilege by the city of Venice • Etching technique (copper engraving) invented – privileges for reproduction granted (Albrecht Dürer) • 15th-17th Century – numerous such privileges granted in Europe Social Revolution (Renaissance, humanism, reformation) & technology & market → protection against copying → printers & publishers, i.e. industry prime beneficiary • Idea of intellectual property protecting authors –18th Century child © J. Straus 2010 -4- Technology Promoter of (Re)Production and Distribution of Works & Challenge for Copyright Technology Law • Phonographs & gramophones → Creation of neighbouring rights • Cinematography → Rome Convention 1961 • Broadcasting & television → Phonogram Convention 1971 • Cable & satellites → Satellite Convention 1974 • Reprography → TRIPS 1994 • Recording → New approaches: Limitation of • Computer programs exclusive rights & statutory licenses & fair remuneration & proceeds collected and distributed by collecting societies © J. Straus 2010 -5- However Limitations and Exclusions Allowed Only if Confined to • Certain special cases which • Do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and • Do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder [Art. 9 (2) BC, Art. 13 TRIPS] © J. Straus 2010 -6- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge Technology • 1980s – Compact Disc (CD) • 1990s – Digital Video Disc/Digital Versatile Disc (DVD: DVD- ROM; DVD-R; DVD+R; DVD-RW; DVD-RAM) • Digital technology & internet • Digital technology & www 2.0 (broadband communication) • Software → creation of & editing of digital content • Online distribution of digital works © J. Straus 2010 -7- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge Consequences • Analog works: – Production & storage & distribution of physical carriers necessary and costly – Distribution of illegal copies huge logistic problem • Digital works – Cheap and easy copying & distribution of commercially valuable digital content without physical carrier – CD & DVD → PC → internet → distribution to third parties – File-sharing network → exchange of files with, e.g. music works – File-sharing networks based on “p2p” software © J. Straus 2010 -8- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge DRM-Technology/TPM as Response • “The answer to the machine is in the machine” Clarck 1996 • DRM – digitally controlled administration of rights, i.e. enforcement of rights in digital environment by technological means – e.g. encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism - [technical protection measures TPM] • Allows copyright owners to control the way consumers access and use digital works – also following the delivery • Functions as electronic licensing system © J. Straus 2010 -9- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge DRM’s Impact • Seen as business enablers for digital distribution of content and drivers for the variety of new business models that consumers may want OECD • DRM may facilitate the creation and dissemination of creative works • By protecting digital works from unauthorized downloading, viewing and possible creation of derivative works – potential encouragement for the content right holder to make content available for digitization and subsequent digital sale OECD © J. Straus 2010 -10- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge DRM Technologies – Platform Technologies • Windows media DRM → provides secure delivery of audio/video content over an IP network to a PC/other playback device → distributer can control how content used • OMA DRM → implemented in over 550 portable phone models → for controlling cell phone ring tones & access to media files such as video • Methods bypassing DRM → analog loopback transformation (analog hole), decryption keys, pirate decryption, watermarks removal, etc. © J. Straus 2010 -11- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge DRM – Patented Technology: EP 1 329 791 as Example • A method for controlling distribution and use of digital works, the method comprising the steps of: – creating usage rights from a usage rights grammar, each of said usage rights defining a specific instance of how a digital work may be used or distributed; – associating said usage rights with a digital work; – storing said digital work and its associated usage rights in a first repository, said first repository having a server mode of operation for enabling said first repository to grant or deny requests from other repositories to access digital works according to usage rights and said first repository having a requester mode of operation for enabling said first repository to request access to digital works; © J. Straus 2010 -12- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge DRM – Patented Technology: EP 1 329 791 as Example – a second repository, having a requester mode of operation for enabling said second repository to request access to digital works, initiating a request to access said digital work in said first repository, said request specifying a transport usage right, said transport usage right being a right to copy, a right to transfer or a right to loan; – the first repository determining if said specified transport usage right is associated with said digital work; © J. Straus 2010 -13- Digitization – New Quantitative & Qualitative Challenge EP 1 329 791 © J. Straus 2010 -14- Consequences Technology Law • Digitization → WCT (Art. 11, 12) 1996 • DRM/TPM → WPPT (Art. 18, 19) 1996 • Circumventing → DMCA (17 U.S.C. §§ 1201,1202) 1998 • Technologies → EUCD (Art. 6, 7) 2001 → ChCA (Art. 47 [48] (6), (7)) 2001 → GCA (Sections 95a, 95b) 2003 → ChRPRCIN (Art. 4, 5, 12 26) 2006 © J. Straus 2010 -15- Minimum Standard – Common Denominator Art. 11 WCT & Art. 18 WPPT • Provide adequate legal protection & effective legal remedies • Against the circumvention of effective technological means • Used by authors in connection with the exercise of their rights under WCT & BC • Restricting acts with respect of their works • Not authorized by the authors concerned or • Permitted by law © J. Straus 2010 -16- Implementation at Regional/National Level of PCT/WTPPT Standards Art. 6 (2) EUCD Sec. 95a GCA • Circumvention of effective TPMs prohibited • By deliberate or negligent acts, including • Preparatory acts of: manufacture, import, distribution, sale, rental, advertisement for sale or rental or possession of – devices, products or components or the provision of services which are – promoted, advertised or marketed for the purpose of circumvention of or – have only a limited commercial significant purpose or use other than to circumvent – are primarily designed, produced, adapted or performed for enabling or facilitating the circumvention of any effective TPMs © J. Straus 2010 -17- Minimum Standard – Common Denominator Art. 48(6) ChCA • Prohibit circumvention of effective, valid and defensive TPMs* • If acts done deliberately • Preparatory acts, limited to information and network communication (i.e. Internet dissemination) • Not covered: Rental, advertisement for sale or rental, or possession for commercial purposes * Offensive TPM not protected – KV300L++ case – Jiangmin NewTech, Ltd. © J. Straus 2010 -18- Exception to the Prohibition of Circumvention of TPM Art. 6 (4) EUCD • Member states shall take appropriate measures – to ensure that right holders make available to the beneficiary of an exception or limitation to their exclusive rights means of benefiting from that exception or limitation – to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception/limitation, and – When the beneficiary has legal access to the protected work © J. Straus 2010 -19- Exception to the Prohibition of Circumvention of TPM Sec. 95b GCA – Enforcement of Restricting Provisions • Right holders employing TPM obliged – to provide the beneficiaries of exclusions/limitations – with the means necessary to be able to make the required use – provided they have lawful access to the work – administrators of justice & public safety, handicapped persons, collections for use in churches and schools; school broadcast; for teaching and research of the public – beneficiaries have the right to act against violators of this obligations • Applicable only to off-line access, not to works made available to the public online based on contract © J. Straus 2010 -20- Exception
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Traitor Tracing Scheme Based on RSA for Fast Decryption
    A Traitor Tracing Scheme Based on RSA for Fast Decryption John Patrick McGregor, Yiqun Lisa Yin, and Ruby B. Lee Princeton Architecture Laboratory for Multimedia and Security (PALMS) Department of Electrical Engineering Princeton University {mcgregor,yyin,rblee}@princeton.edu Abstract. We describe a fully k-resilient traitor tracing scheme that uti- lizes RSA as a secret-key rather than public-key cryptosystem. Traitor tracing schemes deter piracy in broadcast encryption systems by enabling the identification of authorized users known as traitors that contribute to unauthorized pirate decoders. In the proposed scheme, upon the confis- cation of a pirate decoder created by a collusion of k or fewer authorized users, contributing traitors can be identified with certainty. Also, the scheme prevents innocent users from being framed as traitors. The pro- posed scheme improves upon the decryption efficiency of past traitor tracing proposals. Each authorized user needs to store only a single de- cryption key, and decryption primarily consists of a single modular expo- nentiation operation. In addition, unlike previous traitor tracing schemes, the proposed scheme employs the widely deployed RSA algorithm. 1 Introduction Broadcast encryption is beneficial in scenarios where a content provider wishes to securely distribute the same information to many users or subscribers. The broadcast content is protected with encryption, and only legitimate users should possess the information (e.g., decryption keys) necessary to access the content. These keys can be embedded in software or in tamper-resistant hardware devices such as smart cards. Current tamper-resistant hardware is vulnerable to a variety of attacks [1], however. Furthermore, truly tamper-resistant software, which includes programs that resist unauthorized tampering or inspection of code and data, has yet to be developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Telecommunikation Satellites: the Actual Situation and Potential Future Developments
