artefatica

Patrícia Akester, at the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law at Cambridge, recently published the results of her research into Digital Rights Management: Technological accommodation of conflicts between freedom of expression and DRM: the first empirical assessment. 

Akester concludes that while “the nightmarish vision of digital lock up has not materialised … significant problems do exist, and others can readily be foreseen.” She found that the “evidence shows that some beneficiaries of privileged exceptions are being adversely affected by the use of DRM and practical solutions are required.” 

Areas of “privileged exception” include libraries, professors, students, and researchers. Users who are allowed by British law to access and copy content, but are stymied by DRM. These copyright exceptions are connected to core freedoms. 

I only had time to skim it (over 100 pages long) and it’s quite technical — but here are the parts that stuck out for me. 

The British Library’s biggest concern is digital preservation. There are preservation concerns in relation to access to works and duplication of works – both activities being essential for preservation purposes.

The first preservation concern pertains to the fact that where DRM (applied to works in digital format or to ancillary software used to access those works) becomes obsolete and the relevant manufacturers are not willing to provide updates or have gone out of business, the British Library could find itself with digital content that it can no longer have access to and unable, by law, to circumvent. The obsolescence of a DRM could render an item hosted by the British Library inaccessible.

The second preservation concern is that, presently, where a DRM prevents copying (and the British Library is unable, by law, to circumvent) reproduction of a work for preservation purposes is impossible. 

It’s no surprise, of course, that some British students are frustrated, and others break the law to do their work. Can you blame them? Some quotes:

“Most media students are aware of bypass measures because they are essential in this field of study”  

 “I download software to break encryption”

“I can’t rip clips legally, even if I use a DVD from the library”

 “I wouldn’t think twice about ripping something illegally in order to have it for study” 

 “Restrictions on DVDs encourage me to download illegal versions”

Apparently the US has done a better job. The law still protects DRM, “but in order to ensure that the public keeps the ability to engage in non-infringing uses of works, Congress [has] set out safe harbour provisions”.

I’m new to the whole DRM issue. But what I understand is this: it extends copyright into places it was never supposed to go. Think about that book you just bought. You can read it as many times as you want, lend it to a friend, give it away, archive it. But a DRM-protected video? Forget it.