Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government The Courts News

Ask Prof. Felten About DMCA's Effects 169

Posted by Roblimo from the freedom-to-tinker dept.
Princeton Computer Science Professor Edward W. Felten has been mentioned and quoted frequently on Slashdot, usually about DMCA matters and, more recently, about new state laws that may make it illegal to use "unapproved" networking devices, VPNs or firewalls with your home or office Internet connection. Please avoid questions that can be answered by reading the pages linked to here or with a bit of Google research. We'll post Prof. Felten's answers to 10 of the highest-moderated questions as soon as he has time to answer them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Prof. Felten About DMCA's Effects More

Ask Prof. Felten About DMCA's Effects

Comments Filter:

  • Just one question (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ites ( 600337 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:05PM (#5631791) Journal
    Do you believe the evolution of our technologies (such as the Internet) are more under control of restrictive commercial interests today than in the past, or has this always been a feature of technological change?

    • Re:Just one question (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dsplat ( 73054 )

      Do you believe the evolution of our technologies (such as the Internet) are more under control of restrictive commercial interests today than in the past...?

      I liked your question and I thought I would take a stab at it because I think that there are competing forces at work. Ignoring some of them to answer the question may overlook important facets of the answer.

      I doubt that anyone could dispute that the overwhelming majority of computing is done with commercially available software. A huge driving

  • From your discussions with them ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06NO@SPAMemail.com> on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:08PM (#5631808)
    do you perceive that legislators are aware of the extraordinarily broad negative implications of these new telecommunications laws that are being proposed/enacted?

    Also, if you are aware of it, have the hardware/software manufacturers who will be affected joined together to fight these laws, or has it flown under their radar?

    • Elaborating on burgburgburg's question, what is the distinction between a company who has chosen to enjoy a new, more controlled, more constricted environment, and those who desire a more natural, free one?

      Is there a tell-tale characteristic consistently associated with a company's policy on this sort of thing?

  • Hey, you're a teacher, right? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Skyshadow ( 508 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:09PM (#5631811) Homepage
    Given that the things we need to do in our jobs will be illegal in a couple of years, (a) which other fields would you recommend getting into and (b) when should we start going to the local tech school to pick up the training we'll need to make it in our new careers?

    Better yet, are there any other countries that have eqivalent programs to our H1-B system? I could always go live as an indentured servant to an American software company overseas.

    If this fall through, however, I have dibbs on learning to rebuild engines for a living.

    • You are waaay overreacting.
      Given that the things we need to do in our jobs will be illegal in a couple of years

      What exactly do you do at your job that will be illegal in a couple of years?
    • Corrections. It's already booming and the sky's the limit for those that manage to stay on the outside of a 700V lethal electric fence! You could be the manager of an inmate labor program, or you could go for career with the Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice as a certified Execution Technician. And what's best your skills as a IT professional are still needed... CAS (Computer Aided Sentencing), IT-Systems (Inmate Termination Systems (what did you think?)), handheld DTT (Dissident Tracking & Termination) a
    • which other fields would you recommend getting in
      How about 'drama'?
    • Sorry. Engines are computerized.

  • What sort of positive legistlation? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Viperion ( 569692 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:09PM (#5631812) Homepage
    Dr. Felten, do you have an suggestion as to what sort of legistlation could be introduced that would soothe the minds of reactionary lawmakers while preserving the rights that we currently enjoy?

  • Priceton Computer Science Professor Edward W. Felten...

    Can he spell the name of his school better than Roblimo can?

  • Spelling? (Score:3, Funny)

    by mrybczyn ( 515205 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:11PM (#5631829)
    Dr. Felten, how do you feel about the lack of spellchecking by Slashdot authors? Is Priceton(sic) an interesting workplace?

  • Will ISPs exercise more restrictove TOS now? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by frdmfghtr ( 603968 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:12PM (#5631836)
    The ability to share a high-speed connection with all the computers in the same household is one of the selling points of broadband, much as the ability to provide analog cable service to all the TVs in a house.

    Do you see ISPs taking advantage of the new rules to force customers to purchase additional IPs to connect all the machines in the house, or will they recognize one of the selling points of broadband and permit multiple PCs on a single cable modem?
    • This came up in a conversation with some friends of mine. I read over the comcast TOS and couldn't find anything stating it was illegal to use a firewall/router. In fact, there was language in the TOS that suggested all users employ a firewall device or software for their protection.
      • To go one step further: I wanted to setup a network at home and didn't want to be hassled by Comcast, so I called them to actually purchase two more IP addresses for a whopping $6.95/month each. I spoke to two different reps (because I didn't believe the first one) and they both told me the same thing.

        "If your computer doesn't need a real-world ip address, purchase a Linksys wireless router and set them up behind NAT. There is no need to purchase additional IPs from us unless your computer needs a 'rea
        • First off - the only readon it would need a real-world IP is if you are running a server. (okay...maybe netmeeting or something)

          I was told the same thing by the installers from Charter - unoffically. They suggested the linksys before I showed them the linux firewall.

