[FYI] (Fwd) STATEMENT OF THE INTERNET SOCIETY ON DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT

["Axel H Horns" <horns@ipjur.com>]

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:02:06 -0400
Send reply to:  	Law & Policy of Computer Communications              <CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
From:           	"R. A. Hettinga" <rah@SHIPWRIGHT.COM>
Subject:        	STATEMENT OF THE INTERNET SOCIETY ON DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT
To:             	CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

--- begin forwarded text


Status: RO
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 22:18:29 +0100
From: Somebody
To: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah@shipwright.com>
Subject: STATEMENT OF THE INTERNET SOCIETY ON DIGITAL RIGHTS
MANAGEMENT


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 15, 2002
Contact: Julie Williams
703-326-9880, x111; 703-402-6715 cell

STATEMENT OF THE INTERNET SOCIETY ON DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT

Washington, D.C. - The Internet Society strongly opposes attempts to
impose governmental technology mandates that are designed to protect
only the economic interests of certain owners of intellectual property
over the economic interests of much larger portions of society.  The
current debate in many countries of the world regarding digital rights
management (DRM) has illustrated the inevitable conclusion of
technology mandates in law: a world where all digital media technology
is either forbidden or compulsory. The effect of these mandates is to
grant veto power over new technologies to special interest groups who
have continually opposed innovation.

There are many policy reasons that can be advanced to oppose
government intervention in technology.  Society at large has a
powerful economic interest in promoting research resulting in the
creation of new products and services as well as new jobs. Many of the
legislative proposals currently under consideration would shackle
technology and the research needed to support it, solely for the
benefit of one small group. From the standpoint of sound public
policy, intellectual property rights must be respected but must also
be kept in balance with other rights and interests. In particular,
copyright law is a kind of "bargain" between rights owners and
consumers. Copyright, except in rare instances, is not perpetual, and
there are a wide range of fair use exceptions to copyright that limit
its restraints. Without these limits, copyright would soon become an
oppressive burden on creativity and freedom of expression. The
Internet Society acknowledges these policy considerations, but also
believes that there are other even more persuasive arguments, based on
sound engineering and technological principles, that show the folly of
government mandated technology.

Technology mandates are inherently anti-innovative. The entire concept
of a mandate is that it freezes a particular technology at a point in
time, and inhibits research and development on new and better
technology. Technological standards are desirable and even necessary
for widespread implementation of new technology, but all standards
sooner or later must give way to new standards. This process should
not be impeded by legislation that effectively prohibits research and
development.

A classic illustration of the dangers of DRM legislation may be found
in legislation enacted by many countries as part of their treaty
obligations under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
copyright treaties. The so-called Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA), passed by the United States Congress in 1998, is an example.
Under the WIPO treaties, the United States, like the other countries
bound by the treaties, had an obligation to "provide 'legal protection
and effective legal remedies' against circumventing technological
measures, e.g., encryption and password protection, that are used by
copyright owners to protect their works from piracy . . ." [See S.
Rep. No. 105-190, at 8, 10-11 (1998)].  The DMCA, in responding to
this obligation, illustrates the "law of unintended consequences."
While purporting to help copyright owners, it seriously threatens
research in the field of encryption for security.

The DMCA prohibits "circumvention" of existing technological measures
(such as encryption) that control access to a work and encryption; it
prohibits "trafficking" in technology designed to circumvent access
control; and it prohibits "trafficking" in technology designed to
circumvent copying. These prohibitions are subject to certain
exceptions; the DMCA acknowledges rights of fair use, so that, in
certain limited circumstances, circumvention of copying protection for
purposes of fair use of an encrypted work does not violate the act.

Another important exception is the separate provision of the DMCA that
allows circumvention of access controls for the purpose of encryption
research to identify flaws and vulnerabilities of encryption
technology. This provision is narrowly drawn with explicit conditions
relating to good faith in performing research. Most significantly, the
exception is for access only; it does not permit what the act refers
to as trafficking in such research.

The danger to research presented by statutes like the DMCA is best
illustrated by a real world example of a researcher in the field of
encryption. Just because cryptography can be or is being used for
purposes other than copyright protection, does not mean it is not also
used for copyright protection and therefore subject to the provision
of the DMCA. Although a researcher may be looking at a certain type of
cryptographic technology that is used to protect packets containing
information in the public domain, that same technology might also be
used to protect other packets that contain copyrighted data, unknown
to the researcher. Likewise, a researcher might attempt to break the
protection on an item without realizing that the protected item is a
copyrighted work, which may not be discovered, if at all, until it is
too late. But the issue isn't whether the researcher has cracked the
protection - the issue is what the researcher may do with the
resulting information.

A central question for encryption researchers is whether publishing
the results of their research amounts to disseminating something whose
primary purpose is to circumvent copyright protection. Under the DMCA,
the act of circumventing access controls for good faith research,
standing alone, is, generally speaking, legitimate. This does not
present great problems to researchers. However, when the researcher
then wishes to publish the results of the research, the DMCA provides
a test of the intent of the original circumvention that depends on
whether the subsequent publication is made to "advance the state of
knowledge" of encryption research, or whether it is made "in a manner
that facilitates infringement." In other words, if the researcher acts
in good faith to circumvent access control and publishes with the
intent of reaching other researchers, but the information ends up
being "disseminated in a manner that facilitates infringement," then
the original circumvention of the access controls may have been
illegal. Since there are both civil and criminal remedies available to
copyright owners, the researcher faces serious dilemmas in deciding
whether, how and when to publish.

There are already court decisions in the United States and elsewhere
involving both civil and criminal aspects of the publication of
encryption research. Many prominent figures in the field have already
spoken out against the chilling effect of legislative interference
with research in technology. The Internet Society calls on the
legislatures of the world to limit the damage caused by shortsighted
legislative efforts, intended to carry out the seemingly high-minded
purposes of the copyright treaties, that instead threaten the
advancement of science and technology.

About ISOC
The Internet Society is a not-for-profit membership organization
founded in 1991 to provide leadership in the management of Internet
related standards, educational, and policy development issues.  It has
offices in Washington, DC and Geneva, Switzerland. Through its current
initiatives in support of education and training, Internet standards
and protocol, and public policy, ISOC has played a critical role in
ensuring that the Internet has developed in a stable and open manner. 
It is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet
Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and other Internet-related bodies.

For over 10 years ISOC has run international network training programs
for developing countries which have played a vital role in setting up
the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country that
has connected to the Internet during this time, while at the same time
working to protect the Internet's stability.  ISOC is taking the next
step in this evolution with the recent announcement of its intent to
bid for the .ORG registry based on the belief that a thriving
non-commercial presence is a key element in developing a strong social
and technical infrastructure in all nations.  For additional
information see http://www.ISOC.org.

--- end forwarded text


--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44
Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve
respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the
world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon,
'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'


**********************************************************************
For Listserv Instructions, see http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia
Off-Topic threads: http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot
Need more help? Send mail to: Cyberia-L-Request@listserv.aol.com
**********************************************************************
------- End of forwarded message -------


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de