<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">hi all,<div><br></div><div>this is a great thought-provoker piece -- kindof a unified field theory of why things like SOPA and IP protection strategies in general don't work. it'll make some of you cranky, and i'd really like to have a discussion about those points.</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html">http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html</a></div><div><br></div><div>here's a teaser:</div><div><br></div><div><p></p><blockquote type="cite"><p>General-purpose computers are astounding. They're so astounding that
our society still struggles to come to grips with them, what they're
for, how to accommodate them, and how to cope with them. This brings us
back to something you might be sick of reading about: <em>copyright</em>.
</p><p>But bear with me, because this is about something more important.
The shape of the copyright wars clues us into an upcoming fight over
the destiny of the general-purpose computer itself.
</p><p>In the beginning, we had packaged software and we had sneakernet.
We had floppy disks in ziplock bags, in cardboard boxes, hung on pegs
in shops, and sold like candy bars and magazines. They were eminently
susceptible to duplication, were duplicated quickly, and widely, and
this was to the great chagrin of people who made and sold software.
</p><p>
Enter <em><a href="http://boingboing.net/tag/DRM">Digital Rights Management</a></em>
in its most primitive forms: let's call it DRM 0.96. They introduced
physical indicia which the software checked for—deliberate damage,
dongles, hidden sectors—and challenge-response protocols that required
possession of large, unwieldy manuals that were difficult to copy.
</p><p>These failed for two reasons. First, they were commercially
unpopular, because they reduced the usefulness of the software to the
legitimate purchasers. Honest buyers resented the non-functionality of
their backups, they hated the loss of scarce ports to the authentication
dongles, and they chafed at the inconvenience of having to lug around
large manuals when they wanted to run their software. Second, these
didn't stop pirates, who found it trivial to patch the software and
bypass authentication. People who took the software without paying for
it were untouched.
</p><p>Typically, the way this happened is a programmer, with possession
of technology and expertise of equivalent sophistication to the
software vendor itself, would reverse-engineer the software and
circulate cracked versions. While this sounds highly specialized, it
really wasn't. Figuring out what recalcitrant programs were doing and
routing around media defects were core skills for computer programmers,
especially in the era of fragile floppy disks and the rough-and-ready
early days of software development. Anti-copying strategies only became
more fraught as networks spread; once we had bulletin boards, online
services, USENET newsgroups and mailing lists, the expertise of people
who figured out how to defeat these authentication systems could be
packaged up in software as little crack files. As network capacity
increased, the cracked disk images or executables themselves could be
spread on their own.
</p><p>
This gave us DRM 1.0. By 1996, it became clear to everyone in the halls
of power that there was something important about to happen. We were
about to have an information economy, whatever the Hell that was. They
assumed it meant an economy where we bought and sold information.
Information technology improves efficiency, so imagine the markets that
an information economy would have! You could buy a book for a day, you
could sell the right to watch the movie for a Euro, and then you could
rent out the pause button for a penny per second. You could sell movies
for one price in one country, at another price in another, and so on.
The fantasies of those days were like a boring science fiction
adaptation of the Old Testament Book of Numbers, a tedious enumeration
of every permutation of things people do with information—and <a href="http://boingboing.net/2011/12/28/wednesday-weird-bible-verse-1.html">what might be charged</a> for each.
</p><p>
Unfortunately for them, none of this would be possible unless they could
control how people use their computers and the files we transfer to
them. After all, it was easy to talk about selling someone a tune to
download to their MP3 player, but not so easy to talk about the the
right to move music from the player to another device. But how the Hell
could you stop that once you'd given them the file? In order to do so,
you needed to figure out how to stop computers from running certain
programs and inspecting certain files and processes. For example, you
could encrypt the file, and then require the user to run a program that
only unlocked the file under certain circumstances.
</p><p>
But, as they say on the Internet, <em>now you have two problems</em>.
</p><p>You must now also stop the user from saving the file while it's
unencrypted—which must happen eventually— and you must stop the user
from figuring out where the unlocking program stores its keys, enabling
them to permanently decrypt the media and ditch the stupid player app
entirely.
</p><p>
Now you have <em>three</em> problems: you must stop the users who figure out how to decrypt from sharing it with other users. Now you've got <em>four</em>
problems, because you must stop the users who figure out how to extract
secrets from unlocking programs from telling other users how to do it
too. And now you've got <em>five</em> problems, because you must stop
users who figure out how to extract these secrets from telling other
users what the secrets were!
</p><p>
That's a lot of problems. But by 1996, we had a solution. We had the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/trtdocs_wo033.html">WIPO Copyright Treaty</a>,
passed by the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization.
This created laws that made it illegal to extract secrets from unlocking
programs, and it created laws that made it illegal to extract media
(such as songs and movies) from the unlocking programs while they were
running. It created laws that made it illegal to tell people how to
extract secrets from unlocking programs, and it created laws that made
it illegal to host copyrighted works or the secrets. It also established
a handy streamlined process that let you remove stuff from the Internet
without having to screw around with lawyers, and judges, and all that
crap.
</p><p>And with that, illegal copying ended forever, the information
economy blossomed into a beautiful flower that brought prosperity to the
whole wide world; as they say on the aircraft carriers, "Mission
Accomplished".</p><p>That's not how the story ends, of course, because pretty much
anyone who understood computers and networks understood that these laws
would create more problems than they could possibly solve. After all,
these laws made it illegal to look inside your computer when it was
running certain programs. They made it illegal to tell people what you
found when you looked inside your computer, and they made it easy to
censor material on the internet without having to prove that anything
wrong had happened.
</p><p>In short, they made unrealistic demands on reality and reality did not oblige them. </p></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>the article goes on to cover a bunch of stuff from there. enjoy.</div><div><br></div><div>mikey</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>
<div><div style="font-size: 12px; ">- - - - - - - - -</div><div style="font-size: 12px; ">phone <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>651-647-6109 </div><div style="font-size: 12px; ">fax <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>866-280-2356 </div><div style="font-size: 12px; ">web <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span><a href="http://www.haven2.com">http://www.haven2.com</a></div><div style="font-size: 12px; ">handle<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)</div></div>
</div>
<br></div></body></html>