    Telecommunikation Satellites: The Actual Situation and Potential Future Developments Dr. Manfred Wittig Head of Multimedia Systems Section D-APP/TSM ESTEC NL 2200 AG Noordwijk [email protected] March 2003 Commercial Satellite Contracts 25 20 15 Europe US 10 5 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 European Average 5 Satellites/Year US Average 18 Satellites/Year Estimation of cumulative value chain for the Global commercial market 1998-2007 in BEuro 35 27 100% 135 90% 80% 225 Spacecraft Manufacturing 70% Launch 60% Operations Ground Segment 50% Services 40% 365 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 Consolidated Turnover of European Industry Commercial Telecom Satellite Orders 2000 30 2001 25 2002 3 (7) Firm Commercial Telecom Satellite Orders in 2002 Manufacturer Customer Satellite Astrium Hispasat SA Amazonas (Spain) Boeing Thuraya Satellite Thuraya 3 Telecommunications Co (U.A.E.) Orbital Science PT Telekommunikasi Telkom-2 Indonesia Hangar Queens or White Tails Orders in 2002 for Bargain Prices of already contracted Satellites Manufacturer Customer Satellite Alcatel Space New Indian Operator Agrani (India) Alcatel Space Eutelsat W5 (France) (1998 completed) Astrium Hellas-Sat Hellas Sat Consortium Ltd. (Greece-Cyprus) Commercial Telecom Satellite Orders in 2003 Manufacturer Customer Satellite Astrium Telesat Anik F1R 4.2.2003 (Canada) Planned Commercial Telecom Satellite Orders in 2003 SES GLOBAL Three RFQ’s: SES Americom ASTRA 1L ASTRA 1K cancelled four orders with Alcatel Space in 2001 INTELSAT Launched five satellites in the last 13 month average fleet age: 11 Years of remaining life PanAmSat No orders expected Concentration on cash flow generation Eutelsat HB 7A HB 8 expected at the end of 2003 Telesat Ordered Anik F1R from Astrium Planned Commercial Telecom Satellite Orders in 2003 Arabsat & are expected to replace Spacebus 300 Shin Satellite (solar-array steering problems) Korea Telecom Negotiation with Alcatel Space for Koreasat Binariang Sat.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) [X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT to SECT
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) [X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 OR [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _______________ to ________________. Commission file number: 0-26176 EchoStar Communications Corporation (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Nevada 88-0336997 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 5701 S. Santa Fe Littleton, Colorado 80120 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (303) 723-1000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Class A Common Stock, $0.01 par value 6 ¾% Series C Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [ ] Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
    [Show full text]
  • Eutelsat S.A. €300,000,000 3.125% Bonds Due 2022 Issue Price: 99.148 Per Cent
    EUTELSAT S.A. €300,000,000 3.125% BONDS DUE 2022 ISSUE PRICE: 99.148 PER CENT The €300,000,000 aggregate principal amount 3.125% per cent. bonds due 10 October 2022 (the Bonds) of Eutelsat S.A. (the Issuer) will be issued outside the Republic of France on 9 October 2012 (the Bond Issue). Each Bond will bear interest on its principal amount at a fixed rate of 3.125 percent. per annum from (and including) 9 October 2012 (the Issue Date) to (but excluding) 10 October 2022, payable in Euro annually in arrears on 10 October in each year and commencing on 10 October 2013, as further described in "Terms and Conditions of the Bonds - Interest"). Unless previously redeemed or purchased and cancelled in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Bonds, the Bonds will be redeemed at their principal amount on 10 October 2022 (the Maturity Date). The Issuer may at its option, and in certain circumstances shall, redeem all (but not part) of the Bonds at par plus any accrued and unpaid interest upon the occurrence of certain tax changes as further described in the section "Terms and Conditions of the Bonds - Redemption and Purchase - Redemption for tax reasons". The Bondholders may under certain conditions request the Issuer to redeem all or part of the Bonds following the occurrence of certain events triggering a downgrading of the Bonds as further described in the Section "Terms and Conditions of the Bonds — Redemption and Purchase - Redemption following a Change of Control". The obligations of the Issuer in respect of principal and interest payable under the Bonds constitute direct, unconditional, unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of the Issuer and shall at all times rank pari passu among themselves and pari passu with all other present or future direct, unconditional, unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of the Issuer, as further described in "Terms and Conditions of the Bonds - Status".
    [Show full text]
  • Ms. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12Th St., SW Washington DC 20554
    aai American Antitrust Institute Ms. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., SW Washington DC 20554 October 21, 2003 Dear Chairman Powell: Subject: Digital Broadcast Copy Protection, MB Docket No. 02-230 We are writing to urge the Commission to carefully consider the consumer effects, the anticompetitive impacts, and the extensive costs that a Broadcast Flag scheme will impose on a wide-range of consumer-electronics devices and personal computers. Despite our efforts to raise these questions about the Broadcast Flag approach—efforts that predate even the Commission’s decision to create a Broadcast Flag docket—they remain unanswered to this day, except by unsupported generalizations that the scheme will cost “pennies.”1 Because the proponents of the Broadcast Flag scheme have yet to address these issues—issues that may not only affect consumer pocketbooks but also may slow or even halt the transition to digital television—we believe the Commission does not yet have the complete record necessary to decide whether and how to implement this scheme. Below we suggest potential remedies to these deficiencies. Here are three of the major questions that remain unanswered in the existing record: After the flag is adopted, will consumers have the same reasonable and customary uses with their digital television content that they enjoy in today’s analog world? The proposal offered by the Motion Picture Association of America makes clear that the Flag scheme will tether user-recorded content in new ways. It will not allow consumers to watch that content on machines other than new, compliant devices (but it is unclear if it will permit recordings to be shared within a user’s own “personal digital network”).
    [Show full text]
  • Donald Best Wikipedia Text-Only Version
    This is Google's cache of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_best. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 4 Jan 2010 12:00:57 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more These search terms are highlighted: donald best wikipedia Text-only version Try Beta Log in / create account article discussion edit this page history Donald Best From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Donald best) This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page navigation from related articles; suggestions are available. (February 2009) Main page Contents Donald Best is a former Detective Sergeant with the Toronto Police who is probably the most notable (or notorious) deep-cover satellite piracy Featured content investigator in Canada. Starting in the mid-1990s, he was the primary investigator in over a hundred anti-pirate decryption actions launched by Current events satellite television companies Bell ExpressVu (now called Bell TV) and DirecTV and smart card manufacturer NDS Group (Formerly News Datacom, Random article NDC). search His evidence was used in the precedent-setting Supreme Court of Canada case "Bell Express Vu Limited Partnership (Appellant) and Richard Rex, Can-Am Satellites et al (Respondent)"[1] Best's undercover methods have been extensively criticized in online postings and discussion forums by satellite dealers who have been the subject Go Search of his cases. His use of Anton Piller search warrants at dealers' homes has been a focus of complaints but the courts have never rejected any of his interaction searches.
