Major DRM Developments | News | Resources | DRM Defeating Technology | DRM Developers | Microsoft Palladium
- Berkeley Holds DRM Conference. The Berkeley Center for Law and Technology held a conference to discuss the impact of Digital Rights Management on technology, competition, consumers, and on flows of information. The papers from the conference are online. Day by day coverage is available at the Berkeley IP Log. Update: The Conference audio, video, transcriptions, slides, and resources are online. (Feb 28, 2003)
- EPIC Opposes FCC Broadcast Flag Mandate. In comments to the Federal Communications Commission, EPIC has recommended against the adoption of a Digital Television Broadcast Flag mandate unless it incorporates privacy protections for viewer data. The Broadcast Flag could erode anonymity in consumption of media and circumvent well-established public policy that protects viewer data. For more information, see the EFF BPDG Blog and the EPIC Digital Rights Management Page. (Dec. 6, 2002)
- EPIC Joins DRM Submission to OASIS. In comments to the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), EPIC joined the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic in arguing that rights expression languages (REL) should incorporate fair use and privacy principles. (Aug. 13)
- EPIC: DRM Anti-Consumer, Threatens Privacy, Free Speech, Fair Use. In comments to the Department of Commerce Technology Administration workshop on Digital Rights Management (DRM), EPIC argued that DRM technologies threaten privacy, free speech, and fair use. For more information, see the EPIC DRM Page. (July 18, 2002)
- EPIC, EFF Urge House Subcommittee to Consider Risks of DRM. In a letter to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property, EPIC and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged Members to consider the harms to consumer and societal rights posed by digital rights management (DRM) technologies. The Subcommittee will hold a hearing today focusing on the consumer benefits of DRM, with a panel consisting only of content protection representatives, and no witnesses to discuss the risks to privacy, fair use, free expression, or innovation. For more information, see the EPIC Digital Rights Management and Privacy Page and the EFF Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression Page. (June 5, 2002)
Digital Rights Management (DRM) systems restrict the use of digital files in order to protect the interests of copyright holders. DRM technologies can control file access (number of views, length of views), altering, sharing, copying, printing, and saving. These technologies may be contained within the operating system, program software, or in the actual hardware of a device.
DRM systems take two approaches to securing content. The first is "containment," an approach where the content is encrypted in a shell so that it can only be accessed by authorized users. The second is "marking," the practice of placing a watermark, flag, or a XrML tag on content as a signal to a device that the media is copy protected. According to Professor Ed Felten, both approaches are vulnerable to cracking by individuals with "moderate" programming skills.
DRM technology and legislation requiring the inclusion of copy control systems pose serious threats to privacy, open source software development, and the fair use of copyrighted content.
Some DRM technologies have been developed with little regard for privacy protection. The systems usually require the user to reveal his or her identity and rights to access protected content. Upon authentication of identity and rights to the content, the user can access the content.
DRM systems can prevent the anonymous consumption of content. DRM systems could lead to a standard practice where content owners require all purchasers of media to identify themselves. In other areas where individuals can borrow or purchase media, such as video rental stores or libraries, statutory and ethical protections prevent the transfer of personal information linked to the content acquired. Such protections do not exist in the music and growing electronic book markets. In these unregulated areas, artists and authors may have more difficulty in finding an audience for their work because of the privacy risks associated with linking identity to content consumption.
In addition to preventing anonymity in access to digital information, DRM can be used to facilitate profiling of users' preferences or to limit access to certain content. This is done by assigning an identifier to content or to the content player, and attaching personal information to the identifier. For instance, Microsoft's Windows Media Player has an embedded globally-unique identifier (GUID) to track users. Similarly, Microsoft's eBook Reader requires the user to "activate" the software and link it to a Passport account. From there, Microsoft captures a unique hardware identifier of the user's computer. There is also an activation limit that can stop a user from transferring an eBook to other computers. This enables Microsoft to prevent users from sharing books or from reading a book on a different machine.
Also, Windows Media Player creates a log file of the content a user views, and "phones home" to a central server to obtain content titles. These technologies mark an important development in the use of copyright law: copyright can regulate duplication of works to protect content owners. Now, copyright is being used as a justification to both protect content and to profile the consumers of content.
Linking personally-identifiable information to content may result in "price discrimination." Price discrimination is the practice of selling an item at different costs to different consumers. It can be facilitated where the seller knows the consumer's identity, and can associate the identity with a profile that includes financial information on the consumer. DRM systems may enable content owners to control access to content, but also to adjust the price of content based on the consumer's identity.