          The head doesn't know what the tail is doing.

  • Network Identity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rick.C ( 626083 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:13PM (#5631845)
    One of the rumored new restrictions is that you may not mask the identity of a network connection. In your opinion, does this refer to the identity of each machine or the identity of the subscriber (who might be responsible for several machines behind a firewall, e.g.)?

    In other words, are we talking about "people" or "boxes"?

    • Have to Assume the Worst (Score:5, Interesting)

      by billstewart ( 78916 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:02PM (#5632119) Journal
      With some kinds of badly written rules, you can pick whichever interpretation annoys you least and work from there. This doesn't appear to be one of them - if somebody can use the VPN/firewall/NAT/etc. to conceal the identity of the user from the carrier (or for that matter, from an eavesdropper), or conceal the subscriber's identity, or conceal which machine behind the firewall the packets are from (thus concealing that you've got more than one, which violates _some_ carrier's terms of service), then it's potentially illegal in Michigan, and you can't sell them your VPN/firewall/NAT/etc. hardware without risking violating it, because the law is quite clear that it not only applies to Michiganders who rip off their cable companies (like most of the other states' laws), it applies to any of them who buy equipment they _could_ use to rip off service or conceal that they're doing it, and it applies to anybody who sells equipment to anybody in Michigan that they could use to rip off service or conceal it.

      I work for a big ISP that sells several kinds of VPN services, as well as selling routers to users who want to manage the routers themselves. I'd rather not see our Michigan sales reps risk being hauled into jail

      • because that Cisco we installed on their premises can do NAT, or
      • because that firewall conceals their machines from crackers, or
      • because their VPN box conceals data from eavesdroppers, or
      • because their SSL conceals web-visitors' credit card numbers from thieves, or
      • because their email system conceals real email addresses from spammers.
      And I'd rather not see our sales people out of work either. But until somebody gets a temporary restraining order on enforcement, it's a real problem.
    • Disclamer: IANAPhD

      With all due respect ot the previous reply to this post, I would like to disagree and State that "people" or more accuratly Accountibility is what is covered.

      I agree that the letter of the law makes many of the common network devices like NAT's and Firewalls appear questionable. I believe the intent of the law and therefore (it can be hoped) the statutes that will be made will cover accountibility.

      I believe the intent of all this is to ensure that there is responcibility for the action

  • Feasibility? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Wakko Warner ( 324 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:13PM (#5631846) Homepage Journal
    Do the states enacting these (IMO, bogus) new laws have any idea of the amount of economic damage they could cause? Every place I've worked has used some sort of firewall or VPN technology. Billions of dollars' worth of financial communications and transactions take place over such connections every day. Replacing them or removing them entirely is not an option. Will corporations be overlooked when it comes time to enforce these laws, making them just another tool home-user ISPs can use to enforce Terms Of Service clauses? Or will life become infinitely more complicated for everyone?

    - A.P.

    • Chinese bueracracy (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      In ancient times, the Chineese found that the combination of a zillion restrictive laws + selective enforcement gave them the tools to keep the population cowed.

      Everyone was a potential criminal, and if they crossed the PTB, it wasn't hard to find some law that they had broken to charge them with.
      Conversely, it's easy to get the minders to look the other way as long as you have the money to grease the right palms. (Hope you didn't invest in Enron or Tyco, mate!)

      That is exactly what we're getting into no

      • totally on the mark with that comment about selective enforcement.

        In North Carolina, we had a law against "open alcoholic beverages" in automobiles, much like any state. For about a month, there was a lot of publicity about how the law was no longer in effect. However, without much fanfare, the law is back in effect.

        My wife works in the courthouse, and the district attorneys and police officers don't even know whether it is a law or not. So basically, instead of even having to know the law (hard enough wi
    • In almost all cases, the broadband connection providers have an option to allow a VPN or firewalled connection. However, it almost always is an additional cost and is listed as a "business" connection.

      They often have a per-computer charge or a maximum number of devices or computers that are allowed to connect.

      It usually costs significantly more than a regular connection.

  • Tell me... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dicky ( 1327 ) <slash3@vmlinuz.org> on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:18PM (#5631873) Homepage
    For the love of God, man, why???

    Or to put it slightly less sillily, what was (and is!) your motivation for getting involved in this side of the Computer Science world, say, as opposed to the nice safe, clean theoretical stuff?

  • unauthorized devices (Score:5, Interesting)

    by smoondog ( 85133 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:20PM (#5631876)
    Many proposed (anti-vpn) laws have been discussed on slashdot recently [slashdot.org]. Given that many of these laws only cover unlawful devices [slashdot.org], should we still be concerned about this new so called anti-vpn legislation?

    -Sean

  • Intent Vs Effect (Score:4, Interesting)

    by phorm ( 591458 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:22PM (#5631888) Journal
    Do you think that these laws - especially DCMA - ever had an intended "positive" effect. That is, were the ever really intended to deal with existing copyright problems, piracy, etc... or were they always intended to clamp iron teeth of control down on the consumer.

