A Future Out of Our Control:

Digital Rights Management

Scott Granneman

scott@granneman.com

www.granneman.com

© 2002-2003 Scott Granneman

Last updated 20030108

You are free to use this work, with certain restrictions.

For full licensing information, please see the last slide/page.

Today is my birthday.

No one has sung "Happy Birthday"

to me yet today.

I am so desperate to hear "Happy Birthday"

that I will pay someone $1

if they will sing it to me.

Well,

we just broke the law.

Seriously.

I'm not going to pay AOL TimeWarner,

which owns the copyright to "Happy Birthday",

its royalty.

What?

You didn't know?

"Happy Birthday" is still under copyright.

"Happy Birthday" was copyrighted in 1935.

Under the law current at the time,

copyright was limited to 28 years,

plus one 28 year renewal.

"Happy Birthday" would have been

in the public domain

in 1991.

However,

Congress passed the Copyright Act of 1976,

which extended copyright to 75 years.

"Happy Birthday" would have been

in the public domain

in 2010.

However,

Congress passed

the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act

in 1998,

which extended copyright to 95 years.

"Happy-freakin'-Birthday"

will not enter the public domain

until 2030!

Assuming, of course,

that Congress doesn't extend

the term of copyright again.

If you perform "Happy Birthday"

for commercial gain,

or in public,

you owe AOL TimeWarner royalties.

"Happy Birthday" brings in $2 million

every year to AOL TimeWarner.

By the way,

what's "public" mean,

you ask?

According to copyright law,

a public performance occurs

"at a place open to the public,

or at any place

where a substantial number of persons

outside of a normal circle

of a family and its social acquaintances

is gathered."

If you sing "Happy Birthday"

to your kid at home,

that's OK.

It's "fair use".

Fair use

allows for the limited copying

or distribution of published works

without the author's permission.

Ever quote a paragraph in a paper?

Fair use.

Perfectly legal.

Did your teacher ever copy a page out of a book

& hand it out to the class?

Fair use.

Ever backup a music CD?

Or a software CD?

Fair use.

Ever backup a DVD you bought

of a Hollywood movie?

Fair u...

Hey!

Wait a minute!

I can't backup my DVDs!

Nope.

You sure can't.

And if you're using Linux

(as most of us here are),

you can't even legally play your DVDs

on your Linux box.

Oh, you can play DVDs

on your Linux box ...

... if you install DeCSS,

a program designed to decrypt CSS.

CSS stands for

"Content Scrambling System".

CSS is a very weak

encryption scheme

used by movie companies & the MPAA

to encrypt the content on DVDs.

If you buy a DVD player

in the store,

it includes a licensed copy of CSS,

which allows your DVD player

to decrypt & play your DVDs on the fly.

I've got a DVD player on this laptop,

which is running Red Hat 8.0.

In order to watch DVDs on this laptop,

I've got to install and use DeCSS.

DeCSS is illegal.

Damn.

There I go breaking the law again.

Somebody stop me!

:)

DeCSS is illegal

because it acts as what the DMCA

defines as a "circumvention mechanism".

The DMCA

is the "Digital Millenium Copyright Act".

Signed into law in 1998

(hmmm ... the same year as the CTEA ...),

the DMCA does several terrible things.

In particular,

the DMCA makes it a crime

to circumvent copyright protection systems.

It doesn't matter why

you're circumventing the copyright protection.

Just that you are.

Are you trying to use DeCSS

in order to backup the DVD you bought?

Too bad.

It's illegal.

Want to break the encryption

on an "e-book" you bought

so that you can save it as text and back it up?

Too bad.

Illegal.

Want to turn the songs

on a copy-protected CD into mp3s

so you can listen to them

on your iPod

while you work out?

Nope.

Illegal.

You can't even

publish or discuss

methods for circumventing

copy protection schemes.

Illegal under the DMCA.

Goodbye,

1st Amendment.

CSS is an example of DRM.

That's

Digital Rights Management.

Although some of us

prefer to call it

Digital Restrictions Management.

The CTEA gives copyright holders

more time to control copyrighted works

& keep them out of the public domain.

DRM helps copyright holders

tightly control those copyrighted works.

The DMCA helps put the force of law

behind DRM.

Remember ...

even if something is under copyright,

you still have fair use rights.

Unfortunately,

DRM makes exercising those fair use rights

impossible.

And if you decide

to exercise your fair use rights

and get around any DRM,

the DMCA means you just broke the law.

It's getting worse.

There are two new audio formats

designed to replace the CD:

DVD-Audio & Super Audio CD.

Both sound great!

They each store more than 500 to 1000

times the data that a CD holds.

