Tech Policy Summit blog

Court Bolsters Enforcement of Open Source Licenses

Supporters of free/open source licenses like the GNU General Public License and Creative Commons are celebrating yesterday's decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which ruled violating such public licenses can be considered copyright infringement.

The case involved commercial software developers who had allegedly used code that was made available with the open source Artistic License without meeting the terms of the original license. The defendents had successfully argued in District Court that the license requirements that stated they needed to credit the program's developer and document any modifications were a matter of contract, not copyright, law.

However, the Court of Appeals overturned the District Court decision and, in doing so, stiffened the penalties for violating the terms of public licenses.

Stanford Law professor Larry Lessig, a founding board member of Creative Commons, described the ruling as a "very important victory" and said it offered "important clarity and certainty by a critically important U.S. Court." Stanford's Center for Internet and Society also played a key role in the case by preparing an amicus brief.

For more background, you can download a PDF of the Court's opinion.

British ISPs Agree To Landmark Copyright Enforcement Deal

Following negotiations brokered by the United Kingdom's Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR), six major Internet service providers in the UK have signed a memorandum of understanding with British music industry group BPI and the Motion Picture Association to curb illegal peer-to-peer file sharing significantly within two to three years. 

The agreement is particularly significant because it marks the first time that ISPs will be "required to work with music and other rights holders" to fight digital piracy. The ISPs, which include BSkyB, BT, Virgin, Carphone Warehouse, Orange and Tiscali, will launch a pilot program that begins by sending warning letters to individuals that have been identified as suspected copyright infringers.

British telecom regulator Ofcom has been charged with overseeing the process and working with the parties to develop and approve a Code of Practice within four months that determines what actions should be taken against alleged "repeat offenders," i.e. suspension or cancellation of users' Internet accounts or criminal prosecution.

Meanwhile, while the British government says it prefers voluntary industry-led efforts, BERR is continuing to explore what it calls a co-regulatory approach that could lead to legislation. Among the regulatory options being considered by the government are:

• Requiring ISPs to provide personal data relating to a given IP address to rights holders on request, without them needing to go to Court.
• Requiring ISPs to take direct action against users who are identified by the rights holder as infringing copyright through file sharing.
• Requiring that ISPs allow the installation of filtering equipment that will block infringing content, or requiring ISPs themselves to install such filtering equipment.
• Allocating a third party body to consider evidence provided by rights holders and to direct ISPs to take action against individual users as required, or to take action directly against individual users.

BERR is seeking comment on the proposed options between now and October 30th; more information can be found in the consultation document released by the government. The 66-page PDF is available for download here.

p.s. We've previously written these posts about ISPs in the U.S. cooperating with the entertainment industry to police for copyright violations.

Public Interest Groups File Opposition to MPAA Petition

As we wrote about last month, members of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) are interested in making high definition movies available for in-home viewing ahead of the typical release dates for DVDs, and MPAA is seeking permission from the Federal Communications Commission to use selectable output control (SOC) technology to prevent consumers from recording those films.

Despite MPAA's assertions that the arrangement would not only benefit its members by protecting their intellectual property but that it would also help consumers get access to high definition content and major theatrical releases earlier than usual, a number of public interest groups have banded together to voice their opposition to the FCC.

In a document filed with the Commission on Monday, seven organizations including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Knowledge, New America Foundation and Media Access Project urged the FCC to reject MPAA's petition on grounds that it's "unnecessary and contrary to the public interest." They argue that MPAA hasn't provided evidence that use of SOC technology would in fact curb copyright infringement; that it would frustrate consumers who wouldn't be able to use their electronics equipment as expected and that it would give "MPAA members unprecedented and undesirable control over consumer device design."

The full 25-page document is available for download.

EU Parliament's Telecom Reform Raises "Three-Strikes" Concerns

According to BBC News, members of the European Parliament voted yesterday in favor of advancing new telecom reform legislation known as the Telecoms Package that includes a series of controverisal amendments that digital rights activists say would pave the way for a 'three-strikes' law against online copyright infringers in Europe.

MEP Malcolm Harbour, a key backer of the Telecoms Package, dismissed that idea, telling BBC that the amendments "have nothing to do with copyright enforcement. The interpretation of them is alarmist and scare-mongering and deflects from the intention which was to improve consumers' rights."

Opponents, led by a French group called La Quadrature du Net, warn that the legislation designed to harmonize Europe's telecom laws would instead threaten the openness of the Internet by requiring ISPs to give individuals suspected of downloading unauthorized copyright material two warnings before cutting off their Net access entirely. Another organization, Free Internet Infrastructure (FFII), went a step further, saying that a provision that would give the government the power to determine what type of software can be used online (and what can't) would lead to a "Soviet Internet" in Europe.

The European Parliament will vote on the legislation in September.

For more, read the full BBC article here.

MPAA Wants to Release Movies Earlier; Prevent Recording

According to Ars Technica, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) filed a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) petition for "expedited special relief" last month that could result in new restrictions on home recording of movies.

At issue is the FCC's 2003 ruling that probited the use of selectable output control (SOC) technology. SOC enables content providers or distributors from remotely blocking digital video recorders, and MPAA is asking the Commission for a permanent waiver that would allow its member companies like Sony, Disney and Warner Brothers to use SOC as part of a new distribution scheme.

