Chris Smith  03-18-2003
04:21 PM ET (US)
|
jleader: If I take your idea to the extreme - connect once
per tick, but make the ticks once per year, I get the
following...
Rather than move a whole timekeeper there, just keep a "have reached" time stamp. Periodically, the authority in question (TBD) releases a signed timestamp, essentially stating "We have now passed 2002". This message can be distributed any way desired - it doesn't have to come from a central source. You can archive older messages to reply them as needed. But if they do their job correctly, you can never pass 'now'.
An alternate approach is to instead use "Now Cleared" messages. So, the same source would release a "Now released: Winston Churchill" signed message at the appropriate time. This conveniently gets around both the variable lifespan of authors and changes in law.
Of course, the gaping hole is now what signing technology to use. I don't think anyone is prepared to trust a world wide infrastructure - for the next 80 years - to even a 4096 RSA bit key. Yeah - it is almost impossible to break. But the consequences of a "just got luckY" break - or a quantum computer breaking it - make it unlikely that anyone
will trust it.
|
jleader 03-18-2003
02:59 PM ET (US)
|
I suspect that one way of dealing with this is to move the timekeeping function inside the "trusted" part of your computer (think Palladium). Then, it would periodically connect to a timeserver to verify that it hadn't drifted too far off. I doubt that most DRM would care if the time was off by an hour or two, as long as it got back on track every few days, and didn't keep drifting farther and farther off.
Note that without a "trusted" computer, this is all moot, anyway.
|
gilbert 03-18-2003
02:12 PM ET (US)
|
But the copyright limit is only one small part of the puzzle. Supposedly, we'll be able to download and play a song or watch a movie (Pirates of the Carriban, for example. Arr!) that would expire in X days. Well, something has to be able to regulate and be authorative for that time. Otherwise, what's to keep me from running my own timeserver and rolling the clock back every so often? Arrr... Edited 03-18-2003 02:12 PM
|
Chris Smith 03-17-2003
04:28 PM ET (US)
|
Of course, anyone who thinks that they will be using their current computer, operating system, software, etc in 60 or more years time is already being overly optimistic.
SO if you're being that optimistic, why not opt to plan for a Congress-link, a geo-link, a secure clock link, and maybe even an author-death link so that you can track the expiration exactly...
"The author of this work expired 477,799,618 seconds ago."
"The copyright term on this work is currently scheduled
to expire in 1,731,187,022 seconds."
"Please stand by."
|
Jerry Kindall 03-17-2003
12:07 PM ET (US)
|
DRM has no need to support copyright expiration, since the whole point is to get users to voluntarily agree to licenses that are more restrictive than copyright. If you agree never to copy a given work ever, then it becomes breach of contract to do so. It's an attempted end-run around the law. Whether it's legally valid or not is debatable.
Of course all this means is that breach of contract will become as common as copyright violation is today.
|
Chris Smith 03-17-2003
12:22 AM ET (US)
|
They discused the Congress-link needed as well.
All just supports my long-time take - ebooks and music using TPM (Technical Protection Measures) (sometimes incorrectly known as DRM) are NEVER purchased.
They are effectively just rented.
As long as they are transparently priced accordingly, this shouldn't be a problem.
|
Sam Kington 03-15-2003
11:58 PM ET (US)
|
Doesn't this also require the DRM software to identify which country your machine is in (not necessarily which country your ISP is in), and whether that country's laws have changed at all since the DRM software was updated? Unless that information is hard-wired into the DRM software, at which point you need an automatic update mechanism - and, given that copyright terms tend to be extended by legislatures, that would make not being able to download a new version of the software a breach of the license agreement?
|
gilbert 03-15-2003
10:22 PM ET (US)
|
|
roadknight 03-15-2003
02:48 PM ET (US)
|
So does this make Jack Valenti the TickTock Man...errrr...Master Timekeeper?
"Repent Lessig!" cried Jack Valenti
|
Nelson Minar 03-15-2003
12:52 PM ET (US)
|
Cute argument, but nonsensical. Why would someone build a copyright expiration into their DRM system? No one will compell them to. Besides, we all know copyright is effectively perpetual anyway. Sigh. Edited 03-15-2003 12:52 PM
|
Sanity 03-15-2003
12:17 PM ET (US)
|
But it gets worse. If that song is copyrighted – which, after all, is the putative basis for this whole game – that copyright will expire at some point. That means you need to build an expiration date into the rights grant (just in case your handheld is still around in 2098).
There is no reason to suspect that copyright owners will be under any obligation to ensure that DRM permit people to exercise their fair use rights, so this argument doesn't really make sense. Even if it did, if current trends continue, no copyrighted material will ever expire anyway as congress will keep extending the copyright term as it has been doing for years. Edited 03-15-2003 12:17 PM
|
New Topic
My Topics
Views:
725
(Unique:
428
) / Subscribers:
1 | What's this?