Sounds like a winner, right?

Uh, no.

Both SACD & DVD-A

have major restrictions.

First of all,

you can't play them on a computer.

No way, no how.

Part of the deal is,

manufacturers are not supposed

to make players for computers.

You will be able to buy

a stereo component

for your home stereo system,

however.

No digital outputs,

though.

Just analog.

No network connectivity either.

They may sound great,

but I'm not planning on rushing out

and buying a new SACD or DVD-A player.

If I can't convert it to mp3 or ogg,

I don't buy it.

I don't think I'm alone.

:)

DRM is also being used more and more

by software companies.

Guess who's leading the charge?

Yup.

Microsoft.

When you buy Windows XP or Office XP,

you have to undergo what Microsoft terms

"Product Activation".

You in essence register your copy

of Windows or Office

with Microsoft.

You get a software key from Microsoft

that enables Windows or Office to work.

No key?

No work.

Change hardware "substantially"?

(Their word, not mine ...)

You gotta re-activate your software.

Try to install your copy of Windows

on another computer?

Nope.

Not allowed.

You know what's going to happen.

A few years from now,

Microsoft is going to cease activating

Windows XP & Office XP.

You'll be forced to upgrade.

Microsoft is now extending

Product Activation

to more and more products.

Product Activation

is already used to lock down

Windows & Office XP,

newer copies of Office 2000,

Visio 2002, & Project 2002.

On 7 January 2003,

Microsoft released Plus Digital Media Edition,

a $19.95 add-on pack for Windows XP.

It uses Product Activation

to limit installation & use to one computer.

Microsoft is thus extending Product Activation

into their consumer products

as well as their business products.

In addition,

Microsoft is using product updates

to force users to accept DRM.

On 26 June 2002,

Microsoft issued a bug fix for a security hole

in Windows Media Player.

In order to get the fix,

you had to agree to the license.

The license said in part:

"In order to protect the integrity

of content and software protected

by digital rights management 'Secure Content',

Microsoft may provide security related updates

to the OS Components

that will be automatically

downloaded onto your computer."

Let me de-weaselize what we just read:

"We can install whatever we want

onto your computer

whenever we want.

If it breaks your computer or your files,

too bad.

It ain't our fault."

Now Intuit, makers of TurboTax,

have gotten into the activation act.

When you buy TurboTax,

you have to activate it,

which ties it to the computer

on which you installed it.

http://rss.com.com/2100-1040-980600.html

If you try to install TurboTax

on another computer,

you're invited to buy a new license

for that machine.

One person reported at Amazon

that he installed TurboTax

& then got a new computer.

He called Intuit.

He reported that they told him,

"I needed to send in my copy for a refund

and purchase a new one".

Now there's a satisfied customer.

DRM in Windows

is about to get a whole lot worse.

In July 2002,

it was revealed that Microsoft

had received a patent:

a "Digital Rights Management Operating System".

http://cryptome.org/ms-drm-os.htm

Hmmm ...

Now why would Microsoft

be patenting a DRM OS?

Intel & Microsoft are members

of the TCPA:

the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance.

The TCPA's goal:

"a new computing platform

for the next century

that will provide for improved trust

in the PC platform".

Microsoft's contribution to the TCPA

is called "Palladium".

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

Palladium will lock down your computer.

In essence, Palladium will enable

the creator of any digital file

to create & enforce

any desired policy

governing the use of that information.

Microsoft is selling this as "security".

No more viruses!

No more piracy!

Things are a bit more complicated,

however,

once you begin examining

just what Palladium will do.

I create a Word document

& email it to you.

I set a policy that you can read it,

but you can't copy it

or send it to anyone else.

Palladium enforces that policy.

You buy a CD made by Sony.

Sony sets a policy

that you can play but not copy

or create mp3s.

Palladium enforces that policy.

You buy, er, rent software from Microsoft.

You don't pay the bill.

The software quits working.

You can't access your files

created by the software.

Palladium enforces that policy.

Can't you choose not to use Palladium?

Sure.

Microsoft says you'll be able

to run Palladium- & non-Palladium-enabled

programs & files on the same machine.

No big deal.

Until you want to play a CD

that requires Palladium.

Or install software

that requires Palladium to run.

Or until the administrators

in your company

force your PC to boot using Palladium.

Needless to say,

Palladium is a direct attack

on the GPL, open source, & Linux.

What happens when TCPA hardware

requires a TCPA-approved operating system?

No Linux.

No open source.

What happens when a TCPA operating system

permits only TCPA-approved programs?

No Linux.

No open source.

And remember ...

if you DID figure out a way

to get around TCPA and Palladium,

you couldn't tell anyone.