Alternatives exist that would provide copy protection and at the same time protect privacy. For instance, token and password systems could be used to authorize a download of digital content. Alternative, non-privacy invasive solutions have not been explored adequately.
DRM systems that have been designed impinge on users' control and use of content. Many DRM systems will not allow a user to transfer content to portable devices, such as MP3 players. In addition, many DRM systems work only with Windows operating systems to the exclusion of Linux and Macintosh users.
DRM systems may also be designed to actually harm a user's system. One product in particular, InTether Point-to-Point, can impose "penalties" for "illegal" uses of files. The program can force a reboot of the user's computer or destroy the file that the user was attempting to access. A Celine Dion album released in 2002 by EPIC and Sony records can crash a user's computer if the disc is inserted in a CD-ROM drive.
DRM may also be referred to as "Content Management Systems" (CMS), "Content/Copy Protection for Removable Media" (CPRM) or sometimes as "technological measures."
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) can interfere with a user's ability to access content. The DMCA is a 1998 law designed to increase copyright holders' rights. The DMCA created civil and criminal penalties for the creation or distribution of DRM circumvention tools. As a result, a user attempting to circumvent copyright protection, even for legitimate reasons, may violate federal law. The DMCA was the American version of implementing legislation for a World Intellectual Property Organization treaty.
- Douglas Barnes, How to Fight the Super DMCA...and Win, 2003.
- EFF "Intellectual Property - Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)" Archive.
- Unintended Consequences - Three Years under the DMCA, EFF.
- RIAA v. Verizon Case, EPIC.
DRM is a Threat to Open Source Software
DRM schemes and laws that require embedding copy protection into devices endanger the development of open-source software. Open-source software developers rely on reverse engineering to write programs that can interact with hardware. This practice is illegal under the DMCA. Additionally, some industry standards must be "tamper-resistant." "Tamper-resistant" is defined in such a way that it makes open source implementations noncompliant.
- A Bad, Sad Hollywood Ending?, BusinessWeek, May 16, 2002.
DRM Systems Cannot Recognize Fair Use Rights
Statutory and Common Law interpretations of copyright law afford individuals "Fair Use" rights. Fair Use provides a defense to individuals who engage in an unauthorized use of protected content. It is impossible for DRM systems to incorporate Fair Use principles because they are difficult to define, and evolve over time. Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Frontier Foundation has argued that for DRM to recognize Fair Use, engineers must be able to program a federal judge onto a computer chip.
Fair Use allows individuals to interact with content to promote cultural production, learning, innovation, and equity between content owners and consumers. Fair Use includes libraries' and educators' rights to provide content to users, the right to sell physical copies of certain content that one acquires lawfully (the "First Sale" doctrine), and the ability to make a backup copy of software and music. No DRM scheme developed affords users these rights.
- EFF Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression.
- EFF Broadcast Protection Discussion Group Blog.
- Fair Use By Design Workshop, Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy 2002.
- Electrifying Copyright Norms and Making Cyberspace More Like a Book, Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy 2002.
- Reconciling DRM and Fair Use: Preserving Future Fair Uses?, Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy 2002.
- Hollywood, Silicon Valley near deal on digital TV, Mercury News (Reuters), June 3, 2002.
- "Fair Use" Is Getting Unfair Treatment Two recent federal court rulings in Hollywood's favor could undermine consumers' historical rights to use the content they buy, BusinessWeek, May 14, 2002.
A Media Consumption Culture Shift: Pay-Per-Use and the Marginalization of Content Sharing
DRM systems have been presented as a solution to unauthorized copying of digital content. However, the content industry may have other objectives with DRM technology. The technology can limit users' interaction with media. Through limiting interaction, over time, DRM technologies can change users' expectations about control and use of digital content.
Professor Peter Jaszi has argued that DRM developers may be attempting to acclimate consumers to a pay-per-use business model. Under such a system, a fee would be assessed each time digital media is accessed. This business model could be more lucrative for content controllers.
DRM could also acclimate users to a system where sharing of content is not permitted. In 1996, Richard Stallman, President of the Free Software Foundation, painted a picture of a society with stringent copy controls and a societal rejection of content sharing. In The Right to Read, Stallman envisioned a world where copy protection prevented the anonymous reading of books, lending books to others, or the mere possession of software tools that could be used to bypass copyright law:
This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her--but if he lent her his computer, she might read his books. Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books, the very idea shocked him at first. Like everyone, he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong--something that only pirates would do.