    [Show full text]
  • Content Supplier's Perspective
    CONTENT SUPPLIER’S PERSPECTIVE: HOME NETWORKS AND RIGHTS MANAGEMENT Robert M. Zitter, Craig D. Cuttner Home Box Office Abstract subsequent distribution windows such as home video, pay-per-view, etc. – each Copyright Protection, Digital Rights window and its attendant revenue stream is Management, Home Networks and other critical to the total revenue stream that buzzwords are all swirling around in a makes theatrical movie production a viable frenzy that has seemingly pitted content ongoing business. providers against operators and all seem to make consumers appear to be felons. If video programs are available on the Internet at no charge, once the Internet is This paper defines the scope of the issue connected to a digital home network, and discusses the pro- and con-attributes of consumers will be less likely to pay for the a Home Network. services MVPDs offer. Beginning in the first-steps of initial Distribution Security implementation of “simple” Copy Control Information (CCI) and how that may Over time, cable distribution technology evolve into sophisticated Digital Rights has evolved to thwart the capabilities of the Management (DRM) systems. “consuming public” to circumvent the collection of fees and protect revenues. BACKGROUND Non-standard channel (“mid-band” placement for pay channel security in the Content Value and Cable Value ‘70s) was succeeded by block converter devices and, later, by the cable-ready TV, The ‘sale’ of access to video content has which necessitated trapping. Higher value been a hallmark of the cable television premium TV led to channel scrambling and industry since its inception. Technology fixed (programmed) descrambling STB’s.
    [Show full text]
  • American Broadcasting Company from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Jump To: Navigation, Search for the Australian TV Network, See Australian Broadcasting Corporation
    Scholarship applications are invited for Wiki Conference India being held from 18- <="" 20 November, 2011 in Mumbai. Apply here. Last date for application is August 15, > 2011. American Broadcasting Company From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For the Australian TV network, see Australian Broadcasting Corporation. For the Philippine TV network, see Associated Broadcasting Company. For the former British ITV contractor, see Associated British Corporation. American Broadcasting Company (ABC) Radio Network Type Television Network "America's Branding Broadcasting Company" Country United States Availability National Slogan Start Here Owner Independent (divested from NBC, 1943–1953) United Paramount Theatres (1953– 1965) Independent (1965–1985) Capital Cities Communications (1985–1996) The Walt Disney Company (1997– present) Edward Noble Robert Iger Anne Sweeney Key people David Westin Paul Lee George Bodenheimer October 12, 1943 (Radio) Launch date April 19, 1948 (Television) Former NBC Blue names Network Picture 480i (16:9 SDTV) format 720p (HDTV) Official abc.go.com Website The American Broadcasting Company (ABC) is an American commercial broadcasting television network. Created in 1943 from the former NBC Blue radio network, ABC is owned by The Walt Disney Company and is part of Disney-ABC Television Group. Its first broadcast on television was in 1948. As one of the Big Three television networks, its programming has contributed to American popular culture. Corporate headquarters is in the Upper West Side of Manhattan in New York City,[1] while programming offices are in Burbank, California adjacent to the Walt Disney Studios and the corporate headquarters of The Walt Disney Company. The formal name of the operation is American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., and that name appears on copyright notices for its in-house network productions and on all official documents of the company, including paychecks and contracts.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy Protection
    Content Protection / DRM Content Protection / Digital Rights Management Douglas Dixon November 2006 Manifest Technology® LLC www.manifest-tech.com 11/2006 Copyright 2005-2006 Douglas Dixon, All Rights Reserved – www.manifest-tech.com Page 1 Content Protection / DRM Content Goes Digital Analog -> Digital for Content Owners • Digital Threat – No impediment to casual copying – Perfect digital copies – Instant copies – Worldwide distribution over Internet – And now High-Def content … • Digital Promise – Can protect – Encrypt content – Associate rights – Control usage 11/2006 Copyright 2005-2006 Douglas Dixon, All Rights Reserved – www.manifest-tech.com Page 2 1 Content Protection / DRM Conflict: Open vs. Controlled Managed Content • Avoid Morality: Applications & Technology – How DRM is impacting consumer use of media – Awareness, Implications • Consumers: “Bits want to be free” – Enjoy purchased content: Any time, anywhere, anyhow – Fair Use: Academic, educational, personal • Content owners: “Protect artist copyrights” – RIAA / MPAA : Rampant piracy (physical and electronic) – BSA: Software piracy, shareware – Inhibit indiscriminate casual copying: “Speed bump” • “Copy protection” -> “Content management” (DRM) 11/2006 Copyright 2005-2006 Douglas Dixon, All Rights Reserved – www.manifest-tech.com Page 3 Content Protection / DRM Content Protection / DRM How DRM is being applied • Consumer Scenarios: Impact of DRM – Music CD Playback on PC – Archive Digital Music – Play and Record DVDs – Record and Edit Personal Content • Industry Model: Content