Remember the DMCA?

You'd be breaking the law.

The final step in the DRM puzzle:

forcing people to use it.

I believe that most people,

once they realize just how problematic DRM is,

how little it benefits them,

and how it is really designed

to benefit corporations instead of consumers,

will refuse to use it.

Would YOU willingly limit

what you can do with your CDs?

Your DVDs?

Your computer?

That's why the next step

is to make DRM mandatory.

Microsoft hopes that its monopoly

on operating systems

will help it force Palladium

whether we want it or not.

However,

there's also the danger

that DRM will be mandated by law.

Senator Fritz Hollings of South Carolina

has proposed a new law:

the CBDTPA.

Consumer

Broadband and

Digital

Television

Promotion

Act.

Here's a tip:

if a Congressperson

uses the word "promotion"

in the title of a bill,

someone's getting screwed.

If Congress passed

the "Right Leg Promotion Act",

... it would mean

we'd all have to cut off our left legs.

The CBDTPA

joins the CTEA

(Copyright Term Extension Act, remember?)

& the DMCA

(Digital Millenium Copyright Act, remember?)

in the pantheon of horrible bills.

The CBDTPA would require

that any "digital media device"

that can digitally copy anything

must include a government-approved

anti-copying scheme.

It would be illegal

to manufacture or trade

any "interactive digital device"

that does not have

"certified security technology"

embedded in it.

This includes computers,

cell phones,

DVD players,

& televisions.

This also includes

the Big Mouth Billy Bass,

the Philips Digital Baby Monitor,

the Sony Aibo robot dog,

& the TinkleToonz Musical Potty.

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/cat_fritzs_hit_list.html

If you broke the copy protection scheme,

& you sold an unprotected Musical Potty,

you would face 5 years in prison

& $500,000 in fines.

For a first offense.

Senator Howard Coble,

one of the CBDTPA's sponsors,

had this to say

when asked about opposition to the bill:

"As far as I know,

there have been very few complaints

from intellectual property holders."

Well, duh.

Now that the Republicans

are in charge of Congress,

there's less likelihood that the CBDTPA

will become law.

But that doesn't mean that it's dead.

Those who sponsored the CBDTPA

will be back again.

We have to understand the mindset

of the folks supporting the CTEA,

the DMCA,

& the CBDTPA.

The PVR

(Personal Video Recorder)

has gotten pretty popular in recent years.

Some examples ...

TiVo

ReplayTV

Even Microsoft is getting into the act,

with their UltimateTV.

But what can you do with a PVR?

Record TV shows.

Easily.

For instance,

tell your TiVo to record

every episode of the original "Star Trek"

anytime it's on.

Done.

Pause a live TV show

and then continue watching it.

Easy.

The biggie --

skip over commercials.

Easy.

A lot of media companies don't like PVRs.

Jamie Kellner,

CEO of Turner Broadcasting

(CNN, TNT, etc.),

was asked:

"Why are PVRs bad?"

He replied:

"Because of the ad skips.... It's theft.

Your contract with the network

when you get the show

is you're going to watch the spots.

Otherwise you couldn't get the show

on an ad-supported basis.

Any time you skip a commercial

or watch the button

you're actually stealing the programming."

Let me repeat:

"It's theft. ...

Any time you skip a commercial

or watch the button

you're actually stealing the programming."

Someone pointed out to Kellner

that sometimes people get up during commercials

to pee.

Ever do that?

Jamie Kellner thinks that's kinda OK ... kinda:

"I guess

there's a certain amount of tolerance

for going to the bathroom."

Of course,

if urinating is theft,

I've committed theft many times.

I often mute the stereo during commercials.

I sometimes talk to my wife during commercials.

If I have the remote,

I click over to another station during commercials.

Hey, I'm a guy.

We're hunter-gatherers at heart.

I'm hunting for a better show on TV.

I've stolen other stuff too.

I am a rampant thief.

I've surfed the Web ...

... with proxy software that blocks ads!

I've walked into movies ...

... after the previews!

I've watched "60 Minutes"

... and I'm under 50!

Jamie Kellner
(Mr. "Ad skips are theft")

is all in favor of innovation.

"I'm certainly not opposed,

and I encourage the idea

of exploring new models

with new technology that make it better for people.

At the same time,

we have to make sure

we don't damage the existing businesses,

whether it's pay-per-view business ...

and that we don't damage

the advertising-supported networks,

cable and broadcast."

NEWS FLASH!

We live in a system called

C - A - P - I - T - A - L - I - $ - M

In a capitalist system,

new markets

come along that disrupt

old markets.

Where are the buggy-whip makers?

