IPtelligentsia Podcast: Fair Use Hearings

Yesterday, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held hearings on Digital Content and Enabling Technology: Satisfying the 21st Century Consumer.
Today’s podcast discusses the content of those hearings: IPtelligentsia Podcast: House Fair Use Hearings (29:13 MP3)
I apologize in advance for the poor quality– technical problems (a bad microphone cable, I think) made it difficult to record, and as a result the presentation is less polished than usual. But this is the blogosphere, where timeliness reigns supreme.

One Comment

  1. I know your intention was to discuss the question in the next podcast, but I’m going to offer my opinion right now 😉
    As to whether it’s easier to implement DRM in law or in technology, the answer depends on what the intention of the DRM is.
    If the DRM is intended solely to prevent unfair use while specifically avoiding infringing upon fair use rights, then DRM is most easily implemented in law.
    If, on the other hand, the DRM is intended not only to prevent unfair use, but to monitor, control, and restrict fair use (including the fair use of merely viewing legally-purchased content), then DRM is more easily implemented in technology.
    As for whether both avenues should be utilized to prevent unfair use, the question is more complicated than yes or no. When a technological DRM system restricts only unfair use but not fair use, the law can be used to bolster the ability of technology to prevent unfair use. But we’ve seen from the myriad examples presented by the content industry that technological DRM never stops at unfair use, and so the law, if it is truly fair, must (at least partially) take the contrary position of opposing the implementation of overly-restrictive technological DRM systems. (At the same time, the law can still oppose the unfair use of copyrighted materials.)

Comments are closed.