|
Peter de Jager is a provocative Speaker,
Writer and Consultant. His primary focus in on how we manage change,
technology and the future.
In addition to speaking at conferences
worldwide, he also writes monthly columns for CIO Magazine and
Computerworld Canada.
His goal is always to question what we
think is so, and in so doing perhaps open up new opportunities.
If you'd like permission to reprint any
of Peter's articles, please contact him directly.
You can contact him at
pdejager@technobility.com
Or sign the Guest
Book and he'll get back to you.
|
|
|
In the music, publishing, and video industries, there is an active, and
expensive, search for solutions to the whole problem of digital
copyrights. There is a strong, even unassailable, belief that a
technological solution is possible. That there is some, yet to be
discovered way, to impose limited access to certain types of intellectual
property. The Holy Grail they're searching for, is a method to force us to
pay for each listen, view or read of a published work.
The sad news is, lots of money will be unwisely spent on 'Digital Rights
Management' (DRM). Likewise, a lot of companies will promise, and fail to
deliver, secure DRM processes. Regardless of the amount of money spent,
there is nothing anyone can do to a digital publication of a book, song,
or movie, that can stop the creation of an unprotected copy with minimal
effort.
I do realize, that this statement is a form of technological heresy.
Nevertheless, I think the central flaw of DRM is easy enough to
demonstrate with just a few examples. A clue to this simple process lies
in the title of this article.
For the record? (no pun intended) I am not one of those, who believe
'information wants to be free.' I am a firm believer that the creator of a
body of work, owns it. That those who use that work without compensating
the owner, according to the owner's conditions/constraints, is committing
a form of theft. That said, I'm also practical enough to realize that
enforcement, not possession, is nine tenths of the Law.
The easiest example at the moment, is in the music industry. There is a
notion we can somehow encrypt a music file so it can only be played from a
particular 'player application'. A fee must be paid to an Internet
service, which in turn provides a 'key' that will allow 'x' plays of that
particular music file, on that particular computer or music device.
Let's assume all the little details of this are ironed out. Let's assume
the hackers of the world are totally stymied by the encryption, that they
can't hack the player application, they're incapable of comparing files
bit by bit and resetting usage counters etc. etc. I know these assumptions
are pretty wild, but for the sake of argument, assume this the hackers are
defeated. Assume that somehow this is truly an impenetrable process. Have
they achieved their goal? Sadly no. Not even close.
At some point in this complex, and therefore expensive, process, the music
must be sent to the speakers so that I can enjoy it. At some point it must
become 'Music to my ears.' At that point, I can capture it. I can record
it digitally... I now have a
copy of the music, that is nearly, not totally, indistinguishable from the
copy hidden within the depths of the DRM. I do not have to set up a
recording studio to create a copy without background noise. I simply feed
the sound signal directly into a computer.
The same is true for e-books, I can capture the text and images directly
from the signals sent to the screen. Likewise, for video output. None of
this really very new. Bootleg copies of first run movies were once created
by sitting in a cinema with a hand camera, today you download them direct
from the producer. When the movie is digital, rather than film, it
suggests that technology can somehow protect the images. In reality it
merely makes it easier to steal.
This would all be a rather academic discussion, except for the continued
search for technological solutions, for self inflicted problems. When we
create digital copies of anything, we make it too easy to copy, and lose
control over copyright. It sounds like a modern variation of the joke that
starts 'Doctor! Doctor! It hurts when I do this!'
Not all digital works are so easily stolen. Interactive creations don't
exist as a static entity and therefore can't be stolen on the fly. An
example of a highly interactive work, is the 'Ceremony of Innocence' by
Peter Gabriel's Real World Multimedia company. It isn't static. It's
existence, and enjoyment, relies on the interaction between the
viewer/reader and the creator's work. If it were captured from the screen
and speakers, it would merely represent a single slice of many enjoyable
experiences.
© 2005,
Peter de Jager – Peter is passionate about change, how it affects both
individuals and organizations and allows them to grow and prosper. To contact him, and
host internal seminars on Change visit www.technobility.com
For
reprint permissions click here.
|