« Fake Player distribution | Main | Gartenberg at Microsoft »
February 15, 2007
IP rights
IP rights: Two posts were next to each other in the aggregators this morning... above, Aral Balkan describes how some of his technical essays were copied by another site and passed off as their own work... in another, Matt Woodward worries about how his new operating system may actually act in the future, and whether his device drivers may be remotely killed for perceived rights violations. In both cases content creators seek an ongoing connection with the bits they create, but it looks like it's the implementation of digital rights management which bothers people -- sloppy, overbearing, or mysterious contracts increase the total cost of the operating system. I think Aral has a right to determine how his words are used, and while the offender may not appreciate how Aral protected those rights (with the amusing hotlink edit), it's hard for me to see how Aral doesn't have a special connection with those words he strung together. I think both Aral and Matt have valid concerns here -- we want to exercise our own digital rights, and so must respect that same right in others, but it's bad implementations which are the enemy, not the principle of digital rights-management in itself. Do you agree, disagree, see additional angles...?
Posted by JohnDowdell at February 15, 2007 08:01 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/mtadmin/mt-tb.cgi/8381
Comments
Me too! A company in Portugal is stealing my blog and forum with 4 domains!
Thanks,
aSH
Adobe Community Expert
Posted by: aSH at February 15, 2007 08:23 AM
Hmmm, in fact JD, what do you think about my situation ?
Thanks,
aSH
Posted by: aSH at February 15, 2007 08:31 AM
That's funny, Pablo, I was just going to leave an update here mentioning that you've been seeing the same text-swiping and have been dealing with it this week... and you beat me to it in comments here. ;-)
I had been reading your posts, and empathizing, but I hadn't clicked through to the offending sites, and wasn't sure whether it was closer to splogging or closer to resume-stuffing.
It was when I saw the posts from Matt and Aral next to each other that I realized it was the same problem, of people wanting to protect the bits they create, but it was the reasonableness of the implementation that was the issue.
I think your reaction is justified, myself. I didn't comment on it at the time because I wasn't sure what I might be able to add.
Posted by: John Dowdell at February 15, 2007 08:41 AM
Thanks JD !
All the best,
Pablo "aSH"
Posted by: aSH at February 15, 2007 08:43 AM
I've done a fair amount of research into protecting my code, only to be ultimately faced with the futility of trying. All you can ever hope to do is put technological hurdles in place, and prosecute those who you happen to catch. So a real solution ends up being a legal one, when it's all said and done. With that in mind, I think what's needed is really an improved system for catching and prosecuting offenders.
Although we are all endowed with rights to our material from the moment of its creation, we are not all endowed with equal means to enforce that copyright. It's simply not cost-effective for small business (and big business, in many cases) to police the use of its products and prosecute copyright violators.
I end up asking myself the question "what is my copyright worth to me?". If it's just my blog - yeah, it burns me if someone uses my stuff without permission. But it's not like they're taking money from my pocket - my blog is free for all. If it's some software, and I have already sold 2 million copies, I'm not likely to prosecute a handful of pirates. If I've sold 1 million copies and know of 1 million pirates, I'm still not going to prosecute them all, because it would be too expensive.
So if there's no legal solution, what then? Maybe there's a cultural one. If there were some shame in being a software pirate, that might be a deterrent. But it's actually cool to be a pirate. People give you respect, think you have secret knowledge, think you can get them something for nothing. If you steal software, you're sticking it to the man.
This is getting too long to qualify as a "comment" so I'll stop. Interesting subject though.
Posted by: Tom Lee at February 15, 2007 09:23 AM
You could make your text (relatively) immune from (easy) swiping by reading from a text file into a .swf but the .css support and text engine in the nine player isn't as good as most browsers yet. Any chance the flash 10 download will increase its size and add in some better typography support? We _know_ Adobe has what it takes to show properly kerned letters on the screen. And is there a road map for which things out of .css 2 are going into player 10? Don't have a killing need to know this, but it would be interesting none the less.
[jd sez: That's for the Player product team to discuss, not me... I try to keep a distance from stuff teams haven't announced, because I've seen expectations change midcourse before. I do know there's a lot of examination of how SWF, PDF and HTML can all work together, but that's the only context I have now.]
Posted by: George at February 15, 2007 12:57 PM