They used to be doing quite well,

I hear.

Where is the shoe company

my grandfather worked at his whole life?

Where is the gas station

my Dad used to own & operate?

Here's a statistic for you:

The IBM Selectric typewriter

had a 90% market share at one time.

IBM quit selling typewriters in 1991.

It's how capitalism works:

new technologies

cause disruptions and new business models.

Companies can fight change,

or they can adapt.

It's like the Chinese proverb says:

"Learn to bend and you will never break".

A lot of companies

are facing radical challenges

to their traditional ways of doing business.

Instead of changing the way they do business,

they're trying to ...

force technology to change to suit them

AND

use the courts & Congress to give

those technology changes

the force of law.

Robert A. Heinlein said it best

in "Life Line",

one of his first short stories:

"There has grown up in the minds

of certain groups in this country

the notion that because a man or corporation

has made a profit out of the public

for a number of years,

the government and the courts

are charged with the duty

of guaranteeing such profit in the future,

even in the face of changing circumstances

and contrary to public interest.

This strange doctrine

is not supported by statute or common law."

Unfortunately,

a lot of smart & powerful people

have exactly the attitude that Heinlein

was lampooning.

We are informed.

We know what's going on.

Most people don't.

The one thing that we,

the people in this room,

cannot do

is just sit back and shrug our shoulders.

"It doesn't affect me."

"I don't use Windows. Big deal."

"It'll never happen."

The reality:

It does affect you.

It affects everyone.

Microsoft is an implacable foe

of Linux & open source.

It will happen.

It is happening.

We must act!

We must educate everyone we know.

Family.

Friends.

Co-workers.

Spread the word!

I've got lots of articles you can send out.

I've got Web sites you can visit & recommend.

Heck, send this presentation out!

We need to organize!

Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

www.eff.org

Lawrence Lessig,

the brilliant law professor & copyright activist,

issued a challenge recently.

Every time you spend a dollar

on a CD or movie,

every time you support the people

who would restrict your rights,

match that dollar by a donation to the EFF.

If you can't match it dollar for dollar,

make it $.50 on the dollar.

Whatever.

Just do it.

Nike,

that had nothing to do with you.

:)

Finally,

learn about copyright alternatives.

Lessig recently unveiled a fantastic new project:

Creative Commons.

www.creativecommons.org

Creative Commons makes it possible

for people to easily create licenses

for their works of art

that let people know they can copy those works

under certain conditions.

If you want to release your work

directly into the public domain,

Creative Commons can help you do that as well.

Some of those conditions:

Require attribution.

Allow commercial use of the work.

Allow modifications.

This presentation,

for instance,

is licensed under the Creative Commons

Attribution-ShareAlike license.

Look at the last page for more info.

In addition to The Licensing Project,

Creative Commons is also spearheading

The Founders' Copyright Project.

This will make content available

under the same terms as the framers

of the United States Constitution did:

14 years.

No renewal.

Tim O'Reilly,

of O'Reilly & Associates,

has already pledged to place 200 books

under the Founder's Copyright.

So as you can see,

there's a lot that is positive

occurring in the space where copyright,

rights, and controls meet.

But we still need to act.

Don't be complacent.

If you're not willing to fight for your rights,

you don't deserve them.

Let me finish with one last story.

Jake Johansen

was a 16-year-old Norwegian kid

who just wanted to watch "The Matrix" DVD

on his Linux box.

To get around CSS,

he wrote DeCSS.

He was arrested in Norway

at the MPAA's behest,

& charged with a crime.

Just a few days ago,

he was acquitted in Norway.

The judges in the case found that

"someone who buys a DVD film

that has been legally produced

has legal access to the film ...

even if the films are played in a different way

than the makers had foreseen".

The judges in the case

also made this wise statement:

"no one could be convicted

of breaking into their own property".

We face a future

where you could be convicted

for breaking into your own property.

I'm not going to let that happen.

Let's work together for a change.

Thank you!

Email me: scott@granneman.com

Visit my Web site: www.granneman.com

Join GranneNotes:

grannenotes-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Read my blog:

radio.weblogs.com/0100530/

Licensing of this work

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. To view a copy of this license, visit

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0 or send a letter to Creative Commons, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford, California 94305, USA.

In addition to the rights and restrictions common to all Creative Commons licenses, the Attribution-ShareAlike License features the following key conditions:

Attribution. The licensor permits others to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work. In return, licensees must give the original author credit.

Share Alike. The licensor permits others to distribute derivative works under a license identical to the one that governs the licensor's work.

Questions? Email scott@granneman.com

Scott Granneman

2003-01-08T10:43:30

Scott Granneman