It's ironic that Big Content talks about protecting creators' and consumers' rights, but then uses the mechanism of digital locks and other TPM (Technical Protection Measures) to achieve this. Under DMCA-like legislations it is illegal to circumvent or remove these locks even for legitimate purposes, essentially making any culture behind these locks doomed to extinction at the whim of an entertainment corporation: lets not forget the Microsoft "Playsforsure" server shutdown fiasco.
Canada's shiny new C32 bill proposes such digital locks, and according to Appropriation Artist Coalition includes no expiry date for the lock, that lock is on forever (or at least until the law changes). This means that the culture is pretty much inaccessible unless the company that owns it releases it into the wild: and why would they do that if it costs them nothing to keep it but there's the potential of lost profits if they release it.
This might seem ok, it's their "property" to do with what they like isn't it? Sure for a limited period, but this is not how culture is supposed to be. I'm not saying that culture has to be free, but it's deeply anti-people to lock it down in this way. As Appropriation Art point out:
Worse still are the implications for the public domain. Current copyright duration means that no work created in our lifetime will enter the public domain during our lifetime. In Bill C-32, there is no ‘expiry date’ on a TPM. A TPM (or digital lock) can, conceivably last forever, this means that works will remain inaccessible even after they enter the Public Domain. Furthermore a digital lock can be applied to a work already in the Public Domain. This effectively removes the work from the Public Domain. This means that the legislation in Bill C32 opens up the potential to decimate the Public Domain
Which, all paranoia aside, is probably the real prize for Big Content in this legislation.
No comments:
Post a Comment