A conversation with Cory Doctorow

[The_Pope]

http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2006/02...terview/1.html

[Lazlow]

I like his point on the BBC in the UK...

"As a UK license payer, you've already paid for this content."

I've never thought of it like that, but yes - I pay my TV license each year, so I should be able to access the content when I want to.

[ch424]

bit-tech: Some might say that it also makes it fantastically easy to grab the latest feeds of 24 and Lost...

Cory: Well, I don't think that's really the intention...

Nobody I know uses it for anything else!

My english teacher knows him, and he came and gave a lecture last year on DRM, but I wasn't allowed to go because it was only for the 6th form.

I don't mind DRM when it works seamlessly, but it's damn annoying when it stops you putting stuff on different devices, even when you've bought it. I think Charlie Demerjian's DRM is a complete lie is the best article I've read on DRM.

ch424

[TGImages]

I'm against DRM but I'm also against piracy. As long as many people refuse to respect copyright and compensate artists (writers, etc.) for their work then this is going to be a continual circular contest with no end. And don't use the arguement that it's Sony, not the artist that gets most of the money... OK. Then address the problem with Sony rather then screwing the artist out of even more of the little bit they get. I've seen technologies and people fail as their work was ripped off to such an extent that they had no chance to ever make a living at what they were doing.

-G

[Hegemon]

bit-tech: Some might say that it also makes it fantastically easy to grab the latest feeds of 24 and Lost...

How is this illegal? I watch these shows using my over-the-air antenna. I can record them on my VCR, DVD recorder, computer, etc. If I miss an episode, why can't I hop on Bittorent and grab it? I'd be downloading an episode someone else has grabbed from their OTA antenna. It's the same as going to a buddy's house and getting a copy he recorded on VHS. No one is selling them, no one is making money on them. Can someone explain this to me? I must be missing some copyright law somewhere...

[David_Fitzy]

DRM should only enforce the standard copyright laws
allow you to copy as much as you like within your own digital world limitlessly
disallow you to copy to other people
but allow you to sell your right to use the media to another person (invalidating your rights to the media and therfore your ability to play that media)

Just as much as owning a CD and keeping copies of it on your ipod and computer but deleting them if you sell your CD on (or give it away)

But as the DRM is a complete lie article goes how else are those BMWs going to get paid for.

I know why doesn't the MPAA get together with the governments of the world and create a 100% tax where all the extra goes to the MPAA as a potential DRM usage tax (because you never know you might hear a snippet of a song you don't have the right to hear ) Hey why don't we all sign over our souls while we're at it.

I would really like to see artists dump their producers and start distributing their work on the internet themselves pay your senible fee receive the tracks in sensible DRM format. The huge increase they'd get from selling this way would pay for studio time video shoots CD production.

[Bladestorm]

Nice interview, a lot of good points.

In the vein of promoting legitimate uses for the internet and music-sharing, I'd direct people to radio wazee they play "modern, alternative rock" and maintain a huge database of "independant and unsigned bands" who want people to download there music, its very cool (anemo, bettie ford, celldweller, Coda, great glass elevator, Krim, moorish idol, stereolith, Team, whitesilver are a few to start you off )

[ozstrike]

Not read the article yet, but front page of slashdot!

[HapeMask]

Definitely a great article, especially the section where he discusses how bits will never become less easy to copy, and how that kind of drm is not the kind to worry about as there must always be some decryption system. I don't think that can be said enough, that as long as there's a way to view it in a crippled manner, there will be a way to view it in a non-crippled manner as well. (Although it might be illegal)

Originally Posted by Hegemon

How is this illegal? I watch these shows using my over-the-air antenna. I can record them on my VCR, DVD recorder, computer, etc. If I miss an episode, why can't I hop on Bittorent and grab it? I'd be downloading an episode someone else has grabbed from their OTA antenna. It's the same as going to a buddy's house and getting a copy he recorded on VHS. No one is selling them, no one is making money on them. Can someone explain this to me? I must be missing some copyright law somewhere...

This is something I'd like to hear an answer to as well, as it's been bugging me for awhile as to how this is illegal?

[WilHarris]

If you're in the UK, like we are ) It's also not 100% established in the US that BitTorrent of OTA shows is 100% legal - it all boils down to the concept of 'fair use', but that appears to be being scaled back by courts over there.

[Kaze22]

There is no such thing as fair use when it comes to digital freedom, its human nature to abuse freedom for self gain so it is my opinion that DRM lies not in the software, nor its distribution medium, but in the control over CyberSpace. CyberSpace unlike it's counterpart the physical universe has not matured into a fully integrated universe with rules, regulations and the means to enforce such rules and regulations.
Like I already mentioned in my DRM rant, the future of DRM will lie in the integration of the physical universe with the cyber universe, a set of cyber laws, enforcements and databasing needs to put into place to surpress the human urge to take advantage of the digital freedom inherent in the new age.
Absolute freedom leads to absolute chaos, and it's inevitable that freedoms to need to be controlled in cyberspace for DRM to ever truely work.
Like the dude said placing higher level cyphers on products is futile, a new method needs to be put into place.

[speedfreek]

Originally Posted by HapeMask

This is something I'd like to hear an answer to as well, as it's been bugging me for awhile as to how this is illegal?

Its bothered me for a while too. Free over the air, I dont have cable, but if you want to watch it agian you have to pay. If you think thats because its aired with comercials with it, then wouldnt it be illegal to get up and take a piss during the comercial break. I dont think they would be this picky with just the comercials.
Every new encription is broken so soon after its released they should give up and try to make a legal alternative to piracy, I bet if the mpaa and riaa were bypassed that would save plenty of money. Then the costs of implentation of the different anti piracy devices could be cut, you would have DVD's on release day for less than $10, I would rather buy a DVD for $10 than wasting the time and bandwidth downloading a low quality rip. The same is true for cd's. This turned into more of a rant than I wanted it to, sorry.

[Firehed]

Originally Posted by mrhaz

If you're in the UK, like we are ) It's also not 100% established in the US that BitTorrent of OTA shows is 100% legal - it all boils down to the concept of 'fair use', but that appears to be being scaled back by courts over there.

True, but I don't think you would lose a case if it came to that. It's free (as in beer) content - provided you're not hosting it on a pay site of some sort, redistributing it should be perfectly legal. Arguably it would at least much more questionable in the case that the commercials have been removed (as they almost always are), but seeing that you don't have to buy what's being advertised, I can't see that arguement flying. If, OTOH, it's a DVD-rip of a show that's been released to DVD, I think the issues will become much clearer. I think it would also depend on whether it's a full 1:1 (or scaled DVDShrink) backup, or each individual episode on the disc is released independant of each other.