    Some of the provisions of these laws, especially those being so easily misinterpreted or misused, seem to not have any practical intent other than taking rights away from the consumer.

    Looking at the original intent of the laws (and hoping it wasn't as bad as they have turned out), what do you think went wrong, and what can be changed?
    • The answer is secession; it is time to declare independence from the Bush régime and start our own nation free from US control.

      -uso.
      No, I'm not kidding.
      • Another question - As the US descends into a dystopian hellhole thanks to greedy corporations, corrupt politicians, and the general unsustainability of right-wing political viewpoints, how much would you pay for a two-bedroom house with two acres and broadband in the Scottish Highlands?

  • Prohibition of what got us here? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xesdeeni ( 308293 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:22PM (#5631889)
    Do I completely misunderstand the scope of the DMCA, or would it have actually prohibited the actions of clone manufacturers, starting with Compaq, when they reverse-engineered the IBM PC BIOS in 1984?

    It seems this simple fact alone would highlight the ludicrous nature of a law which would prohibit precisely the actions that provided the current state of the industry.

    Xesdeeni
    • Do I completely misunderstand the scope of the DMCA, or would it have actually prohibited the actions of clone manufacturers, starting with Compaq, when they reverse-engineered the IBM PC BIOS in 1984?

      Are you aware that the DMCA specifically allows reverse engineering for the purpose of compatibility?
    • This concern was raised at the time and appears to have caused the insertion of a clause allowing doing so for interoperability. Alas, in law one cannot escape prosecution for breach, one simply has a defense if you take the risk of proceeding.

      In my considered opinion, the exception was not intended to function, from which it follows that the intention is to prevent the reverse-engineering of future IBM PCs.

  • A simple one. (Score:3, Funny)

    by g(zerofunk.org) ( 596290 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:22PM (#5631896) Homepage
    Will any of these questions be on the final exam?
    g

  • Im Curious (Score:2, Funny)

    by Cheapoboy ( 634792 )
    With the paper you wrote in the similarities between poker and nuclear war what is your view on the current ira.... oooh wait Prof. Felton not Prof. Falken... well shit that blows all my questions on how Joushua's AI works too... my bad.

  • Signal to Noise (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sterno ( 16320 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:25PM (#5631911) Homepage
    One of the problems I see with efforts to try to get the DMCA and similar legislation revoked and prevented in the future, is a matter of signal to noise. Most voters don't care about the DMCA or even know about it, and those who do usually have to worry about more important priorities like the state of the economy or the war in Iraq. So, my question is, how can we possibly make the DMCA and it's kin important issues to our legislators? Sure, I can write them, but if they are given the choice of voting for the DMCA and getting some campaign money, or voting against and pleasing a handful of constituents, which will they choose?

    It's unlikely that the handful of consitutents is going to vote against the candidate purely because of their DMCA stance. Personally, I'm very against the DMCA but when the election time comes around, I'm not voting for the anti-DMCA candidate, I'm voting for the guy who's going to fix the economy and patch our international relationships. So how can somebody like myself really get their voice heard by the right people when the threat of "voting for the other candidate" isn't credible?

  • What's it gonna take? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by InterruptDescriptorT ( 531083 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:27PM (#5631916) Homepage
    Professor Felten,

    What's it going to take to get not only our legislators in their infinite wisdom, but the general public, to see the deleterious effects that DRM enforcement efforts and laws like the DMCA are/will have on both the entertainment and computer industries and our rights in general?

    From experience, it's pretty difficult to explain exactly why the DMCA is so awful to the average person--it's very hard, for me at least, to provide a 60-second explanation of why I should be able to open up my digital VCR and find out how the software controlling it works, or why it's so bad that there's copy protection on a CD, rendering it useless for playing in a computer?

    Perhaps if I could find just the right way to frame the argument, and get that message out, we might have some more people concerned about these matters.
    • Well, one thing you can tell people is that there will soon be no way to legally make mixed CDs, or make an extra copy of a CD for their car.

      I don't know about you, but I, and a lot of people I know, do NOT like to keep $500 worth of CDs in my car!

      As more people start using mp3/ogg devices/computers as stereos, they will start to see the negative side of these new restrictions.

    • From experience, it's pretty difficult to explain exactly why the DMCA is so awful to the average person--it's very hard, for me at least, to provide a 60-second explanation of why I should be able to open up my digital VCR and find out how the software controlling it works, or why it's so bad that there's copy protection on a CD, rendering it useless for playing in a computer?

      I have two answers.

      1. The car analogy: these laws are like laws which would require manufacturer to weld the hood of your ca

  • Internet radio (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hafree ( 307412 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:27PM (#5631918) Homepage
    The root of all of the recent controversey surrounding royalties and licensing for internet radio (CARP) stems from an incorrect definition in the 1998 Digital Milennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It fails to differentiate between downloaded and streamed audio content as it pertains to internet radio. From a strictly technical standpoint there isn't much difference. The data being transmitted over the internet to your computer is pretty much identical; downloading just implies that you save a copy. However from a legal standpoint, streamed content is the equivalent of a public performance or broadcast, whereas downloaded content constitutes a distribution of that recording. This makes all the difference in the world when it comes to copyright laws, since the labels making up the RIAA (the copyright holders) should not even be entitled to royalties from internet radio in the first place.

    A seemingly benign oversight in the wording can have major implications. Do you forsee significant changes/corrections to the DMCA along these lines? Why or why not...

    • Re:Internet radio (Score:2, Informative)

      by apweiler ( 300457 )
      From a strictly technical standpoint there isn't much difference.

      And this is the problem, and IMO a reason *not* to differentiate between the two - how can you make sure that no copy is being saved if you can't 'trust' the client that is downloading the content? To really make a difference, you need a working DRM-type system (which doesn't neccessarily mean it has to be protected by law); if you don't want DRM, it's *always* possible to reverse-engineer the protocol and record the content (case in point:
      • You certainly have a valid point, which is probably a major factor in why there is no differentiation. However it is important not to confuse the laws about the use of a technology with the technology itself. Any home stereo with a radio and a tape deck will likely come equipped to record off of the radio; where's your DRM there? The individual that created the recording is now technically responsible for creating that distribution of the recording, but that doesn't change the fact that the original FM b

  • Roadblocks to IP protections? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xesdeeni ( 308293 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:28PM (#5631924)
    Doesn't the DMCA prohibit a company from investigating a violation of their IP if the violation exists on the other side of encryption?

    For example, if company M utilized a software algorithm (putting aside the argument about software patents for the moment) inside an encrypted data stream (audio file, video file, etc.) that was actually patented by company A, wouldn't it be a violation of the DMCA for company A to investigate this violation of their patent rights? And wouldn't any evidence they uncovered in violation of the DMCA be inadmissible if they tried to enforce their patent rights against company M?

    Xesdeeni

  • Blanks and Politics (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SolemnDragon ( 593956 ) <solemndragon.gmail@com> on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:29PM (#5631929) Homepage Journal
    To what extent do you feel that restricting the ability of the common public to log on as 'blanks' (to borrow a Max Headroom term) will limit the possibilities for new ideas to become part of the marketplace/society, given that freedom to express, explore, and freely interact encourages both the best and worst forms of innovation? For example, hacking at its best enables a company to be informed of the latest flaw in their system, while at its worst it can down that system completely.

    Wiping out the ability to enact from behind a firewall will in some cases force the individual to assume social responsibility for their actions, and in others, it could cause a perfectly harmless but useful and constructive citizen to not want to take part. (the way that i don't want to fly on an airline that checks my credit info every time i try to board a plane.) In short, do you view this as a critically restrictive measure where society's NEW ideas come into the picture? Are we in danger of alienating the very people who would be responsible for future innovation of everything around us? I'm one of those who would be alienated, because I view this as an inalienable right to privacy.

  • DMCA and EUCD (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Brian Blessed ( 258910 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:29PM (#5631930)
    In your opinion, do residents of Europe and other US-friendly (business-wise) areas have a hope of avoiding being adversely affected by the DMCA (or superDMCA) or its foreign implementations (e.g. EUCD) and is technological civil disobedience the best form of activism to follow?

    - Brian.

  • FUD (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Shoten ( 260439 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:31PM (#5631940)
    It has been claimed that much of the ado about DMCA is demagoguery, particularly with respect to restrictions on security research. While I do not in any way believe that the DMCA is a good law, particularly with regards to its flaunting of fair use, I tend to agree. Could you comment in greater depth as to the threat that the DMCA poses to researchers, and perhaps clarify this debate?
    • Well, let's see... the RIAA's SDMI challenge people threatened to sue or prosecute Prof. Felten if he gave a talk at USENIX. I'd say that's a pretty chilling effect on research and academic speech.

  • where the 'right to tinker' came in handy.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by smd4985 ( 203677 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:32PM (#5631948) Homepage
    Prof. Felten,
    You are a vocal and staunch proponent of the 'right to tinker'. I understand and support your views on this subject, but I was wondering if you could give us a few examples where the 'right to tinker' was imperative to a major innovation? What innovations may have never come about or been delayed if the 'right to tinker' had never been a assumed privilege of the American citizen?

    Keep up the good work!
    • The entire PC industry comes to mind. Remember, the original IBM PC was the first IBM built out of off the shelf parts. Compaq took one look at this, bought the same stuff and assembled a computer of their own. The only thing missing was the BIOS. And I think that if the DMCA existed back in the early 80's, Compaq would have been sued out of existance upon re-engineering IBM's PC BIOS, regardless of whether they disassembled the code or not. Even if that wasn't the case, they surely would have been ding
      • Compaq would have been sued out of existance upon re-engineering IBM's PC BIOS, regardless of whether they disassembled the code or not

        Just a small nit. They didn't even need to disassemble the code. The original PC, PC/XT and PC/AT's came with manuals that included full schematics and BIOS listings!
        • Now that I didn't know, ah computing was so much more open back in the day...

