You’ve heard of DRM? Now meet DPP.
p2pnet view P2P:- “Doesn’t it seem strange that, for all the advantages brought about by digital technologies, we can’t seem to buy, sell, and own products fairly when they are in a purely digital, downloadable form?” – asks the IEEE Stadards Association, going on:
“Imagine how complicated it would be to build an electronic system that could interpret copyright laws, jurisdictional boundaries, end-user license agreements, and the variety of possible human behaviors, and then restrict people’s behavior so as to violate neither content-owner rights nor consumer rights, and without offending either side.
“It’s not only really hard, it’s completely impossible. Wherever human and legal judgements are involved, full automation is inappropriate.
“Now imagine how much simpler the system would be if it didn’t need to pre-impose restrictions, but rather depended on the natural social consequences of our product usage to preserve a balance between the rights of suppliers and consumers.”
Enter Consumer-ownable Digital Personal Property, aka P1817, which “depends on social consequences instead of usage and sharing restrictions.”
The one fair way to avoid having a company or a computer decide with whom you can share your copyrighted purchases is to let you decide for yourself, “the same way you decide how to share a printed book &mdash you share with people you trust not to lose, damage, or destroy it”, says the IEEE Stadards Association, going on >>>
It works like this:
Purchase a movie, song, book, game, etc. from an online vendor.
Download the encrypted content and store copies wherever you wish.
Send one of two (moveable but uncopiable) playkeys from the vendor to an online playkey bank of your choosing.
Download your other playkey into your TV, mobile phone, computer, or other device.
Now any player device, belonging to anyone, can play the content if:
You give it a copy of the encrypted content, and
You share the location and name of either playkey.
With P1817, product ownership is perpetual, and the tethers are severed that connect your purchases to their vendors. No one can restrict how you privately use or share them. However, because they are copyrighted, rightsholders retain the legal right to control public dissemination of their works.
Just as a printed book can be lost if you share it publicly (i.e., with strangers), you must be careful to share only privately (i.e., with those you trust.) That’s because anyone who shares either of your playkeys can take both of them and move them to his own device and his own online playkey bank! The availability and mobility of playkeys lets you electronically share, lend, borrow, give, take, donate, and resell digital property, just as you do with your physical possessions. And since playkeys remain singular, unique, and protected from counterfeiting, copyright holders know that your sharing will remain a private, non-public matter.
Imagine how complicated it would be to build an electronic system that could interpret copyright laws, jurisdictional boundaries, end-user license agreements, and the variety of possible human behaviors, and then restrict people’s behavior so as to violate neither content-owner rights nor consumer rights, and without offending either side. It’s not only really hard, it’s completely impossible. Wherever human and legal judgements are involved, full automation is inappropriate.
Now imagine how much simpler the system would be if it didn’t need to pre-impose restrictions, but rather depended on the natural social consequences of our product usage to preserve a balance between the rights of suppliers and consumers.
In other words, DPP “depends on social consequences instead of usage and sharing restrictions”, adds the IEEE Stadards Assiociation.
Stay tuned.
(Cheers, Andrew aka Comeoncomcast)
… and identi.ca
IEEE Stadards Assiociation – IEEE P1817 Standard for Consumer-ownable Digital Personal Property, May, 2010
July, 2010
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:39 am
Just like satellite dishes, expensive and forcing people into “options” they don’t want, people will crack the keys because they don’t like the restrictions that will be placed (guaranteed the description above is an ideal version and it will be locked down beyond usability).
July 22nd, 2010 at 12:58 pm
They take a system that essentially allows almost free duplication and lock it down in order to force the inherently foreign concepts of object persistence and ownership in it? It never ceases to amaze me how people buy such an utterly ridiculous idea, only because they’ve been indoctrinated into a narrow minded view for the benefit of their corporate masters.
Remember when copyright was meant to encourage innovation? Yeah, me neither.
July 22nd, 2010 at 2:45 pm
“moveable but uncopiable”
This is the exact reason it won’t work. Once something is digital and it can be moved, it can be copied. They go hand-in-hand and cannot be separated. If it was possible to make something “moveable but uncopiable” we wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place (since file sharing hinges on copying).
Dumbest statement I’ve heard in a long time.
July 22nd, 2010 at 4:41 pm
1. “Instead of usage restrictions”
Bullshit. The “encrypted play-key” is an (attempted) “usage restriction”, in that, lacking the play-key, the file you (supposedly) “own” cannot be unlocked.
2. “Movable but uncopiable”
I call bullshit on that, too. What they *inevitably* mean (by the very nature of how digital data works), is something resembling the “cut and paste” functionality of Windows XP — “copy the file at the new location, and then delete the copy at the old location”.
By doing this, you can make it *appear* as if a single “file” has moved from one location to another. I realize these DRM-fetishist/”content-monopoly” types can’t wrap their minds around the fact that digital data isn’t a physical “thing” (like a physical book or CD, for example), but the “movable but uncopyable” claim just proves it conclusively.
3. “Name and location of either play-key”.
Huh? “location” as in “where the (magically movable-but-uncopyable) play-key is NOW”, or some centralized “play-key reference server”? So what happens if I dump my (totally unique and magically-uncopyable) play-key onto my portable music player, which then malfunctions? (Oh wait, I get it — that’s the part of this that’s supposed to give monopolists (mistakenly called “rights-holders”) total cream-jeans: just like with a physical book or CD, I have to go “buy” either another (encrypted) content-file, play-key, or (more likely) both.
So, essentially, “content”-monopolists gain all the advantages of digital distribution (no physical product costs), and user/victims get all the disadvantages of (analog) physical media.
Given the fact that anything that can be “moving” anything digital is actually “copying + deleting”, this will inevitably be defeated two weeks after first deployment — IF anyone is actually gullible enough to bother in the first place.
July 22nd, 2010 at 6:38 pm
Nobody will put up with all that bullshit while DRM-free copies exist.
July 23rd, 2010 at 11:08 am
So it’s normal DRM but once you ‘lose’ your two keys they will charge you again?
July 23rd, 2010 at 3:54 pm
“Download the encrypted content and store copies wherever you wish.
Send one of two (moveable but uncopiable) playkeys from the vendor to an online playkey bank of your choosing.
Download your other playkey into your TV, mobile phone, computer, or other device.
Now any player device, belonging to anyone, can play the content if:
You give it a copy of the encrypted content, and
You share the location and name of either playkey.”
Sorry, call it whatever the fuck you want, if it looks like DRM, smells like DRM, it’s DRM. No go big corp’s, take your digikey and shove it up your ass.