As MPAA explained in its petition, the film studios it represents are interested in partnering with multi-channel video programming distributors to release high definition movies for in-home viewing prior to the normal release date for DVDs. And they argue that SOC is a necessary safeguard to ensure that films aren't "exposed to unauthorized copying or redistribution" in advance of them becoming available on DVD. MPAA believes it's a win-win because consumers will receive access to major theatrical releases sooner, and the high definition content will offer an additional incentive for consumers to upgrade to HD televisions as part of the switch to digital TV.

Not everyone is buying that argument though. Ars points out that the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Home Recording Rights Coalition, led by Consumer Electronics Association president and CEO Gary Shapiro, have been outspoken opponents of SOC restrictions.

The MPAA's petition is available here, and the FCC is seeking public comments through June 25th (the docket number for the proceeding is 08-82).

Music Labels Take Irish ISP to Court

In honor of St. Patrick's Day...

According to an article from The Irish Times, the four major music studios -- EMI, Sony BMG, Universal and Warner Music -- are getting ready to face off in court against Irish telco Eircom in a case that could set a new precedent for Internet service providers (ISPs).

The Irish Recorded Music Association, Ireland's version of RIAA, is suing Eircom for refusing to use digital fingerprinting technology from Audible Magic to prevent its users from illegally downloading copyrighted material. The case, which is scheduled to begin next month, will be the first time ISPs' role in policing their networks for copyright violations has been brought before the court in Ireland.

According to a university lecturer and digital rights activist quoted in The Irish Times, "this is brand new territory and many Irish technology companies will be watching the case...if the record companies win, this could be extended to other entities. For example, Google might have to police the actions of its users." You can read the entire article at ContentAgenda.com.

The issue of copyright enforcement will also be the subject of a roundtable hosted by BusinessWeek columnist Steve Wildstrom at Tech Policy Summit next week that features Audible Magic CEO Vance Ikezoye, YouTube's chief counsel Zahavah Levine, UCLA's CIO Jim Davis and MPAA's CTO Jim Williams. Check out the rest of the agenda here.

Audio Books Go MP3

Following a similar move by the major music labels earlier this year, several leading book publishers have announced that they're ditching DRM to jump on the MP3 bandwagon.

The New York Times' Brad Stone reports that Random House, Penguin and Simon & Schuster are releasing at least some of their audio book titles in MP3 format, in hopes that wider availability will boost sales. Random House and Penguin have decided to offer their entire catalogs of audio books without copyright protection, and Simon & Schuster will test the waters by releasing 150 DRM-free titles.

According to the NYT, Random House is embracing the DRM-free format after doing a pilot test last fall that revealed that pirated copies of its audio books weren't being made from MP3 files but from physical CDs and digital downloads that had been stripped of their DRM protection. In the end, as a company exec explains, they concluded that "DRM is not actually doing anything to prevent piracy."

Chinese Sites "Volunteer" to Self-Censor

According to Reuters, China has asked Web site owners to voluntarily pledge to censor their content as part of its ongoing effort to regulate online video and audio. Eight Chinese media organizations including the Xinhua news agency and The People's Daily have already signed on to the pact to remove pornography and violent material from their sites.

Which begs the following question: If the Chinese goverment asks you to sign a "voluntary pact," is it really voluntary?

While you contemplate that koan, here is an excerpt from the announcement by China's State Administration of Radio, Film and Television:

The signatories should actively disseminate healthy, beneficial audio-visual programs meeting socialist moral norms...Decadent, backward thoughts and culture must be boycotted by all.

Also, if you haven't already seen it, check out this in-depth article by Atlantic correspondent (and Tech Policy Summit advisor) James Fallows about how the Chinese government controls Internet activity within its borders. Fallows has been reporting from China for over a year now and offers an interesting perspective on the topic.

DRM May Be Dying, But RIAA Warnings Live On

By all accounts, it's been an active week on the digital music scene.

No doubt spurred by the media frenzy surrounding the CES tradeshow, there have been a number of key announcements that suggest digital rights management (DRM) is continuing to lose favor. Even among music execs.

Sony BMG took its biggest step yet into the digital realm when it revealed yesterday that it would join the other three major music labels -- Universal, EMI and Warner -- in selling MP3 versions of its entire catalog at Amazon.com (a blow to rival Apple). Sony had started the week by plugging a much less robust option, known as Platinum MusicPass, that would let consumers buy retail gift cards for DRM-free downloads of certain albums.

While critics dinged MusicPass for being too limited, both that and the move toward selling MP3s on Amazon.com means that fans will have legal access to even more DRM-free tracks.

At the same time, the industry's copyright enforcer, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), is continuing its crusade against illegal downloading on college campuses. Proving that it isn't softening its approach, the RIAA sent over 400 "pre-litigation settlement letters" to 18 U.S. universities, including 26 to my alma mater UCLA [note: Jim Davis, UCLA's chief information officer will participate in a roundtable on copyright at Tech Policy Summit in March].

To read the rest of this post, please visit our Tech Policy Central site.

Digital Music: Taxes, Filtering and Free

"[It] was a bitter pill to swallow, but...the way things are, I think music should be looked at as free. It basically is. The toothpaste is out of the tube and a whole generation of people is accustomed to music being that way."

So says rocker Trent Reznor in a News.com interview featured online today. The founder of Nine Inch Nails, who recently spearheaded the digital distribution of an album by fellow musician Saul Williams, was recounting his experience trying to sell music directly to fans without the involvement of a record label.

Like the group Radiohead, which inspired Reznor to go it solo, Williams' album was released online for free, with a high-quality download available for purchase for only $5. The result, so far, has been that less than 150,000 people opted for the free download version, with just over 28,000 ponying up the cash for the paid version.

For the rest of this post, please visit our Tech Policy Central site.