          After some googling, I was able to find a site that expands on your statement. Compaq couldn't take the BIOS listings and copy them for obvious legal reasons, but the way they got around this was rather novel. Take a look! [oldcomputers.net]
          • Correct. They "clean roomed" them. They had a group, who swore under oath (affadavit) that they had never seen the original IBM BIOS.

            Then they had another group which thoroughly analyzed the IBM listings and created a detailed specification (i.e. INT XX, AH=yy does this, with this output, etc...). They then handed this specification (containing only a blackbox description of the IBM BIOS) to the coders, who then wrote a BIOS to that specification. It passed a court test, IIRC, and is now the standard

  • Firewalls and "concealment" (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Dr Felton,
    Question 1:
    If I am running a firewall on a linux box, and NAT'ing the computers in my house, am I masking the identity of myself, or my machines, (violating the law) since all of the computers belong to me and I am willing to accept responsibility for all traffic?

    Question 2:
    If I run a linux firewall and only one client behind it, am I breaking the law since I am not NAT'Ting more than one PC, and am using the linux box as a firewall device only, not as a client?

    It seems to follow that I am respo
  • How exactly would the DMCA help/hurt independant musicians such as myself? In the beginning, most bands have to try and fend for themselves, and would find things like P2P filesharing to be a great help in getting heard. It seems as if the DMCA is tailored to assist large record companies, and not so much smaller labels and/or independant bands...

  • Corporate Impact? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by robbo ( 4388 ) <slashdot@NosPaM.simra.net> on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:47PM (#5632016)
    Most of the debate surrounding proposed legislation on VPN's deals with the impact on the consumer's right to tinker at home. One issue that seems to be absent from the debate is the impact such legislation would have on the corporate world and the average worker's ability to telecommute using their ISP. Also, many corporations with geographically scattered offices use VPNs to put everyone on the 'same network'. Is a distinction being drawn between corporate and consumer's rights? Can these bills be effectively killed by drawing big corporations into the fray?

  • DMCA and other laws (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Musashi Miyamoto ( 662091 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:49PM (#5632023)
    Most, but not all, readers of Slashdot have a distaste for the DMCA and other laws that have strengthened copyright laws. But what most do not accept is the fact that these laws were created to solve a very real problem.

    Software and media piracy is no longer an underground sub-culture. Just about anyone with enough money for a computer is able to easily find and illegally duplicate software, music, movies, and other media. Worse yet, most of the (former) music and movie buying public are doing just that.

    The only "reasonable" alternative to strengthening laws and adding copy-protection to media is to give the media away, and make money with live appearances and peripheral tangible products, such as lunchboxes and t-shirts. I'm sure the people working for media conglomerates do not find this acceptable.

    Do you agree with this assessment, and if so, if you had the chance to re-architect the DMCA to your liking, what would you change? Would you remove some parts, or augment others?

    • Re:DMCA and other laws (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arkanes ( 521690 ) <arkanes@NoSPam.gmail.com> on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:26PM (#5632261) Homepage
      You've got a valid point, but you need to change your wording - nobody gives (or at least, nobody SHOULD give) a shit whether or not media conglomerates find it acceptable. The point of copyright, the very reason for it's existence, and it's only useful function, is to expand the public domain. It does this by offering a limited monopoly in return for the release of works. This is inherently in opposition to the buisness model of many media congolomerates, which is why we're seeing such draconian IP legislation in the last few years.

      The ONLY important question in IP legislation is whether or not it will enhance the public domain. Whether anyone can make money, or whether the existing entertainment industry can adapt is totally irrelevent.

      This is why (legally protected) DRM is such a bad thing - because it limits access to work far beyond the limits of copyright, and therefore detracts from the public domain, rather than adding to it.

      The idea that media conglomerats have some sort of rights here is a fundamental falsehood, and it only makes it harder to focus on the true issues. Copyright law doesn't care if anyone makes money off of it. The buisness interests of anyone, musician or international megacorporation, do not and should not figure into the equation at all.

      • Your first paragraph doesn't make much sense to me. The US Constitution says:

        Section 8. The Congress shall have power ... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries ...

        Now, how does this expressed intent relate to "expanding the public domain?" I suspect that it has more to do with facilitating commerce by limiting the public domain. But benefit to the public domain was cert

    • The only "reasonable" alternative to strengthening laws and adding copy-protection to media is to give the media away, and make money with live appearances and peripheral tangible products, such as lunchboxes and t-shirts.

      Why is this the only "reasonable" alternative? (And why is "reasonable" in quotes?)

      As far as I can tell, no one has made any kind of effort to actually educate consumers on copyright law.

  • Content Vs. Distribution (Score:5, Interesting)

    by robkill ( 259732 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:51PM (#5632043)
    Radio stations today use a wide variety of digital tools to automate broadcasting. Given that record companies reserve the right to authorize who can broadcast the contents of a CD, what additional effects do you see the DMCA having on radio and eventually web-based broadcasting besides the stratification of the market into megacorps and everyone else (which has already occurred.)? Should copy-protected CD's become the norm, would a "broadcast license" be implemented, with restrictions on the broadcasters? I can't see the record companies providing "protection-free" cd's to record stations, because the resale market for DJ-promotional copies would become even more fierce. Or would we see more mega-companies like AOL-Time-Warner, which own both content and distribution channels?

