headers
Alex Hudson | 5 Dec 2005 12:54

APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

Guysengals.

We've kind of missed the launch of this boat, but it hasn't yet
departed:

http://www.apig.org.uk/current-activities/inquiry-into-digital-rights-management.html

A very narrow enquiry into specific problems with DRM, but nonetheless
it deserves some attention since the media lobby will doubtless give it
theirs.

An initial attempt at a response:

http://www.alcoholicsunanimous.com/chod/apig.xhtml

Issues:

      * 100% too many words for what they asked for already...
      * Labours a number of points which don't need to be laboured
      * Somewhat of a branedump, therefore probably missing a number of
        pertinent points
      * Heavy on rhetoric, light on examples: needs to be the other way
        around, and probably stick closer to their points
      * Not sure whether I can raise "other issues" effectively; could
        make them simply dismiss the entire thing for wandering OT

It's unlikely that they will receive many submissions on the same side
as ours, so we really need to get something good in, I think.

Any help appreciated.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Alex Hudson | 5 Dec 2005 13:50

Gowers Review of Intellectual Property (was: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.)

On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 11:54 +0000, Alex Hudson wrote:
> Guysengals.
> 
> We've kind of missed the launch of this boat, but it hasn't yet
> departed:
> 
> http://www.apig.org.uk/current-activities/inquiry-into-digital-rights-management.html

I suppose, had I been on the ball, I would have also noticed:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/05/uk_intellectual_property_rights_review/

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/newsroom_and_speeches/press/2005/Press_102_05.cfm

Looks like the stuff BPI were batting for wrt. length of copyright on
audio, but will also surely affect Free Software if we let it. We need
to watch:

	http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/gowers

... as that is where the fun will begin, apparently.

This is a real chance for some change in the favour of users, I think.

I'm tarting this e-mail across a couple of lists, please just reply to
list if you respond - thanks.

Cheers,

Alex.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
MJ Ray | 6 Dec 2005 00:55
Gravatar

Re: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

Alex Hudson <home <at> alexhudson.com>
> http://www.apig.org.uk/current-activities/inquiry-into-digital-rights-management.html

Well announced!  I think this is worth getting several responses
into. If any readers are experienced at submitting consultation
responses, please help out, offer advice and/or submit one.

[...]
> An initial attempt at a response:
> http://www.alcoholicsunanimous.com/chod/apig.xhtml
[...]
>       * Heavy on rhetoric, light on examples: needs to be the other way
>         around, and probably stick closer to their points

If anything, I'd avoid spending too many words on examples of
problems and look for positive ideas of what they can do to
help us. I think I will be asking for:

 1. establishment of "fair circumvention" when DRM is being used
    to restrict what should be fair dealing or other vital acts
    - you can't make DRM systems "fail safe" but you can give some
    hope of recovering after they "fail closed";

 2. legislation to ensure that DRM system owners are held responsible
    for computer misuse (Sony?), privacy invasion and monopoly effects
    resulting from their DRM systems, which will help limit distortion;

 3. requiring collecting societies to allow members to leave, rather
    than reports like http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/fc-uk-discuss/2005-November/000512.html
    about why some artists aren't using liberal licensing yet;
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Alex Hudson | 6 Dec 2005 10:02

Re: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 23:55 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Well announced!  I think this is worth getting several responses
> into. If any readers are experienced at submitting consultation
> responses, please help out, offer advice and/or submit one.

Absolutely right. My current plan is to complete a full-length response,
send a director's cut of that to APIG, but make the rest available to
help others. If this gets sent on behalf of AFFS, I probably can't send
a personal response also (they ask that the person/people who prepared
it be identified), but I would strongly encourage others to send
personal responses.

> >       * Heavy on rhetoric, light on examples: needs to be the other way
> >         around, and probably stick closer to their points
> 
> If anything, I'd avoid spending too many words on examples of
> problems and look for positive ideas of what they can do to
> help us.

That's a good idea. 

>  1. establishment of "fair circumvention" when DRM is being used
>     to restrict what should be fair dealing or other vital acts
>     - you can't make DRM systems "fail safe" but you can give some
>     hope of recovering after they "fail closed";

Hm. I'm not sure what I think of this. Most of my arguments are against
having any sort of legal protection of DRM systems: going down this road
would infer to them that having a list of exceptions would fix the
technical issues with DRM.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
MJ Ray | 7 Dec 2005 01:20
Gravatar

Re: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

Alex Hudson <home <at> alexhudson.com>
> On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 23:55 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> >  1. establishment of "fair circumvention" when DRM is being used
> >     to restrict what should be fair dealing or other vital acts
> >     - you can't make DRM systems "fail safe" but you can give some
> >     hope of recovering after they "fail closed";
> 
> Hm. I'm not sure what I think of this. Most of my arguments are against
> having any sort of legal protection of DRM systems: going down this road
> would infer to them that having a list of exceptions would fix the
> technical issues with DRM.

I'll try to make it clear that it's not a solution. It's impossible
to solve the problems posed by DRM. All "fair circumvention" gives
is a small hope that we don't lose access to all our culture.

I realise that fair dealing is limited. It's also not directly
part of the questions, which is why I mention other vital acts
too, such as use on accessible devices, or backing up.
Backing up computer programs is enabled by section 50A of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act... getting a similar permission
for DRM'd works would be good if marginal, don't you think?

> >  2. legislation to ensure that DRM system owners are held responsible
> >     for computer misuse (Sony?), privacy invasion and monopoly effects
> >     resulting from their DRM systems, which will help limit distortion;
> 
> Good idea. I'm not sure how you could word that, though. [...]

Me neither. I'd probably suck at drafting legislation, so I'll
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Simon Waters | 7 Dec 2005 02:18

Re: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

MJ Ray wrote:
> 
> I'll try to make it clear that it's not a solution. It's impossible
> to solve the problems posed by DRM. All "fair circumvention" gives
> is a small hope that we don't lose access to all our culture.
> 
> I realise that fair dealing is limited. It's also not directly
> part of the questions,

One could of course argue that fair dealing is precisely one element
that is missing, and makes EU copyright law different from US.

If WIPOs job is harmonising the law, surely Europe should enact fair
dealing rules.

Indeed I would have thought European wide legislation on DRM would be
impossible without establishing what precisely should be allowed.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alex Hudson | 7 Dec 2005 09:54

Re: APIG Inquiry into DRM tech.

On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 00:20 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> I'll try to make it clear that it's not a solution. It's impossible
> to solve the problems posed by DRM. All "fair circumvention" gives
> is a small hope that we don't lose access to all our culture.

Ok, that sounds cool..

> Backing up computer programs is enabled by section 50A of the
> Copyright Designs and Patents Act... getting a similar permission
> for DRM'd works would be good if marginal, don't you think?

Well, yes and no. I mention Sony v. Owen in the paper; funnily enough,
the judge had a few things to say on this topic even though it was a
moot argument by the time he got around to it:

        "Next there is the backup argument. I have to confess I found
        this rather fanciful. Thus far, millions of Sony games have been
        sold around the world without anybody making backups. They could
        not make backups which would work until a circumvention device
        arrived. Reliance is placed upon Section 50 A which provides,

        'It is not an infringement of copyright for a lawful user of a
        copy of a computer program to make any backup copy of it which
        it is necessary for him to have for the purposes of his normal
        use'
        [..]
        "Copinger considered the question of what is meant by
        'necessary' in the latest edition of Copinger & Skone James. It
        points out that Section 50 A is consequential upon Art. 5 of the
        Computer Software Directive [..]. It goes on to say,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Richard Smedley | 7 Dec 2005 14:52
Picon
Favicon

Re: [Fwd: Seminar: How Free and Open Source Software can help your organisation. 5th Dec.]

> MOST - Midlands Open Source Technology
> ----- Introductory Seminar -----
>
> http://www.most.org.uk/events/seminar.html
> Monday 5 December, BVSC, 138 Digbeth, Birmingham B5 6DR
>
> Come along to the one-day introductory seminar, and find out how the new
> MOST project (see below for launch event details) will be bringing the
> benefits of Free and Open Source Software to the voluntary sector.

I've been asked to briefly report back on the event:

It went very well - around three dozen workers and volunteers from the
sector attended. MOST's holistic approach to bringing Free Software to
the sector was outlined, and we had some very good guest lecturers
including Richard Rothwell (talking about open formats and accessibility);
Ian Lynch (Ingots and Open Document Format); and David Wilcox
(social software). The day was more-than-ably chaired by Mark Taylor
of the Open Source Consortium. :-)

As expected, there was a lot of interest in the training and support that
MOST can offer. Website design and hosting - particularly CMSs - seemed
another area of strong interest to the sector.

We are moving web host soon, but when things settle down look for more
information on Free Software in the voluntary sector at
http://www.most.org.uk/

 - Richard
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane