Comments for Copyright and Technology

Comment on The Harry Potter Watermarking Experiment by Bill Rosenblatt

Bill Rosenblatt — Tue, 22 May 2012 17:20:54 +0000

No. Not only are you using the terminology differently, but your comment isn’t accurate in any case. First, what you say applies to the kind of “watermarking” that’s used with audio or visual content. There is no such thing as the “analog domain” when it comes to EPUB e-books, though it does apply to PDF because that’s really more like a still image.

Furthermore, if you are going to embed functionality in watermarks, the only way to make sure that functionality actually works is to use some kind of DRM. See the ill-fated SDMI standard from 1999-2000 for one example of this.

Comment on The Harry Potter Watermarking Experiment by digitalshamen

digitalshamen — Tue, 22 May 2012 15:40:49 +0000

Reblogged this on Weleys Schadenfreud and commented: Rosenblatt may have missed the point. Watermarking is a receipting mechanism that works in the digital and analog domains. DRM is a file format that is anti-consumer. Finally, beyond data, function can be embedded into data to enable use and other conditions beyond the inherent serialization and traceability of digital watermarks comprised of only data alone.

Comment on A Nail in Public Libraries’ Coffins by Thad McIlroy (@ThadMcIlroy)

Thad McIlroy (@ThadMcIlroy) — Mon, 21 May 2012 04:04:52 +0000

I was surprised to see Amazon come right out with its bald anti-library statement in connection with the Pottermore deal.

Since signing with Overdrive last year to put Kindle books into public libraries Amazon has been publicly playing nice while continuing its increasingly deliberate effort to cripple the broad public library system.

At least Pottermore also has a deal offering Rowling’s books via public libraries, even if supply will never meet demand.

By forcing exclusive distribution arrangements with numerous authors via KOLL payola Amazon drives what is truly the final nail into public libraries: books that cannot be obtained ANY OTHER WAY than from Amazon. That’s dirty pool, an Amazon specialty. I describe it in detail here:

http://thefutureofpublishing.com/2012/04/amazon-strengthens-attack-on-public-libraries/

Comment on Public Library E-Book Lending Must Change to Survive by Retail DRM Versus Library DRM – Writers Welcome Blog!…A John … | Online Books Site

Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:45:09 +0000

[...] has blogged about the issue and he will present a panel on June 5 called “The Landscape of Content Protection [...]

Comment on William Patry’s War on Copyright by Andrei Mincov (@MincovLaw)

Andrei Mincov (@MincovLaw) — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:30:56 +0000

William Patry makes a lot of great points in his book. I have profound respect for him because he is one of the very few who is not afraid to dig deep to the foundational question: why do we have copyright laws at all He correctly debunks many myths behind today’s mainstream justification behind copyright that it is supposed to balance the interests of creators with the interests of the public.

Because Patry’s book is based on erroneous conjectures, the big issue is, it consequently it concludes with extremely dangerous proposals. Patry thinks that copyright laws are not about giving creators the right to have power over how their works are utilized. In his view, the purpose of copyright laws is to ensure the most benefits to the public but only give authors the bare minimum to would encourage creativity.

In my review, How Not To Fix Copyright – My Response to William Patry (http://mincovlaw.com/blog-post/how_not_to_fix_copyright) , I clarify the faults in Patry’s approach and offer numerous precise notes to extracts from his book.

Comment on London 2012 Conference by Join our 1-day course on Content Security and Connected TV - Farncombe

Join our 1-day course on Content Security and Connected TV - Farncombe — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:37:56 +0000

[...] are holding this course in partnership with the Copyright & Technology London 2012 event, which is taking place on the Tuesday 19th June, also at the King’s [...]

Comment on Copyright and Technology London 2012 Conference by Join farncombe’s one-day training course on Content Security and Connected TV - Farncombe

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:19:06 +0000

[...] are holding this course in partnership with the Copyright & Technology London 2012 event, which is taking place on the Tuesday 19th June, also at the King’s [...]

Comment on DECE Sets a New Direction by Looking Ahead (Through the Rearview Mirror)? « Judeumeh's Blog

Looking Ahead (Through the Rearview Mirror)? « Judeumeh's Blog — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:41:33 +0000

[...] be a little too late. A good explanation of this move, and its implication, is available on the Copyright & Technology blog. In any event, one key question remains i.e.: what happens to your protected digital content if / [...]

Comment on Is Copyright a Consumer’s Right or a Citizen’s Right? by File Sharing & Copyright (Whose Right Is It Anyway)? « Judeumeh's Blog

File Sharing & Copyright (Whose Right Is It Anyway)? « Judeumeh's Blog — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:34:46 +0000

[...] 2. Citizens versus Consumers – According to Bill Jones’ post on the Copyright and Technology blog, the lines have become very blurred indeed when it comes to Copyright. [...]

Comment on Patry on Copyright Repair by Andrei Mincov (@MincovLaw)

Andrei Mincov (@MincovLaw) — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 17:40:37 +0000

William Patry’s book has several great points. I have a great deal of respect for him since he is one of the marginal few who are fearless enough to answer the most basic question: why do we have copyright laws at all. He sets straight numerous myths following today’s mainstream justification about copyright that it is meant to balance the interests of authors with the interests of the people.

But because Patry’s book is based on erroneous conjectures, it consequently it concludes with extremely dangerous proposals. Patry thinks that copyright laws are not about giving creators the right to have power over how their works are utilized. In his view, the purpose of copyright laws is to ensure the most benefits to the public but only give authors the bare minimum to would encourage creativity.

In my review, How Not To Fix Copyright – My Response to William Patry (http://mincovlaw.com/blog-post/how_not_to_fix_copyright), I clarify the faults in Patry’s approach and offer numerous precise notes to extracts from his book.

Andrei Mincov
http://mincovlaw.com/