  • Fighting back... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by st0rmcold ( 614019 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @01:53PM (#5632061) Homepage

    Basically, almost everyone with a technological background will agree that this law is flawed. Is this soemthing without precendence? That Congress acted on pure ignorance, of course not.

    My question to you Mr. Felten, do you think this law will inspire a new breed of creativity among hardware developers?

    Maybe the same way copyright inspired copyleft, the DMCA is a form for companies to protect their products, and stop other people from profiting on those products (god forbid!), but since this really throws onto the pile, and adds hardware materials in to the copyright bin, maybe it will inspire some hardware enthousiasts to create copylefted hardware? blueprints and materials created by the people who love to tamper, and who would put a type of GPL on the specific materials as to prevent anyone from trying to hide the actual source if you will, of the product in question.

    I personally think this would go a long way, engineers could actually start making money, by receiving support from people who enjoy their products, and suggest ways to improve such things. (Currently hard working engineers make billions for their respective companies and bring him mearly pennies to feed their families.)

    I might be way off base, as the production line has it's fee's, but even tho it would be copylefted, dosen't mean it couldn't be sold, just means that anyone could improve it, or modify it.

    Thanks for your time. Remi

    • Maybe the same way copyright inspired copyleft, the DMCA is a form for companies to protect their products, and stop other people from profiting on those products (god forbid!), but since this really throws onto the pile, and adds hardware materials in to the copyright bin, maybe it will inspire some hardware enthousiasts to create copylefted hardware?

      There's already a couple projects with exactly that in mind:

  • Preemptive answers (Score:5, Informative)

    by jdbarillari ( 590703 ) <joseph+slashdot@barillari.org> on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:00PM (#5632105) Homepage

    Prof. Felten has a weblog, Freedom to Tinker [freedom-to-tinker.com]. It may answer some questions in advance. He is also teaching a class this semester called "Information Technology and the Law". The readings are online [princeton.edu].

  • Definition or origin and destination? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Neither of the proposed state laws defined what "place of origin" for a communication is. Couldn't this law make computers illegal? For example, my "communications service provider" does not know if a "communication" came from DIMM bank 0 or DIMM bank 1 in my computer. They don't know if a file I am emailing came from hard drive sector 3F5BC or 3F5BD. Does this mean that my computer is concealing the place of origin of my communication?

    When I read the law, I assumed that the "place of origin" of all of my

  • Greetings, Professor Felten (Score:3, Funny)

    by Lars Rindsig ( 140449 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:10PM (#5632166) Homepage
    Shall we play a game?

  • Micromonopolies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TastyWords ( 640141 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:18PM (#5632214)
    background: For a long time, it was thought a monopoly pretty much was conceived & sustained through assistance through the government (at some level), but not necessarily via patents or copyrights; i.e., look at things such as utility companies. After the two marathon lawsuits into the latter decades of the 20th centuries (IBM, Ma Bell), things seemed to quiet down a bit, except for cable companies & similar ilk. Now, we've got competition for cable companies via satellites (although 95+% of people who have have access to cable only have a choice of a single company), potentially multiple broadband vendors, and with the fuel cell development, a choice of not using an electrical utility.

    All of that said (whew, sorry)...

    Now that the DMCA has been passed and pretty much defended in the courts, isn't it starting to form "minimonopolies" (or "micromonopolies")? If so (or not), why? And do you see this changing over time? If it hurts the consumer, what do you think it'll take for the consumer to vote with their pocketbook and modify this?

    Thank!

  • Where would you go to have digital freedom? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Where in this Earth would you move to, should MPAA, RIAA, et alia succeed in their attempt to turn the personal computer into an expensive paperweight? Now that civil liberties are no longer fashionable in America, which country would hold the flag of digital (and analog) freedom?

  • Super DMCA and anonymity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SiliconEntity ( 448450 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:20PM (#5632228)
    If I use a VPN or an anonymous remailer, all of my IP packets are correctly labeled with regard to their source and destination as they travel from my system to the remailer or VPN server. If I use a NAT box, all of my IP packets are correctly labeled with regard to their source and destination as they travel from the NAT box to the remote system.

    Why do you claim that these technologies would be outlawed by the so-called Super DMCA laws, even though using these technologies does not involve falsifying the source or destination of any of my packets? Isn't it more likely that these laws are directed against IP spoofing, where people do in fact falsify these fields, to the great detriment of the net?
    • This is an excellent point, but i fear the people entrusted by corporate america to enforce their doctrines may use the fact that many people don't understand the significance of what you said to bend the rules. Amazing what lobbying dollars can do. Just look at how the execution of the current DMCA was twisted and abused to serve the purposes of big business.