--The Right to Read, Richard Stallman, 1996.
Major DRM Developments
The FCC Broadcast Flag
In August 2002, the FCC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to consider whether digital television signals should incorporate a digital broadcast flag. Such a flag would mark digital content as "protected" and direct devices to limit individuals' use of the content.
Comments were due December 6, 2002. The Electronic Frontier Foundation runs a "blog" to share detailed information about the flag. You can view comments by visiting the FCC E-Filing Page and entering proceeding 02-230 in the first box.
- EPIC Comments on the FCC Broadcast Flag, Proceeding MB 02-230.
- FCC Explores Digital Broadcast Copy Protection, FCC Press Release, August 9, 2002.
- FCC NPRM on Digital Broadcast Copy Protection (PDF), FCC, August 9, 2002.
- EFF BPDG Blog, EFF.
- FCC demands pirate-proof, digital TV, ZDNet, August 8, 2002.
- F.C.C. Reportedly Poised to Act on Digital Tuners in TV's, New York Times (Reuters), August 6, 2002.
H.R. 5211, Rep. Berman's P2P Anti-Piracy Bill
Representative Howard Berman (D-CA) introduced H.R. 5211 in July 2002. The bill would allow cybervigilantism in order to stem P2P piracy. The measure would actually permit copyright owners or their agents to engage in behavior currently illegal under a computer fraud act in order to interdict filetrading.
The bill authorizes copyright agents to block or otherwise disable file transfers where there is a reasonable basis to believe that the file traders are engaging in piracy. Copyright agents' techniques would be shielded from public view--they will have to notify the Department of Justice of their file blocking plans, but the techniques would be exempt from open government laws. Individuals whose file transfers are wrongly blocked would have almost no recourse. A wronged individual would first have to complain to the Department of Justice before bringing suit, and in order to prevail in court, the individual would have to show over $250 in monetary damages and that the copyright agent knowingly and intentionally blocked a legal file transfer.
The bill is extremely broad, and although it is written to target Napster or Kazaa-like systems, it could be read as authorization to interfere with e-mail and instant messaging systems.
- H.R. 5211, THOMAS Database.
- The Berman P2P Bill: Vigilantism Unbound, EFF Comments on H.R. 5211.
- Oppose Section 514.
- The Berman Bill, Digital Speech Project.
- 'Rewiring' file-sharing networks may stop attacks, New Scientist, November 11, 2002.
- Movie Studios Press Congress in Digital Copyright Dispute, New York Times, July 29, 2002.
- Could Hollywood hack your PC?, Wired, July 23, 2002.
In June 2002, Microsoft announced its Palladium project, a project that would embed DRM into software and hardware. For more information, see the EPIC Palladium Page.
The SSSCA and the CBDTPA
In September 2001, Senator Fritz Hollings (D-SC) announced plans to introduce the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA). The SSSCA would require equipment manufacturers to embed government-approved copy protection systems into all computer equipment.
In February 2002, Sen. Hollings scheduled hearings to examine the need for government imposition of standards for digital content protection. During the hearing, legislators declared that they would introduce legislation to mandate control requirements if the industry did not develop them. All of the hearing panelists represented large corporations and there was no testimony taken from consumer advocates.
In March 2002, Sen. Hollings introduced the Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA). This copyright control would force manufacturers to embed copy protection in all devices that can receive digital media. The Senate Judiciary Committee also held hearings, and is now accepting comments from the public on the implications of the CBDTPA. Opposition to the CBDTPA has been vigorous both from individual users and from business interests.
- Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, Cryptome.
- Politechbot.com Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act Archive.
- Protecting Creative Works in a Digital Age: What is at stake for Content Creators, Providers, and Users?, Senate Judiciary Committee.
- SSSCA Working Draft, Cryptome.
- Politechbot.com Security Systems Standards and Certification Act Archive.
- SSSCA, Crypto-Gram Newsletter.
- Professor Ed Felten's Testimony on the SSSCA, Felten.com.
- Big Brother! Take My Little Sister, New York Times, December 8, 2002.
- Execs Look to Lead Anti-Piracy Charge, CNET, June 5, 2002.
- EPIC and EFF Letter to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on DRM, June 5, 2002.
- The LawMeme Guide to Spider-Man and Star Wars Bootlegs, LawMeme, May 13, 2002.
