subscribe to this page
This paper discusses different perverse consequences of the DMCA. Lee says that when Congress was trying to prepare for new digital technology, it made a mistake. When the DMCA was passed, the courts were cut out of its role. The universal band on technology and devices that “circumvent” digital rights management technologies (DRM) leave no role for the courts. This lack of balance has created a system for consumers with limited options. The copyright owners now completely control things like Internet streaming and playback devices. There is even evidence of certain firms utilizing the DMCA as a means of stopping research and reverse engineering.
The DMCA also eliminates competition. The copyright owners and companies that issue their content have the power the lock out competitors. Also, digital rights management technologies tend to be ineffective and do little to stop pirates. Instead DRM technologies make it harder for people making fair use out of the copyrighted work.
The paper says that there were in fact legal happenings in play before the DMCA enactment. These legal processes were leading to a balanced body of law that would involve the courts. Consumer choice, fair use, and competition would not be decreased as they are with the DMCA. The budding body of law would give rights back to the people instead of depending on the technology design. Really, without the DMCA we would be okay.
Lee says that people should not have to worry about coming out with a new technology and getting sued because it is illegal according to the DMCA. That undermines the goals of copyright. This is a key point of my paper. This article is extremely helpful in arguing my case. The effects of the DMCA decrease consumer rights and options. It also stifles creativity. No one wants to come up with new technology wondering if they’re going to get sued for it.
tagged article cine_500 dmca drm online_film_distribution by makeda ...and 2 other people ...on 01-DEC-08
This article is important to my research as it identifies the adverse effects the DMCA has had on technology industries, consumers, and scientific and academic research. My thesis aims to discuss how the Motion Picture Association labels piracy as the biggest threat to the motion picture industry and how that thinking can be seen as short-sighted and incorrect. Lack of innovation caused by technology protection measures under the DMCA is the biggest threat. This article really spells out what the DMCA has unintentionally done and will help me make my point in regards to illustrating how anti-piracy or anticircumvention measures are only fairly effective, and don't address the real problems that the MPA faces.
Author Timothy B. Lee opens the article with a quote from Robert Frost: "good fences make good neighbors" (2). It's pretty safe to say that fences are effective in establishing and maintaining private property rights. In this scenario, digital rights management, the technical measures placed on digital media such as CD's and DVD's, are the fences of intellectual property and copyright. DRM provides content owners a strict level of control not previously available under copyright law - control that hinders the creativity and free thinking that tech firms employ in order to revolutionize and expand their products. The article discusses how plenty of new technologies have allowed customers to purchase and view media in brand new ways, ways that the film studios don't always immediately condone. In the past, Hollywood has been very hesitant towards new technologies, from cable, to the VCR, to DVD's and now the internet.
In discussing the fight against piracy, the author identifies three significant actions that Hollywood and the recording industry take (or have taken) to deter and reduce the act: lawsuits, PR campaigns, and digital rights managment technology. These actions may keep someone who is not technologically informed from committing piracy, but for the most part these solutions have done little to help in the fight.
The DMCA's anticircumvention provisions have created many problems, including the unhealthy corporate misuse of the DMCA in trying to destroy competition. Not only are competitive tech firms brushed aside under this act, but academic research has been stymied (again, by corporate bullies who don't want product flaws and misrepresentations to go public). Under the DMCA, too much power is put in the wrong hands, hands that want only to protect their 'property' and possible financial revenues.
tagged article cine_500 dmca drm online_film_distribution by djaime ...and 2 other people ...on 11-APR-08
This article discusses the potential future of Hollywood if it would open its arms and embrace the internet as a legitimate ancillary market. Fears of piracy leading to the death of America's film idustry pervade the thoughts of major film studios, leading them to very slowly and cautiously adopt the internet, unlike television which has been much more open to the possibilities of the medium. I happened to read this article earlier in the semester and it was the spark that led me to pursue online film distribution in general as my research topic. The article focuses heavily on the current distribution options that are available to filmmakers and consumers. This information provides me with an efficient base in looking at what is available to filmmakers and consumers now, legally vs. illegally, and ideas as to why Hollywood has been slow to act.
The article suggests that in order for money to be made, more choices need to be available to consumers. FilmOn.com and MovieFlix are two of the currently available options, however the former fails to carry a number of popular titles, while the latter focuses on true independents, straight-to-video, and student productions. Great for niche audiences but certainly not good for studios. Speaking of studios, Movielink, another distribution portal formed by studios with approximately $150million in start-up money, was recently sold to Blockbuster for only about $20million - this doesn't exactly bode well for proponents of online video opportunities.
Apple's iTunes is another option. At the time of this article's writing, Apple was allowed by all six studios to distribute, but only via a rental agreement, offering no download-to-buy options. If download-to-buy options were to be allowed, the writer contends that sales would be sufficient enough to show studios the internet's potential, which in turn would hopefully make Hollywood more comfortable with this new distribution tool.
The article hypothesizes on why Hollywood is so slow to act: the industry takes major financial risks daily. Any changes to its existing business model would indicate taking even bigger risk. Another reason relates to the values of Hollywood business as it's based on recognition of films, not necessarily on growth. Also, DVD's are still very much big business - a money maker that studios don't want to tamper with.
An important fact noted by the author is that Hollywood has always been slow to acknowledge new technologies, from cable to the VCR to VHS, even to DVD's. Adopting the internet whole-heartedly will also allow studios to maximize their vast film libraries, considering that most store retailers do not have enough shelf space to stock all that's available (or could be available). If you make more content available for DVD, effectively selling more films, they can be more affordably priced. This effect on pricing could help deter piracy substantially.
Other obstacles mentioned include the popular consumer preference to view movies on their t.v. screens, not computer screens, as well as the lack of common standards between websites and devices which enable the downloading of content from the internet to then be viewed on your t.v.
Besides having to change their business model, Hollywood's exclusive 'windows' practice, a system that follows a film from theatrical release to on-demand, to DVD, to online for example, would be in jeopardy. Hollywood is quite fixed to this system; though the overall time of different windows has shortened considerably, it doesn't seem that the studios are interested in abandoning this process any time soon.
An interesting question raised by the author is that Hollywood certainly knows and enjoys using the internet to market its films - why not sell them there as well?
tagged article cine_500 online_film_distribution by djaime ...and 2 other people ...on 09-APR-08
IMDB/Without a Box merger
TiVo/Amazon's Unbox