Digital rights management
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Digital rights management (DRM) is an umbrella term referring to technologies used by publishers or copyright owners to control access to or usage of digital data or hardware, and to restrictions associated with a specific instance of a digital work or device. The term is often confused with copy protection and technical protection measures, which refer to technologies that control or restrict the use and access of digital content on electronic devices with such technologies installed, acting as components of a DRM design.
The use of DRM has been controversial. Advocates argue DRM is necessary for copyright holders to prevent unauthorized duplication of their work to ensure continued revenue streams.[1] The Free Software Foundation suggests that the use of the word “Rights” is misleading and suggest that people instead use the term Digital Restrictions Management.[2] Their position is essentially that copyright holders are attempting to restrict use of copyrighted material in ways not included in the statutory, common law, or Constitutional grant of exclusive commercial use to them. The Electronic Frontier Foundation considers some DRM schemes to also be anti-competitive practices, citing the iTunes Store as an example.[3]
Introduction
Digital rights management technologies attempt to control or prevent access to or copying of digital media, which can otherwise be copied with very little cost or effort. Copyright holders, content producers, or other financially or artistically interested parties have historically objected to copying technologies, before digital media. Examples have included player piano rolls early in the 20th century, audio tape recording, and video tape recording (e.g. in the Betamax case in the US). The advent of digital media increased concerns. While analog media inevitably loses quality with each copy generation, and in some cases even during normal use, digital media files may be copied an unlimited number of times with no degradation in the quality of subsequent copies. Digital Audio Tape, thought by many observers of the time to be a probable replacement for the audio cassette, was a market failure in part due to opposition to it on grounds of unauthorized copying potential[citation needed]. The advent of personal computers, the ease of ripping media files from a CD or from radio broadcast, combined with the internet and popular file sharing tools, has made unauthorized dissemination of copies of digital files (often referred to as digital piracy) much easier. This has concerned some digital content publishers, leading some to pursue DRM technologies to try to prevent those actions.[citation needed]
Although technical controls on the reproduction and use of software have been intermittently common since the 1970s, the term DRM has come to primarily mean the use of these measures to control copyrightable artistic content.[citation needed] Some DRM technologies enable content publishers to enforce access policies that go beyond preventing copyright violations, and also prevent legal fair use.[citation needed]
While DRM is most commonly used by the entertainment industry (e.g., films and recording),[citation needed] it has found use in other media as well. Many online music stores, such as Apple’s iTunes Store, as well as certain e-books producers, have adopted various DRM schemes in recent times. In recent years, a number of television producers have begun demanding implementation of DRM measures to control access to the content of their shows in connection with the popular TiVo time-shifting recorder system, and its equivalents.[4]
Technologies
DRM and Movies
An early example of a DRM system is the Content Scrambling System (CSS) employed by the DVD Forum on movie DVDs since circa 1996. The scheme used a simple encryption algorithm, and required device manufacturers to sign a license agreement restricting the inclusion of certain features in their players, such as a digital output which could be used to extract a high-quality digital copy of the movie. Thus, the only consumer hardware capable of decoding DVD movies was controlled, albeit indirectly, by the DVD Forum, restricting the use of DVD media on other systems until the release of DeCSS by Jon Lech Johansen in 1999, which allowed a CSS-encrypted DVD to play properly on a computer using Linux, for which the Alliance had not arranged a licensed version of the CSS playing software.
Microsoft’s Windows Vista contains a DRM system called the Protected Media Path, which contains the Protected Video Path (PVP). PVP can prevent protected content from playing while unsigned software is running to prevent the unsigned software from accessing the protected content. In addition, PVP can encrypt information during transmission to the monitor or to the graphics card to prevent unauthorized methods of recording video.
DRM and Music
Audio CDs
In 2002 Bertelsmann (the record companies BMG, Arista and RCA) were the first to use DRM on audio CDs. Initially this was done on promotional CDs; later all CDs from these companies included at least some DRM.[citation needed]
However, these CDs could not be played on all devices that were intended to do so, including some car CD players. Many people could no longer play CDs they had purchased on their computers. Computers running Windows would sometimes crash when people attempted to play such CDs, and many of the CDs could not be played on computers at all.[citation needed]
In 2005, Sony BMG’s DRM technology installed DRM software without notification or confirmation; among other things, the installed software included a rootkit. This created security vulnerabilities others could also exploit, and when the nature of the DRM involved was made public, Sony recalled millions of CDs. Several class action lawsuits were filed, which were settled by agreements to provide affected consumers with a cash payout or album downloads free of DRM.[5]
It also did not prevent copying. The DRM software had to be renewed constantly to fight cracking, yet this never succeeded. For example, the Sony DRM technology created fundamental vulnerabilities in consumer’s computers, yet could be trivially bypassed by holding down the “shift” key while inserting the CD, or disabling the autorun feature. In addition, the audio could simply be played and re-recorded, completely bypassing all of the DRM.
By January 2007 EMI stopped publishing audio CDs with DRM, stating that “the costs of DRM do not measure up to the results”. EMI was the last publisher to do so; audio CDs containing DRM are no longer released by the major publishers.[6]
Internet music
Many online music stores employ DRM to restrict the usage of music purchased and downloaded online. There are many options for consumers buying digital music over the internet, in terms of both stores and purchase options. Two examples of music stores and their functionality follow:
- The iTunes Store, run by Apple Inc., allows users to purchase a track online for under a dollar. The tracks purchased use Apple’s FairPlay DRM system. Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, has stated that Apple would be willing to sell music on iTunes without DRM.[7] As a result of this, EMI has agreed to sell its music DRM-free and at a higher quality on iTunes for a 30 cent premium, beginning in May 2007.
- Napster music store, which offers a subscription based approach to DRM alongside permanent purchases. Users of the subscription service can download and stream an unlimited amount of music encoded to Windows Media Audio (WMA) while subscribed to the service. But as soon as the user misses a payment the service renders all music downloaded unusable. Napster also charges users who wish to use the music on their portable device an additional $5 per month. Furthermore, Napster requires users to pay an additional $.99 per each track to burn a track to CD or to listen to the track after the subscription expires. Songs bought through Napster can be played on players carrying the Microsoft PlaysForSure logo (which, notably, do not include iPod players or Microsoft’s own Zune).
The various services are currently not interoperable, though those that use the same DRM scheme (for instance the several Windows Media DRM format stores, including Napster) all provide songs that can be played side by side through the same player program. Almost all stores require client software of some sort to be downloaded, and some also need plug-ins. Several colleges and universities, such as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, have made arrangements with assorted Internet music suppliers to provide access (typically DRM-restricted) to music files for their students, to less than universal popularity, sometimes making payments from student activity fee funds.[8] One of the problems is that the music becomes unplayable after leaving school, unless the student continues to pay individually. Another is that few of these vendors are compatible with the most common portable music player, the Apple iPod. The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property (to HMG in the UK; 141 pages, 40+ specific recommendations) has taken note of the incompatibilities, and suggests (Recommendations 8 — 12) that there be explicit fair dealing exceptions to copyright allowing libraries to copy and format-shift between DRM schemes, and further allowing end users to do the same privately. If adopted, some of the acrimony may decrease.
Although DRM is prevalent for Internet music, some Online music stores such as eMusic, Audio Lunchbox, and Anthology recordings do not use DRM. Major labels have begun releasing more online music without DRM. Eric Bangeman suggests in Ars Technica that this is because the record labels are “slowly beginning to realize that they can’t have DRMed music and complete control over the online music market at the same time… One way to break the cycle is to sell music that is playable on any digital audio player. eMusic does exactly that, and their surprisingly extensive catalog of non-DRMed music has vaulted it into the number two online music store position behind the iTunes Store.”[9] Apple’s Steve Jobs has called on the music industry to eliminate DRM in an open letter titled Thoughts on Music[10]. Apple’s iTunes store will start to sell DRM-free 256 kbps (up from 128 kbps) music from EMI for a premium price. In March of 2007, Musicload, one of Europe’s largest online music retailer, has announced their position strongly against DRM. In an open letter, Musicload stated that three out of every four calls to their customer support phone service are a result of consumer frustration with DRM.[11]
Microsoft’s Windows Vista contains a DRM system called the Protected Media Path, which contains Protected User Mode Audio (PUMA). PUMA implements DRM policies on audio.