- Alternatives to the CBDTPA, Slashdot, May 1, 2002.
- White House Cool to Hollings' Act, Wired, April 27, 2002.
- Copyright Bill (CBDTPA) Universally Rejected, Slashdot, April 10, 2002.
- Copyright Bill Universally Rejected, Global Technology (Reuters), April 10, 2002.
- Digital-Copyright Bill Inspires Flurry of Criticism, Yahoo News (AP), April 9, 2002.
- A Mickey Mouse Bill, Security Focus, April 1, 2002.
- As Copyright Gets a Starring Role, We're Cast as the Villains, Washington Post, March 31, 2002.
- Operation Enduring Valenti, The Register, March 27, 2002.
- Dan Gillmor: Bleak future looms if you don't take a stand, Mercury News, March 23, 2002.
- Anti-Copy Bill Slams Coders, Wired, March 22, 2002.
- What Hollings' Bill Would Do, Wired, March 22, 2002.
- Senate Won't Act On Digital Content Bill - Lawmaker, Newsbytes, March 14, 2002.
- House Cool to Copy Protection, Wired, March 4, 2002.
- Peter Trei: "The Original SSSCA," a short story, Declan McCullagh's Politechbot, March 2, 2002.
- Hearings on Digital Movies and Piracy, New York Times, March 1, 2002.
- Content Spat Split on Party Lines, Wired, March 1, 2002.
- More on intel backs consumers in copyright war, David Farber's Interesting People List, February 28, 2002.
- Digital Security Fomenting a Feud, Wired, February 27, 2002.
- Chairman Announces Hearing on Digital Content Copyright Protection, Broadband, and Digital TV Transition, Senate Commerce Press Release (via Politechbot.com), February 26, 2002.
- USACM Letter to Sen. Hollings on SSSCA, EFF, September 26, 2001.
- Defeat the "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" (SSSCA), EFF Action Alert, September 21, 2001.
- New Copyright Bill Heading to DC, Wired, September 7, 2001.
Dmitry Sklyarov and Adobe eBook Copy "Protection"
In June 2001, a Russian programmer named Dmitry Sklyarov published a program that can defeat a DRM technology used to secure Adobe eBooks. In July, at the behest of Adobe, the Department of Justice arrested Sklyarov for violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) shortly after he presented a paper on cracking Adobe ROT-13 copy protection. Sklyarov remained in jail for several weeks and has been released on $50,000 bail. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) assisted in his defense and in December 2001, federal authorities dropped charges against him.
Federal authorities have now pursued ElcomSoft, Dmitry Sklyarov's employer. The case is being litigated in Federal District Court in California.
- Index of ElcomSoft, Dmitry Sklyarov, Adobe, US Government and DMCA-related articles from around the Web, Planet eBook.
- US v. Sklyarov FAQ, EFF.
- EFF "Intellectual Property: Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA): U.S. v. Sklyarov" Archive, EFF.
- ElcomSoft Verdict: Not Guilty, CNET, December 17, 2002.
- Russian Firm Battles Copyright Law, News.com, April 1, 2002.
- Civil Liberties Group: Copyright Law Unconstitutional, Newsbytes, February 4, 2002.
- Feds Drop Copyright Case Against Russian Programmer Feds Drop Copyright Case Against Russian Programmer, Law.Com, December 14, 2001.
- Free Dmitry! Protest Call Brings Adobe to the Negotiating Table, EFF Action Alert, July 20, 2001.
- Free Dmitry! What You Can Do To Help Set Dmitry Sklyarov Free, EFF Action Alert, July 17, 2001.
- Press Release and Complaint in US. v. Sklyarov, Cryptome, July 17, 2001.
- FBI Reportedly Detains ElcomSoft Employee in U.S. Author of Advanced eBook Processor Software not on flight home, Planet eBook, July 16, 2001.
- eBook Security: Theory and Practice (PowerPoint), by Dmitry Sklyarov.
Ed Felten and Suppression of Academic Inquiry into DRM Systems
In April 2001, a team of researchers headed by Princeton Professor Ed Felten announced that they could defeat a DRM system developed by the Secure Digital Media Initiative (SDMI). Before presenting their paper, SDMI and the Recording Industry Artists of America (RIAA) threatened Felten and his team with a lawsuit under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Felten's team decided not to publish the paper. Ultimately, SDMI and RIAA retreated from the treat of lawsuit, fearing that the DMCA may have been stricken as constitutionally overbroad when applied against a group of professors presenting an academic paper. In June 2001, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) bought suit against RIAA to obtain a declaratory judgment that Felten could present the SDMI research. Additionally, EFF sought the invalidation of the DMCA as an unconstitutional restriction on free expression. In August 2001, Felten presented the SDMI paper at the USENIX conference. In November 2001, a Federal District Court dismissed EFF's case. In February 2002, Felton decided not to appeal the dismissal.
