The only way to extend copyright to embrace the distributed nature of the Internet is to extend the “web of trust” to cover media. The “web of trust” would merely be an extension of copyright, restricting publication *not* use and access. This would be an open and distributed way to prevent unauthorized republication of content.

The problem is that copyright in its current state doesn’t extend well to the Internet, as anyone has access to the means of publishing content. There is no way of preventing unauthorized publication of digital content without utilizing encryption. However, both the means of encryption and the means of access should be an open public good.

Within the “web of trust”, you would buy a key to the content, not the content itself. You would also be able to resell this key, transferring your rights to use and access the content to another person. It would be within the rights of the consumer to break the “web of trust” if, and only if, the key has been lost or rendered non-functional and they wish to access the content. Consumers would always have the right of fair use. Under no circumstances, however, would consumers have the right to redistribute their key, as this would result in the republication of the content.

The effects of this “web of trust” would be very similar to the clause you see in books where you cannot sell a book without its cover. This stipulation does not affect end users but it does force *publishers* and *vendors* to obtain permission to republish the content.

Media can never be free. Because if media was free, there would be no economic incentive to produce it. Media, however, *can* be made open. And there is every economic incentive for media to be made open.

In depth technical specifics are available here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerckhoffs%27_principle

Thanks,
Ryan Oram

The recording industry has begun to astroturf to get support for Bill C-32 and the digital lock provisions.

http://balancedcopyrightforcanada.ca/
http://www.facebook.com/balancedcopyright

The Minister of Heritage has also called everyone against the bill
“radical extremists”.

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/06/23/copyright-heritage-minister-moore.html
http://video.itworldcanada.com/?bcpid=7044989001&bctid=101481423001

—–

The response of a Canadian author (who has released all his novels under Creative Commons: Attribution Non-Commercial) on “radical extremism” and copyright: http://www.boingboing.net/2010/06/23/a-canadian-authors-p.html

A great overview of the technology behind digital locks and the problems with digital media that need to be resolved: http://www.flora.ca/documents/digital-ownership.shtml

—–

Note: The following was originally posted by [Ryan] on the Balanced Copyright for Canada Facebook page.

—–

Rights and freedoms are not radical or extremist.

Consumers have just as much of a right to freedom of use as the artists have a right to compensation.

Besides, closed digital locks do not help artists as they do not prevent piracy. In fact, they encourage it as the free “pirated” media doesn’t have the limitations of the DRMed pirated media.

The closed digital locks serve only to protect the jobs of the middlemen in the media industry, as they force the artists and
consumers to rely on them for media creation and distribution.

—–

Copyright in its current state doesn’t extend well to the Internet, as anyone has access to the means of publishing content. I agree that there is no way of preventing unauthorized publication of digital content without utilizing encryption. However, both the means of encryption and the means of access *must* be an open public good.

The current DRM systems are not designed to protect artists. They are designed to restrict use and access to our media and hardware. The media companies want to force us to buy multiple copies of their content, even though there is no technological reason to do so. So they have, in earnest, created one out of thin air. This is the reason why we can not play a video bought off of Xbox Live on our iPods.

The only successful content authentication system will be one that is universal to every device AND completely open source, utilizing open standards for the delivery, the container, and the encryption. This is because such a system is the only system the public will accept, as it will be a system under *our* control.

In the end, the people are never going to give up control of our bought and paid for media and hardware so media companies can line their coffers. And we will do everything possible to keep that control, even if that means we have to break a few locks along the way.

—–

I think it’s telling that it’s web developers who are the most vocally opposed to this system.

We are the people who understand the technology behind these systems as we work with it every day. The Internet is built on open standards and specifications. We want the system currently place to be extended to support media. Closed DRM is fundamentally against the principles of universal use and access on which the Internet was created.

To the media industry:

When in Rome, it’s best to do as the Romans do. Work with us and respect our principles and values and we will likely be willing to work with your industry to protect your content.

It’s your call.

—–

Technology can not fix societal problems. Piracy, as a black market, is a societal problem. You can never prevent people from pirating, as a few will ALWAYS find a way. You can only attempt to influence people to buy through efficient and productive technology.

I think it’s pointless to attempt to make an uncrackable system as the reason why people crack DRM is mostly because they want to get around the restrictions present in the media. Making a system that doesn’t restrict users in this way is a much more productive way to solve the problem, rather than trying to implement endless layers of DRM that will end up being hacked eventually anyways.

Mind you, there needs to be at least something in place to *deter* people from republishing the content without the author’s permission. So let’s just make that something using secure open parts, put in as few restrictions as possible, and call it a damn day.

– Ryan Oram

I think one important point the film makes is about mashups. Many of my favourite songs are mashups. Here are some examples by a guy who goes by the name of Pogo:

Toyz Noise:

Upular:

Bangarang:

And of course, Alice ( I can’t find Pogo’s copy anymore. Was it deleted? ):

If there’s one thing I’ve learned over time; it’s how to tell when a relationship is over. With artists they seem to be over before they begin.

