piracy “the case of internet piracy” com 327 april 1, 2014

of 22/22
PIRACY “The Case of Internet Piracy” COM 327 April 1, 2014

Post on 24-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents

1 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Slide 1
  • PIRACY The Case of Internet Piracy COM 327 April 1, 2014
  • Slide 2
  • QUIZ!!
  • Slide 3
  • 1. Writing on the early pirates of the film industry, Lessig notes that they moved to _____________ to escape the reach of Thomas Edisons legal monopoly on film production. a) Hong Kong b) Toronto c) California d) online
  • Slide 4
  • 2. What service does Lessig compare to early cable TV companies? Cable companies were thus _______izing broadcasters content, but more egregiously than anything _______ ever did ____ never charged for the content it enabled others to give away. a) Napster b) Facebook c) Google d) Netflix
  • Slide 5
  • 3. We could, for example, remind ourselves that for the first one hundred years of the American Republic, America did not honor _________ a) the bro code b) the founding fathers c) foreign copyrights d) international ocean law
  • Slide 6
  • 4. What new (at the time of his writing) technology does Lessig focus on in the latter half of Chapter 5? a) podcasting b) peer-to-peer file sharing c) music streaming d) Tinder
  • Slide 7
  • BONUS Lessig, assessing the potential negative effects of file- sharing on the music industry, writes: If every download were a lost saleif every use of Kazaa rob[bed] the author of [his] profitthen the industry would have suffered a _____ percent drop in sales last year, not a 7 percent drop a) 8 b) 100 c) 1 million d) 0
  • Slide 8
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg PLAN 1.Group presentation 2.Anti-piracy tools: DRM & net non-neutrality 3.A look at Aaron Swartz and his piracy
  • Slide 9
  • Anti-piracy tools #1 Digital Rights Management (DRM): digital locks to restrict unauthorized use of hardware & software enforced by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA) of 1998 Examples?
  • Slide 10
  • Bought an ebook from Amazon but can't read it on your ebook reader of choice? That's DRM. Bought a DVD or Blu-Ray but can't copy the video onto your portable media player? That's DRM. Bought a video-game but can't play it today because the manufacturer's "authentication servers" are off-line? That's DRM. Bought a smart-phone but can't use the applications or the service provider you want on it? That's DRM. (https://www.eff.org/issues/drm)
  • Slide 11
  • Proponents of digital locks argue that they are necessary to prevent intellectual property from being stolen, just as physical locks are needed to prevent personal property from being stolen. "It's like you have a store, you want to be able to lock your door at night," says Danielle Parr, executive director of the Entertainment Software Association of Canada (CBC.ca, The pros, cons, and future of DRM, August 7, 2009) Whats the problem with this analogy?
  • Slide 12
  • Significantly, in 2000, a US appeals court found (in Universal City Studios, Inc v Reimerdes) that breaking DRM was illegal, even if you were trying to do something that would otherwise be legal. In other words, if your ebook has a restriction that stops you reading it on Wednesdays, you can't break that restriction, even if it would be otherwise legal to read the book on Wednesdays. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2014/feb/05/digital-rights-management Under the DMCA, it is illegal to circumvent DRM regardless of how restrictive DRM is
  • Slide 13
  • Anti-piracy tools #2 Net non-neutrality Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle. The idea is that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally. This allows the network to carry every form of information and support every kind of application. (Tim Wu, Columbia law prof, 2008) In practice: Internet Service Providers cant restrict access to stuff they dont want you to see / use / download
  • Slide 14
  • http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2007/10/19/AR200 7101900842.html 2007 2014 http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/14/technology/fcc-net- neutrality/
  • Slide 15
  • Implications -Service providers can set up tiered access to particular content ($4.99 extra for Premium YouTube; $19.99 extra for blazing fast online gaming! $2.99 extra for unbroken Netflix!) -Service providers can choke access to content that their competitors sponsor -Service providers can choke access to content that they dont like (e.g. IP addresses that are critical of them, that offer alternative services, etc) -Comcast / Time Warner merger we will have less choice Marx: -Capitalism loves monopolies, not competition -Capitalism loves to commodify things that were originally common good
  • Slide 16
  • Possibilities? Support the argument that the Internet (like the phone) is a public utility Remember that the Internet began as, and still is, a publicly-funded infrastructure
  • Slide 17
  • Aaron Swartz: Internet Pirate 1986-2012 As a teenager, helped develop the technology behind: Reddit RSS Creative Commons (with Lawrence Lessig)
  • Slide 18
  • Arrested January 6, 2011, for downloading 4.8 million JSTOR articles from MIT servers JSTOR (Journal Storage): One of the leading subscription-based storage houses for scientific publications Compiles (publicly-funded) research and makes it available to university libraries for an annual subscription fee
  • Slide 19
  • Initially charged with breaking & entering, grand larceny & unauthorized access to a computer network State charges dropped in March 2012 Federal charges for computer fraud and accessing a protected computer introduced in September 2012 Max. 50 years in prison & $1 million in fines JSTOR asked federal prosecutors to drop the case (they didnt) Swartz hung himself on January 11, 2013
  • Slide 20
  • Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) Highlights of the CFAA (among other things): Formed in 1984 to combat malicious hacking (harm to economic and/or political interests) Bans unauthorized access to protected computers Includes penalties for violations of Terms of Service when Swartz tried to download thousands of academic articles, he did so as an authorized guest user of the M.I.T. network. He didnt actually hack or break into the network; he violated the terms of service for guests by downloading too much stuff Tim Wu, New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/03/fixing-the-worst-law-in- technology-aaron-swartz-and-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act.html
  • Slide 21
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAcEzhQ7oqA WarGames (released in 1983): No fewer than six different anti-hacking bills were introduced that year, and Congress convened its first hearings as soon as politicians returned from their summer recess. Rep. Dan Glickman, a Kansas Democrat, opened the proceedings by saying: "We're gonna show about four minutes from the movie 'WarGames,' which I think outlines the problem fairly clearly." A House committee report solemnly intoned: "'WarGames' showed a realistic representation of the automatic dialing and access capabilities of the personal computer. http://www.cnet.com/news/from-wargames-to-aaron-swartz-how-u-s-anti-hacking-law-went- astray/
  • Slide 22
  • Swartzs Open Access Manifesto (2008) Those with access to these resources students, librarians, scientists you have been given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world is locked out. But you need not indeed, morally, you cannot keep this privilege for yourselves. You have a duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords with colleagues, filling download requests for friends.... But all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It's called stealing or piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were the moral equivalent of plundering a ship and murdering its crew. But sharing isn't immoral it's a moral imperative. Only those blinded by greed would refuse to let a friend make a copy. http://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccess Manifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt