[wos] End of resistance against DRM?

[Matthias Spielkamp]

As always, Lessig is very pragmatic in his approach. He's always been 
too pragmatic for the taste of many. So this debate is not new, it's 
just focusing on a topic that's closer of the heart of many than 
figuring out the ins and outs of CC-by-sa-nc-MixRipBurn-whatever 
licences for Mongolia. Here's what he writes in his blog:

     Sun has made recent announcements about their openDRM project. In 
my view, they’ve made some commitments that are important for any DRM 
project. E.g., as I’ve seen it described, it would be implemented to 
allow individuals to assert “fair use,” and unlock DRM’d content, with a 
tag to trace misuse. And they’ve described a platform upon which authors 
keep the freedom to turn the DRM off, and more the content from the 
secured platform.

     These are good things. But some confuse praise for better DRM with 
praise for DRM. So let me be as clear as possible here (though saying 
the same thing I’ve always said): We should be building a DRM-free 
world. We should have laws that encouraged a DRM-free world. We should 
demonstrate practices that make compelling a DRM-free world. All of that 
should, I thought, be clear. But just as one can hate the Sonny Bono 
Act, but think, if there’s a Sonny Bono Act, there should also be a 
Public Domain Enhancement Act, so too can one hate DRM, but think that 
if there’s DRM, it should be at least as Sun is saying it should be.

Matthias

Volker Grassmuck wrote:
> A DReaM or a nightmare?
> 
> I just looked at the newly released report by UK market researcher 
> Screendigest: "Digital Rights Management and New Entertainment Business 
> Models: A strategic analysis
> http://www.screendigest.com/reports/06drm/readmore/view.html
> 
> It mentions as a DRM "interoperability provider": Sun Microsystem's Dream.
> 
> DReaM is for "DRM/everywhere available". DReaM-CAS is for "Conditional 
> Access System," a full open source DRM environment for the MPEG-2 
> Transport Stream format.
> 
> Sun's marvelous marketing label for this project is "Open Media Commons":
> http://www.openmediacommons.org/
> 
> DReaM  Overview Document
> http://www.openmediacommons.org/collateral/DReaM-Overview.pdf
> 
> To read the specs you have to register.
> https://dream.dev.java.net/
> 
> Wired has an article on it:
> Reasons to Love Open-Source DRM
> http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70548-0.html?tw=wn_story_page_prev2
> 
> It mentions Lawrence Lessig endorsing Sun's Dream. "The "fair use" 
> champion approved Sun's plan, because Sun worked with the Creative 
> Commons "pretty much from the outset, to support their license 
> definitions," according to Tom Jacobs, director of engineering at Sun 
> Labs and the project lead of the Open Media Commons.
> 
> Lessig's statement read, "In a world where DRM has become ubiquitous, we 
> need to ensure that the ecology for creativity is bolstered, not 
> stifled, by technology. We applaud Sun's efforts to rally the community 
> around the development of open-source, royalty-free DRM standards that 
> support 'fair use' and that don't block the development of Creative 
> Commons ideals."
> 
> Even the Wired author has his doubts about it.
> 
> EFF's Cory Doctorow remains firm in his opposition to any kind of DRM:
> Sun's "Open Media Commons" Is More Like a Gated Community, August 24, 2005
> http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_08.php#003929
> 
> And it makes the Register's Andrew Orlowski's head explode:
> Lessig blesses DRM. It's open source DRM, so it's good. Huh?
> Andrew Orlowski, 24th March 2006
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/24/lessig_blesses_drm/
> 
> 
> And what do we do with it at wos? Do we follow Lessig into a world of 
> green, politically correct, interoperable, open source, five copies 
> allowed DRM? Uninvite him? Put him on the stand?
> 
> at a loss
> Volker
>