  • Strategy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Meat Blaster ( 578650 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:27PM (#5632268)
    Our current methods of informing the public and the government about the evils of the DMCA seem to be reactive and passive -- defending a lawsuit, writing public responses to the librarian of Congress periodically about the DMCA, setting up resources where the public if they were so inclined could stop by and learn about the problem.

    Do you feel that it would be a good time for a shift in strategy towards more active measures such as forming a group to lobby representatives directly, issuing mailings about the DMCA particularly to those whose representatives support legislation like the DMCA/UCITA/SSSCA, or beginning a television ad campaign? Such an endeavor is bound to cost a bit, but I can't help but feel that particularly with 2004 coming up having a bit of organized PR on our side of the debate would be quite helpful.

  • How can we implement a test that all technological measures and DMCA arguments (an argument is a protective measure IMHO) must pass or qualify so that no indirect protection is granted?

    Perhaps look up a giant thesaurus for a phrase more precise than "access control measure". Privilege control measure?

    Companies do not have a right to protect that which is not protected by copyright, patent, nor trademark law.

    They do this blindly, illegally, and without due process (even the due process provided by the DMC

  • Differences by State? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Do you notice any particular states that show extra enthusiasm over the DMCA?

    Those who are in the process of moving might be in the position where they're undecided about one place or another and turn it into an opportunity to protest an unjust law. Take those skills and dollars to better places.

    And as an aside to the /. crowd:

    When the economy recovers and the jobs come back, a lot of folks are going to be moving around in a relatively short period of time. Be useful to have some sort of comparison list

  • DMCA or Copyright in general? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @02:47PM (#5632356)
    Do you think the root cause of all this trouble is with the DMCA in particular, or is the Act just a symptom of the problems with existing federal copyright laws in general?
    • OK, here's my own answer on this. My opinions, but I gotta say it.

      One should keep in mind that it's not copyright unto itself that is a problem. Unto itself, the copyright is a good thing. It's two things that make it a problem though - abusers (legitimate pirates) and the vocal minority (the {RI,MP}AA).

  • Propaganda war (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Catamaran ( 106796 )
    This is as much a propaganda war as it is a legal battle. What do you think of my idea for a flier?

    Pirates or Heroes?
    Media giants are portraying as "pirates" those who copy and exchange copyrighted materials. History may well portray them differently. In 1773, the British government granted special tax status to the East India Company, at the expense of colonial merchants. The revolt that followed, the Boston Tea Party, was condemmed by the British government, but today those responsible are widely reg

  • Our position in the world (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TooTechy ( 191509 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @03:03PM (#5632424)
    Do you see this new legislation altering our ability to work remotely? Will these restrictions place undue hardship on US workers when compared with facilities in other countries? Is it likely that other countries will evolve faster technologically as a result of these draconian measures?

  • Balance of Interests? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Catiline ( 186878 ) <akrumbach@gmail.com> on Monday March 31, 2003 @03:22PM (#5632510) Homepage Journal
    Between the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act granting longer terms to copyright and the DMCA granting greater "enforcement" powers to the holder (in the form of legally-unbreakable encryption) the trend in copyright seems to be passing into more power for the holder and a weakening --perhaps even destruction-- of fair use and of a public domain. Likewise, the proliferation of code patents encroaches upon the creative commons from yet another angle, and all of these aspects serve only the entrenched players in various fields (cable/satellite companies, MPAA/RIAA, IBM/Microsoft/Adobe, etc.). What would you propose to be the proper balance of interests and what measures do you think should be taken to arrive there?

  • Legal interpretation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gclef ( 96311 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @03:25PM (#5632519)
    Much of the problem with the laws such as the recent state anti-NAT laws and the DMCA revolves around judicial interpretation. (Eg, whether NAT or freenet is illegal strongly depends on how the courts read the definitions of a communications device in the various laws.) My question to you is: is there anything we can do to influence this interpretation? From my understanding, once there is a ruling on a subject, that becomes precedent, so if we can get a ruling stating that these laws do not cover things like freenet, life gets better. Getting that ruling, however, is hard. Is there a "good" way to do that (besides bankrupting myself by getting prosecuted for violating it)?

    thanks.

  • Do you think that something like this will be used to drive IPv6 adoption?

    Also, what about the new studies that show that CD sales have slumped due to lack of investment in new bands and new releases by RIAA member-companies?

    What exactly will constitute an "unapproved device"?

    That's it from me

    Queen B

  • Too many questions in these kinds of topics get modded 5. Right now fully half of the comments rated 2 or more are at 5!!! That means you moderators are throwing your power away, turning the decision over to the hands of the slashdot editors who will have to choose 10 questions out of 50 or more that are modded to the max.

    Use your power! Mod down those 5's that aren't of the highest quality. Mark them as overrated. Forget that dreck about how you should mod up more than mod down. You've got to be tou
  • The effects of these laws will be the same as all the other stupid laws out there. Y'know, it's impossible to be living in the US nowadays without breaking SOME law or other. And mostly, the authorities ignore it, unless they're pushed by someone or some event, or unless you cross one of them. At that point, the Powers That Be will audit your life with a fine sieve and use anything they can dig up to make your life miserable.

  • what can we do? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by v1 ( 525388 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @04:04PM (#5632811) Homepage Journal
    What is the most effective thing Joe Q. Public can do to fight DRM? There are all sorts of organizations with various methods, including petitions, boycotts, information-sharing, etc., and the ever popular "write your senator" form letters. This seems like a case of David vs Goliath, and I'd like to know what stone would be best to pick up.

  • pragmatic question about 'fair use' (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LinuxParanoid ( 64467 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @04:27PM (#5633016) Homepage Journal
    Professor Felten,

    The world I've lived in pre-Internet allowed me to, if I found a great newspaper article (or TV show episode) or song, to make a copy of it to pass along to one or a handful of friends to check out.

    It certainly seems like this will be technologically unfeasible if/when sufficient copy protection becomes embedded in content-viewing technology in the mid-term future.

    I know you aren't a lawyer, but you have parsed these laws carefully and talked to more lawyers than I. Did the type of usage I described above ever fall under 'fair use'? Is it 'fair use' today, and if not, is there a particular piece of legislation that changed the legality of this?

    --LP

  • Ethics of technology on college campuses (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ivan Raikov ( 521143 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @04:30PM (#5633041) Homepage
    Dear Dr. Felten,

    Recently, the vice provost of undergraduate studies in my university has initiated a series of activities aimed at getting active student input on improving the educational experience on our campus. One of my pet peeves with the studentry of my school is that they're rather apathetic and uninformed of political and social issues in the world surrounding us. Given that tomorrow these people would be engineers and scientists, and above all, citizens, I think it is vitally important that they are well aware of current social and legal issues in our technological society.

    My two questions are: 1) how would you go about encouraging college students to become more interested in issues like the DMCA 2) do you feel that most engineering and science students in Princeton University have a good understanding of the legal and ethical issues in IT?

  • 2600, and media in general (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dextr0us ( 565556 ) <dextr0us@spl . a t> on Monday March 31, 2003 @04:49PM (#5633206) Homepage Journal
    Do you think that the DMCA has had an effect on the media? Using 2600 as a prime example, don't you think that the media's free speech rights are restricted for fear of persecution? [media including websites]
  • What can we do to get legislation to guard are rights from future attacks?
    It seems like the same bill get proposed with different names over ad over again. I would like to see something that protects are rights and would supercide new laws that take are ability to do what we want within our own homes. As long as we are not redistributing the content to other people outside our home.
  • It got deleted from my bookmarks and I forgot the URL. That link really helped me out.

    Offtopic, but last week someone told me they didn't get google on their computer home (whihc had an internet connection. So maybe the URL isn't so obviuous after all...

  • Anonymous remailers (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wytcld ( 179112 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @05:46PM (#5633668) Homepage
    NAT or VPN may fall within the meaning of laws against concealing the identity of origin of Net packets. Anonymous remailers, intended to fully obscure the origin of messages, most certainly would violate these laws. Yet there are times when a citizen wants to be able to give a tip to law enforcement without becoming personally involved. Let's say I have a well-founded suspicion that my neighbor robbed the bank in the next town. Let's further posit I don't want my neighbor to have any hint I've turned her in, and don't want to play any role in court proceedings (maybe she has a sister who'd come after my family; maybe I don't want the government to inquire as to how I know about the robbery). Won't laws which criminalize anonymous cooperation with law enforcement significantly hinder the well-being of society?
  • You eventually presented your paper on SDMI's encryption systems. You weren't arrested. You weren't sued. Your freedom of speech was preserved. Outside of hypothetical situations which never panned out in reality, can you point to any situations where the DMCA has been used effectively to infringe upon your freedom of speech?
  • Hi Dr. Felten

    My belief is that the Internet has just as much capability to transform civilization as did Gutenberg's invention some 500 years ago. The potention for Internet-connected people to share just about any information that can fit down the wire seems like a revolution in the making. And, as was the case a half millenia ago, it will surely take decades for society to wrestle with and eventually adapt to this new paradigm.

    Napster was the first time most people became aware of this potential sea c
  • Professor Felten,

    You have studied the laws much more than I have. One issue that I have is that the "protection" on my DVDs will never wear out. In other words, once the movies pass into the public domain, I will still be unable to de-encrypt them without breaking the law.

    Do you know of (or would you consider starting?) a campaign to force hardware manufacturers to check the datestamp of the media being played, and if it falls outside the limited protection time granted by the government, "open up" th

  • Unrevoked, do you think decryption software user(not developer or distributor) violation enforcement will broaden enough to touch a family in every community?

    Do you think this would be sufficent to create a substantical counterculture where copyrighted entertainment are commonly given under specific licences like the GPL to be safe from prosecution?

    If criminal enforcement becomes common against users of decryption software do you think academia will embrace, promote, or even fund an entertainment counte

Slashdot Top Deals

Serving coffee on aircraft causes turbulence.

Close