DRM and Documents
Enterprise digital rights management (E-DRM or ERM) is the application of DRM technology to the control of access to corporate documents such as Microsoft Word, PDF, and AutoCAD files, emails, and intranet web pages rather than to the control of consumer media [12]. E-DRM is generally intended to prevent the unauthorized use (such as industrial or corporate espionage or inadvertent release) of proprietary documents. E-DRM typically integrates with content management system software. An example of an E-DRM system is Microsoft’s Rights Management Services. Additional E-DRM vendors include Adobe Systems and EMC Corporation.
Security on General Purpose Hardware
Many of the DRM systems in use are designed to work on general purpose hardware, such as desktop PCs. It can easily be proven that any such scheme is not secure. The argument goes as follows: the software must include all the information, such as decryption keys, necessary to decode the content, since it is able to do so itself. This means it must be possible for a third party to extract this information and decode the content and bypass the restrictions imposed by the DRM system.
This arguments breaks down if the DRM system relies on a trusted platform module, since decryption keys can then be stored securely in the TPM.
Laws regarding DRM
Digital rights management systems have received some international legal backing by implementation of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). Article 11 of the Treaty requires nations party to the treaties to enact laws against DRM circumvention.
The WCT has been implemented in most member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization. The American implementation is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), while in Europe the treaty has been implemented by the 2001 European directive on copyright, which requires member states of the European Union to implement legal protections for technological prevention measures. In 2006, the lower house of the French parliament adopted such legislation as part of the controversial DADVSI law, but added that protected DRM techniques should be made interoperable, a move which caused widespread controversy in the United States.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is an extension to United States copyright law passed unanimously on May 14, 1998, which criminalizes the production and dissemination of technology that allows users to circumvent technical copy-restriction methods, rendering all forms of DRM-stripping and circumvention software illegal, as well as some aspects of research and reverse engineering of existing systems. On 22 May 2001, the European Union passed the EU Copyright Directive, an implementation of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty that addressed many of the same issues as the DMCA.
The DMCA has been largely ineffective in protecting DRM systems,[citation needed] as software allowing users to circumvent DRM remains readily available over the Internet. However, the Act has been used to restrict the spread of such software by inhibiting its distribution and development, as in the case of DeCSS.
The DMCA has had an impact on the worldwide cryptography research community, since an argument can be made that any cryptanalytic research violates, or might violate, the DMCA.[citation needed] The arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov in 2001, for alleged infringement of the DMCA, was a highly publicized example of the law’s use to prevent or penalize development of anti-DRM measures. Sklyarov was arrested in the United States after presenting a speech at DEF CON and subsequently spent several months in jail. The DMCA has also been cited as chilling to legitimate users, such as students of cryptanalysis (including, in a well-known instance, Professor Felten and students at Princeton[13]), and security consultants such as Niels Ferguson, who has declined to publish information about vulnerabilities he discovered in an Intel secure-computing scheme because of his concern about being arrested under the DMCA when he travels to the US.
Other copyright implications
DRM has been used by organizations such as the British Library in its secure electronic delivery service to permit worldwide access to substantial numbers of rare (and in many cases unique) documents which, for legal reasons, were previously only available to authorized individuals actually visiting the Library’s document centre at Boston Spa in England.[citation needed]
Copyright Law vs. Particular DRM Techniques
Copyright law has been defined in terms of general definitions of infringement in any concrete medium. This classic approach focused such law on whether there is infringement, rather than focus on particular engineering techniques. Legislators have in several instances chosen not to prohibit new technologies (for example, piano rolls, radio broadcasting, and audio tape recording have not been prohibited, and in fact endorsed by inclusion in copyright legislation or the Courts in the U.S.). Critics of DRM assert that detecting and prosecuting infringement within the social and legal system avoids a legacy of outlawing generic, universal, popular, widespread, useful, and possibly uncontrollable in any case, engineering techniques in response to specific misuses.