    [Show full text]
  • Content Protection Status Report
    April 25, 2002 CONTENT PROTECTION STATUS REPORT Overview For many years and within many forums MPAA and its member companies have engaged with the Information Technology (“IT”) and Consumer Electronics (“CE”) industries in collaborative efforts aimed at creating viable markets for digitally delivered media. The development of the DVD standard serves as a shining example of a vibrant consumer market that results when these collaborations hit their mark. While positive progress is being made on many fronts, ever-increasing levels of online piracy may destroy the market for digital entertainment before it has a chance to be fully birthed. In recent Congressional testimony, executives from the motion picture and television industries laid out three key goals that must be attained if this trend toward rampant piracy is to be stemmed and give way to the development of a legitimate market. These include: Goal One: Implementing a “broadcast flag” to prevent the unauthorized redistribution of in-the-clear digital over-the-air broadcast television including its’ unauthorized redistribution over the Internet. Goal Two: Plugging the “analog hole,” that results from the fact that digital devices are not generally designed to respond to current analog protection mechanisms. Thus, protected analog content, including content that originated in protected digital format but was stripped of its digital protection when it was converted to analog for display on analog TV receivers, is left unprotected when converted to a digital format. Goal Three: Putting an end to the avalanche of movie theft on so-called ‘file-sharing” services, such as Morpheus, Gnutella, and other peer-to-peer (p2p) networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast Flags and the War Against Digital Television Piracy: a Solution Or Dilemma for the Digital Era? Debra Kaplan Indiana University School of Law
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Indiana University Bloomington Maurer School of Law Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 57 | Issue 2 Article 12 3-2005 Broadcast Flags and the War Against Digital Television Piracy: A Solution or Dilemma for the Digital Era? Debra Kaplan Indiana University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Communications Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Kaplan, Debra (2005) "Broadcast Flags and the War Against Digital Television Piracy: A Solution or Dilemma for the Digital Era?," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 57: Iss. 2, Article 12. Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol57/iss2/12 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Broadcast Flags and the War Against Digital Television Piracy: A Solution or Dilemma for the Digital Era? Debra Kaplan* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 326 II. THE MECHANICS OF THE SOLUTION ............................................ 328 A . The A TSC F lag
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. ) CS Docket No. 97-80 ) MB Docket No. 08-82 ) CSR-7947-Z Petition for Waiver of ) 47 C.F.R. § 76.1903 ) ) __________________________________________) Opposition of the Consumer Electronics Association to Motion Picture Association of America Petition for Waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1903 July 21, 2008 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. ) CS Docket No. 97-80 ) MB Docket No. 08-82 ) CSR-7947-Z Petition for Waiver of ) 47 C.F.R. § 76.1903 ) ) __________________________________________) Opposition of the Consumer Electronics Association to Motion Picture Association of America Petition for Waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1903 The Consumer Electronics Association (“CEA”) submits these Comments in response and opposition to the permanent waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1903, petitioned for by the Motion Picture Association of America (“MPAA”). CEA is the principal trade association promoting growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy, events, research, promotion and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA represents more than 2,200 corporate members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution and integration of audio, video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications, information technology, home networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as related services that are sold through consumer channels. CEA has a strong interest in the outcome of this proceeding. CEA’s members manufactured and distributed to the public, in good faith, the television receivers that would unexpectedly go dark in many homes as a result of Selectable Output Control (“SOC”) being activated, remotely, by content providers or distributors.
    [Show full text]