decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more... 		decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 06:50 AM EST

Open Source Law's Brendan Scott has a report for us from down under:
I'm pleased to report that the Australian House Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has presented its *unanimous* report on exceptions to Technological Protection Measures and it is largely good news for open source and bad news for cartels.

The report is available here. The report makes recommendations consistent with those requested by the Australian Open Source Industry Association (OSIA Limited).

I haven't had a chance to digest it all, but here are some of the more interesting recommendations:

#2 - the definition of technological protection measure/effective technological measure clearly require a direct link between access control and copyright protection. (this is the nub of the Stevens v Sony decision)

#3 - ensure that access control measures should be related to the protection of copyright, rather than to the restriction of competition in markets for non-copyright goods and services.

#4 - region coding TPMs be specifically excluded from the definition of effective technological measure in the legislation implementing the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement - In other words, (if implemented) you can play DVDs on Linux!

#6 - there be exceptions for interoperability, specifically for interoperability between a program and data, for removing involuntarily installed software (think Sony DRM), for security and for individual privacy online;

#11 - clarification aimed at permitting the noncommercial creation of circumvention measures to make use of the exceptions.

#14 - exception for investigating infringement but only where a court makes such an order (I'm not sure whether I should count this as good or bad)

#16 - that the government monitor threats against legitimate security researchers

#28 - access to software protected by obsolete TPMs

It's nice to start the day with some good news, eh? Of course, this is a report, not law, but the good news I see is that more and more, people are coming to understand tech issues, particularly issues that impact FOSS, and that inevitably leads to a more balanced viewpoint.

As an example of how extreme technological protection measures can be, on page 117 of the full report, we find that the committee realized that unless there is an exception made, someone who wished to investigate copyright infringement of his or her own copyrighted work would be breaking the law to do so, if it meant bypassing such a TPM. So one of the exceptions being proposed is "4.8 - Non-infringing use – the use of copyright material by a copyright owner in this context will not be infringing if done for the purposes of s.43 of the Copyright Act 1968."

Of course, a mere child might notice that a law that has the effect of outlawing a person's being able to investigate infringement of his own copyrighted works, or making him pay a licensing fee to do so, is a law that has gone over the top to begin with. That's the real problem here. This love the entertainment industry has for DRM and TPM, like all toxic love affairs, is costing the world already, and it's only just begun. The solution, in my view, is to refuse to buy anything that I feel is unreasonably offered. The entertainment cartels can do whatever they please, but all they can do is make an offer of goods. If I don't like the terms, I'm under no obligation to accept their offer and buy their goods. Neither are you. It's a free market after all. And I see no point in complaining about such terms and then accepting them, just to listen to some music or read a book or whatever. If I do that, they'll certainly never understand. For that reason, I'll never buy a "Trusted Computing" computer of any kind, because I don't like being spied on. That's what those chips do and I don't like it. Why would I give them money to do something to me I don't like? Some things are just obvious.

When the entertainment industry shut down Napster and began suing grandmothers and children, I stopped buying their goods. I don't approve of such behavior and while I believe in respecting copyright, I think they crossed a line. I don't like doing business with people who behave heartlessly. (Magnatune "We Are Not Evil" founder John Buckman lists some other issues here that inspired him to start Maganatune.) When iTunes first came onto the scene, I thought they made a fair offer, and so I bought from them. Then when iTunes later changed its terms midstream, I stopped buying from them too.

I thought I'd simply die without my music, but here I am, still in the land of the living, so I conclude we can say no to terms we find offensive and we won't die. If enough folks do just that, it would balance out the marketplace, which at the moment is seriously tipped against the best interest of consumers.


  


AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It | 363 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Well said.
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 07:43 AM EST
"For that reason, I'll never buy a "Trusted Computing" computer
of any kind, because I don't like being spied on."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic thread
Authored by: MathFox on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 07:48 AM EST
For other Open Source and Legal issues...

---
When people start to comment on the form of a message, it is a sign that they
have problems to accept the truth of the message.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Thread
Authored by: darksepulcher on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 07:49 AM EST
Just because we always have one of these for PJ's benefit.

---
Had I but time--As this fell Sergeant, Death
Is strict in his arrest--O, I could tell you--
But let it be.
(Hamlet, Act V Scene 2)

[ Reply to This | # ]

I'm under no obligation to accept their offer and buy their goods.
Authored by: Wol on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 07:53 AM EST
The problem with that, unfortunately, is they then point at their declining
sales and scream "PIRACY!!!"

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | # ]

AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 08:06 AM EST
...I'll never buy a "Trusted Computing" computer of any kind, because I don't like being spied on... If you recently bought a computer, it's likely that it already *has* a TPM chip in it. This is actually not a problem in itself (there are *some* good uses for that chip). The problem happens when your CPU refuses to boot the OS unless that OS has been signed or when the OS refuses to execute a program or read data because of the TPM chip.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Trusted computing and spying
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 08:12 AM EST
Trusted computing is not necessarily spying you. It can have several uses. The
first is to attest that you are running only "certified" software on
"certified" hardware. The second that you are also a
"certified" user. They can be coupled with a form of restriction: if
the software/user is not "certified", block the computer.

The spying is an altogether different issue. Windows and Media Player call home
without trusted computing and/or DRM. It is very easy to implement a microspy in
the northbridge of a computer that sends all what goes through it to the US
governement or the CIA without any form of trusted computing. You'll probably be
unable to know that it's there unless you manage to intercept its mode of
communication (presumably radio waves).

The worst issue with "trusted computing" is to understand it to mean
that your computer is to be trusted, which is absolutely false: "trusted
computing" means that somebeody (actually several bodies) certifies that
you are using a platform (hardware+software) according to his/her (their)
wishes, no more, no less.

[ Reply to This | # ]

AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 09:44 AM EST
I thought I'd simply die without my music, but here I am, still in the land of the living, so I conclude we can say no to terms we find offensive and we won't die. If enough folks do just that, it would balance out the marketplace, which at the moment is seriously tipped against the best interest of consumers.
Same thing for me. However, I'm not sure the music industry is not pointing out that decline in sales to put the burden on "rampant piracy", and yet, I don't (and you don't either, most probably) pirate music.

What we need is a reliable, independent study asking former music consumers why they have stopped buying records. There may be multiple reasons for this, including the development of P2P, but I am quite sure P2P is not the main reason behind this drop in music sales. But who, among the music industry, is willing to lead a study which would end up proving their business model is obsolete ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Going to be like printers ?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 10:15 AM EST
It's going to be like printers.

'Low-bid' printers take expensive ink cartridges, and print identifying information on every page so 'they' know who printed it and when. 'Free' printers (which do not suffer from those problems) are more expensive.

'Low-bid' computers will get a subsidy from the RIAA, MPAA, AOL. ITunes, etc. who all want you to be able to consume their service in rights-managed fashion. 'Free' computers will be more expensive.

Whether you can legally convert a 'low-bid' computer into a 'free' computer is anyone's guess. Can you do it with printers ?

For me, I'll pay the price of freedom.

[ Reply to This | # ]

They actively prommote sharing of open source applications
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 02:18 PM EST
The <a
href="http://www.computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/UNID/07512FA3A841F42ECC256EE8
001253A0">goverment supports and promotes</a>
the sharing of open source apps between agencies.


<a href="http://matrix.squiz.net/">This product</a> is
just one example. I understand that it is now the most used CMS in australia and
is also now being used accross the ditch at some <a
href="http://www.radionz.co.nz">high profile</a> sites in NZ.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Region coding
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 02:49 PM EST
Item #4 states - region coding TPMs be specifically excluded from the definition
of effective technological measure in the legislation implementing the
Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement - In other words, (if implemented)
you can play DVDs on Linux!

I don't think this has anything to do with Linux, but rather the region codes
that don't permit you to play an Aussie DVD in America, etc.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Free Market Myth
Authored by: Observer on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 05:00 PM EST
I was with you up until the point where you said, "If I don't like their offer, I can refuse to buy it." Technically, that's true, but it still has little or no impact on those making the offer. Unfortunately, the market (and decisions as to what constitutes a "reasonable" offer) is driven by the majority. The majority generally doesn't understand the deeper technological issues and cares little about DRM. To some extent, SONY was right when they said, "People don't care that we've installed the equivalent of a 'root kit' on their computer." Think herds of sheep. As long as they've got food and water (and a cool video game now and then), they are happy. The number of us more technically aware people who refuse to buy DRMed products is still at the noise level for the marketing people in these companies.

The problem is the fact that real innovation is driven by the tiny minority at the head of the curve, and it's this tiny minority that is being hemmed in and disenfranchised by these "protection" schemes. It's the tiny minority on the cutting edge that are out there trying new things, plugging things where they're not supposed to be plugged in, bending the rules, looking at problems in a new light. These are the people who are being slapped down and told to BEHAVE!

The hope is that, as that minority keeps making noise, the rest of the herd starts to notice, and sooner or later, enough of them just might start listening and changing their habits to make the marketers sit up and take notice.

---
The Observer

[ Reply to This | # ]

AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 06:26 PM EST
sorry but I looked. Really I did, and I didn,t see a "contributed by
PJ".

Maybe it was there and I just missed it.

That being said, is it really copyright infringement?

[ Reply to This | # ]

rather than to the restriction of competition..
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 07:36 PM EST
rather than to the restriction of competition in markets for non-copyright goods and services.

This does not sound so great for iTunes seeing that they even changed their implimentation to lock others out of the market.

[ Reply to This | # ]

AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Authored by: ewe2 on Thursday, March 02 2006 @ 10:15 PM EST
Of course the normal course of events in current Australian politics is for the
industry lobby to bury such a report. I don't however see how they're going to
get around the ACCC unless some truly creative new guidelines appear.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Copy-Protection Again
Authored by: Steve Martin on Friday, March 03 2006 @ 07:14 AM EST

If enough folks do just that, it would balance out the marketplace, which at the moment is seriously tipped against the best interest of consumers.

I just yesterday received a shipment from Amazon containing the release of season three of the TV show "News Radio" (which I enjoy very much). I happened to look at the back of the DVD package before opening the shrinkwrap, and saw two things that stopped me dead in my tracks:

  1. A SonyPictures.com icon
  2. A small icon that says "These discs are copy protected."

Great. Another copy-protected Sony product.

I frequently use the DVD drive in my laptop to play DVDs while on the road. However, I'm afraid to put this one in the drive. I checked the Amazon Web site for this product, and while they do prominently state that this disc contains a technology called "RCE" (enhanced region coding), it does not say one word about copy protection.

I'm debating whether simply to return the disc to Amazon and ask for my money back.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffee, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Boycott - AU House Standing Committee on Legal & Constitutional Affairs Report: They Get It
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 04 2006 @ 05:51 AM EST
I don't have to buy DRM material to listen to my favorite music. I copied the
records to tape, so I don't have to worry about wearing them out. You don't
remember those days?

Those were the golden years of music.

If you have a record player and records, guard them with your life!!!!

[ Reply to This | # ]
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.06 seconds