interesting-people message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: [IP] more on Anti-Piracy Patents for Cell Phones Pooled

  • From: David Farber <dave@farber.net>
  • To: Ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>
  • Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:44:58 -0500

------ Forwarded Message
From: Bob Frankston <Bob2-0406@bobf.frankston.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:30:22 -0500
To: <dave@farber.net>, 'Ip' <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Cc: 'Dewayne Hendricks' <dewayne@dandin.com>
Subject: RE: [IP] Anti-Piracy Patents for Cell Phones Pooled

This seems like "son of the broadcast bit".

Let's remember, this is a "pro piracy" conspiracy -- the goal is pirate
knowledge away from the commons.

What's different between licensing an image format or protocol and the
broadcast bit? Basically those who want to maintain control have taken
information out of the commons and pirated it away for their own purposes.

I'm not against people being compensated for their efforts -- the problem
comes when the means prevent even fair use.

On a related topic -- today's Boston Globe has a story on the problems of
airing the "Eyes on the Prize" Civil Rights documentary because of the
complex rights (irony anyone?) issues. The right-to-air expired in 1993 and
a DVD release would require relicensing.

I guess there is a good side -- if you walk down the street whistling "Happy
Birthday" you may be protected from surveillance. At least until someone
stops you on the street and demands you pay the licensing fee for the
whistling rights. Are they separate from the singing rights?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com] On Behalf Of
David Farber
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 13:43
To: Ip
Subject: [IP] Anti-Piracy Patents for Cell Phones Pooled


------ Forwarded Message
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@warpspeed.com>
Reply-To: <dewayne@warpspeed.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:07:18 -0800
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net@warpspeed.com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Anti-Piracy Patents for Cell Phones Pooled

Anti-Piracy Patents for Cell Phones Pooled
Thu Jan 6, 2005 12:22 AM ET
<http://olympics.reuters.com/audi/newsArticle.jhtml?
type=technologyNews&storyID=7250310>

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A film and music technology firm
said on Thursday it had grouped together all the
patents needed to protect digital film and music on
mobile phones against piracy, the first time digital
rights have been pooled.

MPEG LA, which already offers all essential patents
for the international digital video compression
standard known as MPEG-2, said five companies had
pooled essential anti-piracy patents for a standard
set by the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA), an organization
of handset makers and mobile telecoms operators.

Mobile phone makers which implement the technology
into their handsets can protect songs, software and
other digital content against forwarding, or they can
allow consumers to use or copy the material under
certain conditions.

The standard is expected to promote the availability
of digital content for mobile phones. Music, film and
software companies have been reluctant to make their
catalogs available for mobile phone consumption.

The pooling of the anti-piracy and content control
technology will make it easier for handset makers and
mobile operators to start using the technology,
because they can buy the rights to all essential
patents in one place, MPEG LA said.

"They will know what the price is, so there is no
uncertainty when they make their business plans," said
MPEG LA's Vice President for Licensing, Larry Horn.

Handset makers will pay $1 to include OMA's Digital
Rights Management (DRM) 1.0 standard into a mobile
phone. Content owners which want to protect their
material with OMA DRM, will pay royalties representing
one percent of the consumer selling price of their
service.

The five companies are InterTrust and ContentGuard,
two very small but powerful DRM companies, plus
consumer electronics giants Sony Corp and Matsushita
Electric Industrial Co Ltd from Japan, and Dutch
Philips Electronics.

The pooling should also make clear that everyone who
uses OMA's DRM needs to pay royalties. ContentGuard
told Reuters in October that OMA had not informed its
members properly and that many handset makers thought
the anti-piracy standard was free.

[snip]


Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>


------ End of Forwarded Message


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as BobIP@Bobf.Frankston.com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


------ End of Forwarded Message


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people@lists.elistx.com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

</form>

Powered by eList eXpress LLC