Comments on: APIG DRM Inquiry: Should copyright deposit libraries be treated specially?

By: Kevin Marks

Kevin Marks — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:38:10 +0000

The law should require DRM to be removed, or for the creator of the DRM to fund sufficient emulation software that their publication can be accessed by future scholars. An earmarked tax on DRM may be appropriate here, just as the Statute of Anne provided penalties for not submitting publications in a useful form.

By: Suw Charman

Suw Charman — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 12:12:41 +0000

Whilst you can continue discussing this post, any comments posted after this one will not be included in the ORG public consultation paper.

By: kenkil

kenkil — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 12:43:54 +0000

It seems that DRM is new way of enforcing the terms of Copyright. I’m sure that publishers would rather have a permanent monopoly over their current output, rather than the (theoretically) temporary monopoly they currently have.

Unless someone outside the publisher has a non-DRM’d copy of the content, it is difficult to see how the eventual end of the Copyright term will be enforced. Suppose, when “About A Boy” should enter the public domain, there are no non-DRM’d editions available.

Unless I’ve misunderstood the purpose of Copyright Deposit Libraries (CDL), publishers who want to use DRM should therefore be required to lodge a usable, non-DRM’d version of the content with a CDL. This copy should be suitable for (automatic?) release to the public domain as soon as the Copyright term is ended.

By: Simon Gibbs

Simon Gibbs — Sun, 04 Dec 2005 23:07:10 +0000

Martin, in another thread said “Copyright libraries should be forbidden from retaining DRM�d material. To do otherwise would legitimise DRM, and we all think that�s bad, right?”

I agree there should be a ban but not with reasons for a ban. Its about ensuring that the law is followed and that copyright libraries do their job, which is to ensure that the monopoly of reproduction on content does not mean that the content is lost.

If a DRM solution is in place, then there is a risk that the material will not be accessible in future, e.g. if the DRM scheme is “upgraded” or the firm running its tracking servers goes bust.