- The Making of a Policy Gadfly: Seeing crucial computer-science work threatened, a Princeton professor takes on Congress, Chronicle of Higher Education, November 29, 2002.
- Security Researchers Drop Scientific Censorship Case, Electronic Frontier Foundation, February 6, 2002.
- Federal judge throws out EFF-Felten lawsuit challenging DMCA, Politechbot, November 29, 2001.
- Status of the paper "Reading Between the Lines: Lessons from the SDMI Challenge," Ed Felten Web Page.
- Felten v. RIAA, Electronic Frontier Foundation.
- ACM Declaration in Felten v. RIAA, Association for Computing Machinery.
- Professor decides against presentation on foiling music security, Siliconvalley.com (AP), April 26, 2001.
- Reading Between the Lines: Lessons from the SDMI Challenge, by Ed Felten, Cryptome, April 26, 2001. This link contains the SDMI letter threatening lawsuit under the DMCA against Felten for presenting his research.
- An Open Letter to the Digital Community, SDMI, September 6, 2000. This page is an invitation to break the SDMI code. Felten's team was responding to this invitation.
- Professor Ed Felten Web Page, Princeton University.
4C Attempt to Embed DRM in Computer Hardware
In Fall 2000, the 4C Entity, which is comprised of IBM, Intel, Matsushita, and Toshiba, attempted to include Content Protection for Removable Media (CPRM) in the standard for all ATA devices. The ATA standard encompasses hard drives, cd-rom and cd-rw drives, flash memory, and other media storage devices. With CPRM embedded in users' hardware, content producers would have the option of enabling copy protection and hindering "unauthorized" use of files. In February 2001, IBM decided to withdraw its call for CPRM in hard drives and to limit the application of CPRM to only removable media, which includes flash memory and other storage devices associated with digital cameras and MP3 players.
- IBM Backs Away from CPRM on Hard Drives, Focuses on Portable Media, The Internet Law Journal, April 16, 2001.
- Hardware safe from copy protection--for now, ZDNet, April 2, 2001.
- Smoke-screen CPRM "Generic Functionality" proposal, by John Gilmore, Cryptome, February 26, 2001.
- Andre Hedrick On Hard Drive Copy Protection, Slashdot, January 10, 2001.
- 4C May Back Down On Hard-Disk Copy Protection, Slashdot, January 7, 2001.
- CPRM: The End of Digital Media Piracy?, Windows 2000 Magazine, December 28, 2001.
- EFF's Gilmore calls for CPRM hardware boycott, The Register, December 26, 2001.
- CPRM on hard drives - IBM takes a spin, The Register, December 24, 2001.
- Software Bullet Is Sought to Kill Musical Piracy, New York Times, May 4, 2003.
- Beware of TurboTax, which modifies hard drive's boot sectors, Politechbot.com, February 16, 2003.
- Will Your CD Player Tell on You?, Slashdot, December 15, 2002.
- Online casting calls snub Apple, CNET, November 18, 2002.
- Protected CDs 'should be labelled', BBC News, October 29, 2002.
- Why fathers of PC revolution are wary of digital rights management, Politechbot.com, October 10, 2002.
- Microsoft Easing Up On DVD Restrictions, Washington Post, October 9, 2002.
- Tech firm loses Bon Jovi battle, CNET, October 7, 2002.
- Your Rights Online: Lofgren's Anti-DRM Bill, Slashdot, October 3, 2002.
- New consumer-protection bill introduced, News.com, October 2, 2002.
- Dan Gillmor: Apple stands firm against entertainment cartel, Mercury News, October 1, 2002.
- 'Free' Costello CD seeds DRM, MS Media Player 9, The Register, September 22, 2002.
- Bon Jovi Uses 'Bounce' To Battle Music Pirates, Wall Street Journal, September 17, 2002.
- Microsoft/HP to Market Crippled Entertainment PCs, Slashdot, September 3, 2002.
- The Day The Music Died: Windows Media and DRM, Slashdot, August 15, 2002.
- Downloads Did Not Cause The Music Slump, But They Can Cure It, Forrester Research, August 13, 2002.
- Forrester sees $2 billion digital music market by 2007, Siliconvalley.com, August 13, 2002.
- Catch WMP, The Guardian, August 8, 2002.
- Tech activists protest anti-copying, CNET News.com, July 17, 2002.
- Digital Copyright Protection Goes Mobile, New Scientist, July 10, 2002.
- New Chips Can Keep a Tight Rein on Consumers, New York Times, July 4, 2002.
- Fears of Misuse of Encryption System Are Voiced, New York Times, June 20, 2002.
- 'Ranger' Vs. the Movie Pirates, Washington Post, June 19, 2002.
- Mysteries Of The CDRW and Back Ups Revealed, Tom's Hardware, June 17, 2002.
- Lawsuit challenges copy-protected CDs, Reuters, June 16, 2002.
- Milberg Weiss Files Suit Over CDs With No-Copy Technology, Law.com, June 16, 2002.
- DRM Helmet, Slashdot, June 9, 2002.
- DRM Helmets: An Idea Whose Time Has Come, Gordon Mohr, June 7, 2002.
- Fans: Music Should Rock, Not Lock, Wired, June 6, 2002.
- SonicBlue Freed From Monitoring, Wired, June 3, 2002.
- Media companies demand ID numbers for CDs and DVDs, Yahoo News, May 24, 2002.
- Media firms lobby piracy controls to EU, CNET News.com, May 24, 2002.
- Hollywood Wants to Plug the "Analog Hole", Broadcast Protection Discussion Group Blog, EFF, May 23, 2002.
- Copy-Proof CDs Cracked with 99-Cent Marker Pen, Reuters, May 20, 2002.
- Apple: Play Music at Your Own Risk, CNET, May 13, 2002.
- The Legal Theorist, Wall Street Journal, May 13, 2002.
- Lawrence Lessig: The "Dinosaurs" Are Taking Over, BusinessWeek, May 13, 2002.
- New Enimem CD May Be Copy-Proof, USA Today, May 1, 2002.
- Copyright Holders Praise Proposed Bill, CNET News.com, May 1, 2002.
- Hollywood vs. the Internet, Reason Magazine, May 2002.
- Mac OS: Cannot Eject Copy Protected Audio Disc, Computer Starts Up to Gray Screen, Apple Support, April 29, 2002.
- Interview with a Congressman (Rep. Boucher), MP3 Insider, April 26, 2002.
- Electronic Frontier Foundation and Broadcasters Comment, Copyright Office Threatens Internet Radio Privacy, EFF, April 10, 2002.
- Andreessen: Copy protection efforts are doomed, Mercury News, April 9, 2002.
- EFF, EPIC, KPFA & KFCF Joint Comments to US Copyright Office on Internet Radio Privacy and Competition, April 5, 2002.
- Dion's new CD crashing party for some users, Hollywood Reporter, April 3, 2002.
- Privacy Concerns Raised Over Digital Music Proposal, Newsbytes, April 2, 2002.
- The "hidden" privacy issue in Internet radio fees, Declan McCullagh's Politechbot.com, April 2, 2002.
- Don't Confuse Fans with Pirates, Yahoo International Life, April 2002.
- Limit copying and we may end up copying the USSR, Guardian Unlimited, March 24, 2002.
- Does it Take Hardware to Repel Pirates?, ZDNet News, March 22, 2002.
- Piracy, or Innovation? It's Hollywood vs. High Tech, New York Times, March 14, 2002.
- DigitalConsumer Takes Up the Fight Against Copyright Plans in Congress, Wall Street Journal, March 14, 2002.
- Your Rights Online: Consumer Technology Bill of Rights?, Slashdot, March 14, 2002.
- Lawmaker renews anti-copying criticism, CNET, March 13, 2002.
- Morpheus seeks new role in music biz, CNET, March 13, 2002.
- Avex won't buy back unplayable CDs, Japan Today, March 13, 2002.
- AOL Wants to Lock Up its CDs, ZDNET, March 12, 2002.
- Vivendi Group Sues Murdoch Unit, Wired, March 12, 2002.
- Vivendis Canal Plus alleges NDS helped steal digital-TV broadcasts, MSNBC, March 12, 2002.
- Taming the Consumer's Computer, New York Times, March 11, 2002.
- House Rep's Rap: Unshackle the CD, Wired, March 7, 2002.
- CD Technology Stops Copies, but it Starts A Controversy, New York Times, March 1, 2002.
- The Death of Digital Rights Management?, Techreview, March 2002.
- Digital Rights: Background, Systems, Assessment, EU Working Paper, February 27, 2002.
- CD Protection Complaint is Settled, New York Times, February 25, 2002.
- Serious Privacy Problems in Windows Media Player for Windows XP, Computerbytesman, February 20, 2002.
- Microsoft Player Logs User Info, Washington Post (AP), February 20, 2002.
- Senate Panel To Consider Web Copyright Protections, Newsbytes, January 24, 2002.
- A Cop in Every Computer, Law.com (IP Worldwide), January 16, 2002.
- IE privacy flaw still causing leaks, ZDNet, January 15, 2002.
- Philips Says Compact Discs Can't be Copyprotected, Slashdot, January 11, 2002.
- More on Rep. Boucher's nastygram and copy-protected CDs, Declan McCullagh's Politechbot.com, January 8, 2002.
- Lawmaker promises changes to Online Copyright law, SiliconValley.com (Reuters), January 7, 2002.
- Rep. Boucher sends nastygram to music firms re: copy-protected CDs, Declan McCullagh's Politechbot.com, January 7, 2002.
- Digital Music Conference Follows Turbulent Year, CNN, January 6, 2002.
- CDs That Block Copying May Herald a Revolution, Los Angeles Times, January 6, 2002.
- Coming Soon: Hollywood Versus the Internet, Cyberia-L via Cryptome, December 18, 2001.
- A Call to End Copyright Confusion, Wired, December 18, 2001.
- Universal to release copy-protected CD in U.S., Mercury News, December 16, 2001.
- Digital Rights Management Operating System, Slashdot, December 12, 2001.
- Digital Rights Management Operating System, Patent Number 6,330,670, December 11, 2001.
- Loading and Identifying a Digital Rights Management operating system, Patent Number 6,327,652, December 4, 2001.
- Where are the non-SDMI MP3 Players?, Slashdot, November 27, 2001.
- Why Copyright Laws Hurt Culture, Wired, November 27, 2001.
- A Lock and Load Battle Over Music, Los Angeles Times, November 22, 2001.
- Copy Protection Technology is Doomed, Computer, October 2001 (subscription required).
- Digital Rights Management II Conference, to be held January 29-30, Berlin, Germany.
- BMG Backs Down Over Copy-Protected CD, Slashdot, November 18, 2001.
- Sites spotlight reports of copy-protected CDs, CNET News, November 13, 2001.
- Conference on the Public Domain, to be held November 9-11, 2001, Duke University School of Law.
- Workshop on Security and Privacy in Digital Rights Management 2001, to be held November 5, 2001, Philadelphia, PA, as part of the Eighth ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS-8).
- Microsoft DRM System Technical Details, Cryptome.
- MS digital rights management scheme cracked, The Register, October 19, 2001.
- DRM Summit, October 18, 2001, New York City, NY, sponsored by Siliconalleyreporter.com
- Old Code Defeats New CD Anti-Ripping Technologies, The Register, October 8, 2001.
- U.K. Digital Activist Group Takes On CD Copy Protection, Newsbytes, October 1, 2001.
- Sounding off on behalf of copy protection, CNET News, September 28, 2001.
- First lawsuit filed against new CD copy protection scheme (PDF), Plaintiff Complaint, Rothken Law Firm, September 6, 2001.
- Digital Content Sales Hinge on Standardized Protection, Gartner Group, August 29, 2001.
- Protecting Copyright in a Digital World, Crypto-Gram Newsletter, August 15, 2001.
- Trouble Brewing Over Copy Protected CDs, Computertracker, August 7, 2001.
- Big Audio Dynamite, If you play pirate CDs, you could end up trashing your hi-fi, New Scientist, August 4, 2001.
- PC Music Listening Data May Be Tracked, Sold, Newsbytes, June 6, 2001.
- Loopy Ideas Secure Music Rights, Wired, May 18, 2001.
- The Futility of Digital Copy Protection, Crypto-Gram Newsletter, May 15, 2001.
- MS May Have File-Trading Answer, Wired, May 1, 2001.
- Why Can't I Make Copies From Copies of My CDs?, Gigalaw.com, April 2001.
- Latest Windows XP Beta Adds Strict Copy Protection, PC World, March 25, 2001.
- Copy This! Can 'Military' Technology Beat Digital Piracy?, Inside.com, March 12, 2001.
- Document-Destroying Copy Protection, Slashdot, March 12, 2001.
- CD anti-piracy system can nuke hi-fi kit, The Register, March 8, 2001.
- Everything you ever wanted to know about CPRM, but ZDNet wouldn't tell you..., The Register, December 29, 2000.
- Copy Protection: Just Say No, Computerworld, September 4, 2000.
DRM Defeating Technology
- The Right to Read, from The Road to Tycho, by Richard Stallman, February 1997.
- What's Wrong With Copy Protection, John Gilmore.
- Marjorie Heins, The Progress of Science and Useful Arts: Why Copyright Today Threatens Intellectual Freedom, Free Expression Policy Project, December 2002.
- John Halderman, Evaluating New Copy-Prevention Techniques for Audio CDs, Princeton University, October 2002.
- Anticircumvention Rules: Threat to Science, Science Magazine, September 19, 2001.
- The Law & Economics of Reverse Engineering (PDF), Professors Pamela Samuelson and Suzanne Scotchmer (2001).
- Information Rights and Intellectual Freedom (PDF), Professor Julie Cohen, Ethics and the Internet 11-32 (Anton Vedder, ed., Antwerp: Intersentia, 2001).
- DRM Will Beget DCRM, Professor Roger Clarke, January 2, 2001.
- DRM and Privacy, Professor Julie Cohen, 18 Berkeley Tech. L.J. xx (forthcoming 2003).
- Some Reflections on Copyright Management Systems and Laws Designed to Protect Them (PDF), Professor Julie Cohen, 12 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 161 (1997).
- A Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at 'Copyright Management' in Cyberspace (PDF), Professor Julie Cohen, 28 Conn. L. Rev. 981 (1996).
- EPIC Comments to the Technology Administration of the Department of Commerce on DRM, July 17, 2002.
- Privacy and Digital Rights Management (DRM): An Oxymoron?, Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario, October 2002.
- Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002, Lofgren website.
- Factsheet: Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002, Lofgren website.
- Dan Bricklin, Copy Protection Robs The Future: Copy protection will break the chain of formal and informal archivists who are necessary to the long-term preservation of creative works.
- The Copyright Grab, Wired, January 1996.
- Payment Demands for Spurious Copyrights: Four Causes of Action, Professor Paul Heald, 1 J. Intell. Prop. L. 259 (1994).
- Unintended Consequences: Bad Results from the DMCA, EFF, May 2002.
- The DMCA's Chilling Effect on Encryption Research, Michael Landau, Gigalaw.com, September 2001.
- Creative Commons at Harvard's Berkman Center.
- DRM Workshop, European Union, February 28, 2002.
- EUCD-Status, Association Electronique Libre.
- CD Audio Copy Protection, Distronics.
- U.K. Campaign for Digital Rights.
- Anti-DMCA Web Site.
- DRM Watch.
- Center for the Public Domain.
- Subcode on a Compact Disk.
- Fat Chuck's. A list of copy-protected CDs.
- Rothken Law Firm. Ira Rothken litigated DeLise v. Fahrenheit Entertainment, Sunncomm et al., a challenge to the use of Digital Content Cloaking Technology that requires the consumer to reveal her identity before gaining access to content. The lawsuit was settled in February 2002. In the settlement, the defendants agreed to provide better notice and the ability to download content without requiring personal information.
- Adjuncts and Alternatives to Copyright, ALAI 2001 Congress, Columbia University Law School.
- Project on Anti-Circumvention of Technological Protection, Columbia University Law School.
- International Intellectual Property Resources, Columbia University Law School.
- 4C Entity CPRM Documents.
- Secure Digital Music Initiative.
- 10th ACM Conference on Computers and Communications Security, October 2003.
- The "Beale Screamer's" Crack of Microsoft DRM 2, Cryptome.
- ElcomSoft's AEBPR (Advanced eBook Processor), Cryptome.
- CloneCD will produce an exact copy of an original CD, thereby defeating copy protection systems that include corrupt sectors on the CD.
The following is a partial list of DRM systems that are available or under development:
- Internet Digital Rights Management (IDRM). IDRM is an IRTF (Internet Research Task Force) Research Group formed to research issue and technologies relating to Digital Rights Management (DRM) on the Internet. The IRTF is a sister organization of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
- Microsoft DRM Web Page.
- InTether Desktop.
- Cactus Data Shield, a system developed by Midbar Tech, adds noise to music data that is being copied.