Monday, April 11, 2005

Could the DMCA Exemption for Libraries Lead the Way through the DRM Maze?. Whenever I post anything about Apple, I’m guaranteed to get comments from Apple fans, and last week was no exception. However, Ben Karel posted some very thoughtful commentary that suggests a most interesting possibility. In my original post, I pointed to an effort to get Apple to try and help libraries circulate audio ebooks to patrons with iPods and to play nicely with others in the industry. In the comments to that post, Ben and I differed on who is to blame for the current situation, but his last comment really has my mind going. “There are relatively cheap technological solutions to this particular (technological) problem. By ‘relatively’ cheap I mean less than two thousand dollars for the hardware and software infrastructure. Considering that it would probably double the number of patrons able to listen to library ebooks on their player of choice for a one-time fee amounting to a fifth of the price of a single year's subscription, said technological solutions would be a no-brainer were it not for the DMCA's prohibitions upon any and all forms of DRM circumvention. Hmm. But wait! According to http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00001201----000-.html , Provision (a)(1)(B) states that the ban on circumvention of copyright-protecting technological measures does not apply to users who are ‘adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title [...]’. I'm not entirely sure, but I think the next two subparagraphs essentially say that only the Librarian of Congress has the authority to [pre!?-]determine when the exemption in rule (B) applies. So perhaps the route of least resistance is to forget about Apple entirely and instead convince the Librarian of Congress that the DMCA should count 'audiobooks in public libraries' as a class of copyrighted works deserving of an exemption to aid in noninfringing use by the majority of library patrons. Also something to consider: the DMCA seems to focus on technologies that short-circuit the process of gaining access to a protected work. Little seems to be said about one may do with that work after having gained access. Oh. Stupid me. The DMCA already has a built-in exemption for libraries and other such nonprofit entities, which means it looks like you're free to convert those problematic encrypted WMA files into MP3 so that the majority of your patrons will be able to access and play said files in a noninfringing manner. No doubt a real lawyer ought to examine this, but... Problem solved?” In the immortal words of Neo, whoa! It's an interesting idea. So now, I’m wondering if we could really do this. After all, there’s a difference between “letter-of-the-law-right-with-a-true-loophole” and “letter-of-the-law-right, go-for-it but get-your-butt-sued-out-of-existence-and-the-loophole-closed-forever.” Which, of course, is exactly what legislation like the DMCA is designed to do – stop you from even thinking about trying anything for which you could even remotely, possibly be sued for actually doing. So now I’m in a pinch. Illinois LSTA grants are due in June, and this year there’s finally a "dream big" one that my organization could apply for. I’ve already pitched a half dozen ideas, two of which we’re probably going to submit and one of which a member library is going to submit. But what if we submitted a grant to actually do what Ben proposes? What would the implications be? Is it realistic? Would we still exist in a year or would the legal bills kill us? Would it ultimately open up circulation of digital files in libraries or end it forever? I'm not a fan of DRM, but I also don't want to see libraries used for illegal copying (a whole other debate). Is there an open source type of DRM for these files? I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV, so I'd be interested to hear reactions from others on this. [The Shifted Librarian] 8:53:36 PM    comment []

Brian points at info on the APA Logic Education Session. Richard Zach writes I’ve put up materials from the panel discussion on Logic in Philosophy Graduate Training at the ASL Spring Meeting, which featured Michael Glanzberg, Ted Sider, and Brian Weatherson, and which Andy Arana and I organized. The materials include slides for Michael’s and my talks, notes for Ted’s talk, and Andy’s paper, as well as MP3’s of the talks. I didn’t record Andy’s, since he read his paper and it’s available online, and I cut out the discussion since most of it was inaudible. I’ve closed off comments here so people who want to leave comments can do so over at Richard’s. [Thoughts Arguments and Rants] 6:59:16 PM    comment []

Reviving a Magazine With Ballast of a Web Site First. Radar magazine, which folded two years ago and is being revived in May, is taking the unusual step of starting a Web site before publishing the magazine. By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE. [NYT > Technology] 7:34:15 AM    comment []

interview. There's an interview with me about our department on the university website. So in the photo I don't tilt my head, I tilt my body. I wonder what that body language means. [jill/txt] 7:29:06 AM    comment []

A Story that Takes Resources ($$$) to Report. NY Times: Stores Say Wild Salmon, but Tests Say Farm Bred. Tests performed for The New York Times in March on salmon sold as wild by eight New York City stores, going for as much as $29 a pound, showed that the fish at six of the eight were farm raised. Farmed salmon, available year round, sells for $5 to $12 a pound in the city. What the newspaper has done here is an example of excellent consumer reporting -- a piece that took serious resources, as in money and a willingness to take what undoubtedly will be some serious heat from the markets named here, to accomplish. It's difficult to imagine how citizen-journalists could pull off the same story in such a credible way. This is one more reason why I don't want to see Big Journalism disappear. It's too important. [Dan Gillmor on Grassroots Journalism, Etc.] 7:29:01 AM    comment []

Databases rev up. There's nothing like the human brain. No nonbiological entity can process massive amounts of different types of data, integrate the data, analyze it, and respond to it in a split second. Yet to hear the major database vendors tell it, they're coming close. [InfoWorld: Top News] 7:26:57 AM    comment []