I like to be kind and respectful when things are over. I don’t believe in burning bridges. Maybe that makes some women hate me more – because they want to move on but they can’t justify hating me. That would just be easier.

Life is strange and wonderful. I do cherish these chance encounters, and I hope that everyone I meet remains a friend; even if we part ways.

-E

My coworker’s wife went to Costco and was leaving when she saw someone hit her car, and then start to pull away. Well she ran after him, flagged him down and discussed what would happen. She got all the pertinent details and can do something about it if there turns out to be damage from it. She’s a lucky one.

I remember when I was a kid someone smashed into my father’s brand new car, destroyed the grille and then took off and nobody ever caught them. This happens thousands of times per day, peoples property being damaged and there’s nothing they could do about it. Most of the time when caught the driver claims they didn’t notice. Well if you didn’t notice, you have absolutely no business driving a car. You should be legally barred from doing so.

Well what if each car with a backup camera also recorded when the car experienced shock, even minor bumps like those experienced in a parking lot. Well then we’d have video evidence of every collision, major or minor, from a car’s eye view.

I think this is a good thing. What do you think?

Well let me tell you that this is not at all what happened. Lenovo hired out it’s upgrade process to Mentor Media Ltd., a company which specialises in, “…cutting edge supply chain management services to customers in many different industries.”

Mentor Media Inc. has been unresponsive, withholding of contact and order information and generally irresponsible throughout this process. For example, you’ll be hard pressed to find anyone to contact regarding your order on the Lenovo Windows 7 Upgrade page. When you place your order, they do not include your order number in email communications with you. They don’t send you any emails except the one confirming your order. A few weeks ago I received an email stating that even though Windows 7 had been out since October 22nd in stores, it wouldn’t be until late November that Lenovo customers would see their orders.

Then nothing happened – and now it’s December 2nd, 2009. I’m still waiting for my copy of Windows 7 from Lenovo and Mentor Media Ltd. I wouldn’t mind if the upgrade were truly free, but I’ve paid $40 for “shipping” for this item. That’s practically the price of a piece of software to start with – for just a disc! If all I receive in the mail is a disc I’ll be upset. You don’t charge customers $40 to ship an item that should have come with their system. I purchased my system right before Windows 7 was launched. It would have been installed if I had waited a week.

So I called Mentor Media Ltd. by checking the website associated with the root URL of the Lenovo Windows 7 Upgrade page. Upon answering, I was asked for my order number. Of course this was on a piece of paper I printed out over a month ago. Thankfully the lady was able to look up my account. I was told that my credit card had been indeed charged the ridiculous shipping fee already and that it should be shipping soon – but that Lenovo had sent out a message to her company saying that it would not honour IdeaPad Windows 7 Upgrades until mid-December!

I asked her when this message got to her company and she told me a week ago. When I explained to her that the responsible thing for her company to do would be to email IdeaPad owners and let them know about the extended delay, she hung up on me – the rotten wench.

So here I am bitter because my MSDN version of Windows 7 is expired on my laptop and my desktop has been replaced with a black screen. The corner says my copy of Windows 7 is not legitimate. Funny, it seems the offer of Windows 7 for free from Lenovo was not legitimate at all.

[edit 2009/12/03]

I’ve just received the first communication since early November from Mentor Media. They’ve sent me an expedited parcel via UPS. So I’ve still essentially paid $40 for a copy of Windows 7 1 month after launch – a copy that should have come with my laptop, but it’s still on it’s way and that’s good, right?

[edit 2009/12/03]

ONTARIO, CA, US 12/03/2009 4:00 P.M. ORIGIN SCAN
It’s coming from Ontario, going to Ontario, it’s only a CD and it costs $40 for “shipping”? Yes, I’m still upset about this.

[edit 2009/12/04]

LOUISVILLE, KY, US 12/04/2009 1:56 A.M. ARRIVAL SCAN
ONTARIO, CA, US 12/03/2009 7:19 P.M. DEPARTURE SCAN

Hunh? Okay so maybe UPS’s site is just awful. It seems the ONTARIO, CA, US location is moving up the list just underneath of wherever else it’s been. Either that or it started right beside me and got delivered the the United States before coming back to me in Ontario. Either way, something’s very wrong here.

[edit 2009/12/07]
So I remembered someone telling me about an Ontario in the US – so I had the wherewithal to look it up this morning and yes, there’s an Ontario in California. That makes a bit of sense because shipping of anything from the US seems unreasonably expensive.

[edit 2009/12/08]
I’ve finally received the discs. Two discs came, one containing an upgrade version of Windows 7 which seems to work for fresh installs. The second disc contains drivers for a few models of IdeaPad notebooks, including the one I bought. Everything works, and I haven’t received any insane brokerage fees… yet. Only the $40 to have two CDs mailed to me in bubble wrap via UPS from California.

So I’ve been using this thing for a few days now and I really like it.

I’ve found that Cyanogenmod causes my phone to be a bit unstable, and the music program wasn’t working at all. I’ve restored my phone to the v1.6 developer Android OS for now.

So I found this great application for managing your blog from an android phone. I’m trying it out right now. We’ll see how things look after.