International Issues
In Europe, there are several dialog activities that are uncharacterized by its consensus-building intention:
- Workshop on Digital Rights Management of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), January 2001. [1]
- Participative preparation of the European Committee for Standardization/Information Society Standardisation System (CEN/ISSS) DRM Report, 2003 (finished). [2]
- DRM Workshops of DG Information Society, European Commission (finished), and the work of the DRM working groups (finished), as well as the work of the High Level Group on DRM (ongoing). [3]
- Consultation process of the European Commission, DG Internal Market, on the Communication COM(2004)261 by the European Commission on “Management of Copyright and Related Rights” (closed). [4]
- The INDICARE project is an ongoing dialogue on consumer acceptability of DRM solutions in Europe. It is an open and neutral platform for exchange of facts and opinions, mainly based on articles by authors from science and practice.
- The AXMEDIS project is a European Commission Integrated Project of the FP6. The main goal of AXMEDIS is atomating the content production, copy-prevention and distribution, reducing the related costs and supporting DRM at both B2B and B2C areas harmonising them.
- The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property is the result of a commission by the British Government from Andrew Gowers, undertaken in December 2005 and published in 2006, with recommendations regarding copyright term, exceptions, orphaned works, and copyright enforcement.
The European Community was expected to produce a recommendation on DRM in 2006, phasing out the use of levies (compensation to rights holders charged on media sales for lost revenue due to unauthorized copying) given the advances in DRM/TPM technology. However, opposition from the member states, particularly France, have now made it unlikely that the recommendation will be adopted.[citation needed]
Controversy
DRM opponents
Many organizations, prominent individuals, and computer scientists are opposed to DRM. Two notable DRM critics are John Walker, as expressed for instance, in his article The Digital Imprimatur: How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle[14], and Richard Stallman in his article The Right to Read and in other public statements “DRM is an example of a malicious feature - a feature designed to hurt the user of the software, and therefore, it’s something for which there can never be toleration“.[15] Professor Ross Anderson of Cambridge University heads a British organization which opposes DRM and similar efforts in the UK and elsewhere.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation and similar organizations such as FreeCulture.org also hold positions which are characterized as opposed to DRM.
The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure criticizes DRM’s impact as a trade barrier from a free market perspective.
To date, the first two draft versions of the GNU General Public License version 3 released by the Free Software Foundation, prohibit using DRM to restrict free redistribution and modification of works covered by the license, and has a clause stating that the license’s provisions shall be interpreted as disfavoring use of DRM. Also, in May 2006, the FSF launched a “Defective by Design” campaign against DRM.
Creative Commons provides licensing options encouraging the expansion of and building upon creative work without the use of DRM.[16]
Bill Gates spoke out about DRM at CES in 2006. He said that DRM is not where it should be, and causes problems for legitimate consumers while trying to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate users.[17]
According to Steve Jobs, Apple opposes DRM music after a public letter calling its music labels to stop requiring DRM on its iTunes store. To date, EMI has complied. Apple considers DRM on video content as a separate issue.
As already noted, many DRM opponents consider “digital rights management” to be a misnomer. They argue that DRM manages rights (or access) the same way prison manages freedom. A common alternative is “digital restrictions management”. Alternatively, ZDNet Executive Editor David Berlind suggests the term “Content Restriction, Annulment and Protection” or “CRAP” for short.[18]
The use of DRM may also be a barrier to future historians, since technologies designed to permit data to be read only on particular machines, or with particular keys, or for certain periods, may well make future data recovery impossible - see Digital Revolution. This argument connects the issue of DRM with that of asset management and archive technology.[citation needed]
DRM opponents argue that the presence of DRM infringes existing private property rights and restricts a range of heretofore normal and legal user activities. A DRM component would control a device a user owns (such as an MP3 player) by restricting how it may act with regards to certain content, overriding some of the user’s wishes (for example, preventing the user from burning a copyrighted song as part of a compilation or a review). An example of this effect may be seen in Microsoft’s Windows Vista operating system in which content is disabled or degraded depending on the DRM scheme’s evaluation of whether the hardware and its use are ’secure’. All forms of DRM depend on the DRM enabled device (e.g., computer, DVD player, TV) imposing restrictions that cannot be disabled or modified by the user.
Tools like FairUse4WM have been created to strip Windows Media of DRM restrictions.[19]
MyPodcast is giving you this special opportunity. Move your podcast to our systems and earn cash! 
