Point 3: How should copyright deposit libraries deal with DRM issues?
Does DRM prevent copyright deposit libraries doing their job? What support should they get from companies using DRM?
The Open Rights Group exists to preserve and promote your rights in the digital age. Find out more.
The Open Rights Group is funded by hundreds of individuals who care about their rights in the digital age. Join them today
Click to find out how each of these issues affects you:
A donation is included in the purchase price of every item sold, and you get some quality goods.
Wed, Oct 15 - Sat, Oct 18 — FIL @ Parque das Nações, Lisboa, Estremadura 1000 PT
Thu, Oct 16 2:00 PM - 4:00 PM — Cafe Zest (top floor of House of Fraser) @ Victoria Street, London, England UK
Sat, Oct 18 10:00 AM - 5:00 PM — RSA, The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce @ 8 John Adam Street WC2N 6EZ, London, England UK
Sun, Oct 19 12:00 PM - 4:00 PM — Marbella Café @ Sunshine Studios, 52–54 Newton Street, Manchester, England M1 1ED UK
Thu, Oct 23 - Sun, Oct 26 — Olympia Conference Centre @ Kensington, London, England UK
For news, events and other information, please join the low-volume ORG Announcements list.
To talk about digital rights issues with other ORG supporters, please join the ORG Discussion list.
December 4th, 2005 at 11:07 pm
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.
December 5th, 2005 at 12:43 pm
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.
December 19th, 2005 at 12:12 pm
Whilst you can continue discussing this post, any comments posted after this one will not be included in the ORG public consultation paper.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:38 pm
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.