Digital Rights Management 1

R UN N I N G H EAD : D I G I T AL RI G H T S M AN AG EM E N T

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT: AN OVERVIEW OF

TECHNOLOGY, RIGHTS, AND CONSEQUENCES ON
OPEN ACCESS

H EI D I E. H AN S EN

WA Y N E S T AT E UN I V ER S I T Y

N EA V I LL / LI S 83 20

SE PT EM B ER 1 1, 200 7
 Digital Rights Management 2

ABSTRACT
Digital Rights Management is a technology used to limit how a user can interact with certain

digital works. Copyright holders have supported Digital Rights Management technologies to protect

their works from widespread piracy on the internet and peer-to-peer networks. Several methods of

implementing rights management will be discussed, as well as the problems associated with Digital

Rights Management technologies by opponents. Open access movements and libraries have

approached rights management cautiously. Recent updates to copyright law as it applies to Digital

Rights Management have undermined other exclusive rights and limited how people can interact

with digital information. Groups have come out both in favor and against Digital Rights

Management; some have suggested improvements to Digital Rights Management that would ensure

fair uses and user privacy.

 Digital Rights Management 3

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT: AN OVERVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY,

RIGHTS, AND CONSEQUENCES ON OPEN ACCESS
It is apparent to many people that the internet has been a revolutionary tool, opening up the

floodgates of discovery and knowledge in our society. As connection speeds increase and devices

for access are becoming smaller and more portable, we are also discovering that people want to take

their media everywhere; music, books, even television have become pocket sized and ready for

people on the move. It is easy to perceive how this is an exciting time for a consumer, but for

publishers and creators of content it is extremely frightening.

Before the internet explosion and recent advances in technology, many content creators did

not need to worry about widespread copying and piracy of their intellectual property. In the early

days of computing, systems were bulky, files were large, and networks were slow. Now that

computers are cheaper, more accessible, and internet connections are faster than ever, content

owners have much to worry about. Perfect copies of many works can be transmitted over internet

networks; possibly bypassing any copyright protections that content holders were always afforded.

As we are discovering, however, technologies not only open the doors to access but they can also

easily close them.

Imagine a music fan that purchases music from an online music store but discovers the

tracks cannot be copied to their computer or burned to a CD. Take a library patron who is excited

about a new service to listen to audio books but then is disappointed to find out they cannot

participate with their new iPod music device. Finally, picture a student who discovers an e-book to

aid in their school research, only to realize that they are not allowed to print the pages from the

book to read offline. Each one of these situations has something in common; they use a technology

called Digital Rights Management (DRM) to limit how a user can interact with the content presented
 Digital Rights Management 4

to them. DRM has been a blessing for some people and a curse for many others and has re-ignited

the debate on copyright, intellectual property, fair use, and open access for everybody involved.

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT

According to Michael Godwin, DRM “is a collective name for technologies that prevent you

from using a copyrighted digital work beyond the degree to which the copyright owner (or a

publisher who may not actually hold a copyright) wishes to allow you to use it.” (2006, p. 1) DRM is

simply a group of technologies that either controls what can be done with content, or how it can be

accessed. “Like copyright, DRM systems are complex, with many variations.” (Bailey, 2006, p. 120)

Despite the variations, there are two main types of DRM, one is digital watermarking (also known as

fingerprinting) and the other is encryption. Sometimes these technologies work by themselves to limit

access, other times they can be used in conjunction with specialized software and devices. (Bailey,

2006)

The encryption method of protecting content is currently the most popular solution for

content providers. This method of DRM scrambles the protected content only to allow it to be

accessed by the correct key. In most cases the key is in the form of a special device that is only

authorized to access the content. “This, for example, is how DVD movies work – their content is

scrambled so that only DVD players that have the right keys can decode the content so that

someone can watch the DVD movie.” (Godwin, 2006, p. 10) A less common approach to DRM is

often known as digital watermarking, fingerprinting, or labeling. The many varieties of

watermarking technologies all function by embedding information, usually in the form of metadata,

to identify the content and associated rights. There are a few distinguishing characteristics of digital

watermarks that include; being undetectable, survives emigration or conversion, large capacity for

metadata, security, and efficiency. (Rosenblatt, Trippe, & Mooney, 2002)

 Digital Rights Management 5

It is likely that most people have interacted with DRM in some way or another, often

without realizing it. Users of the popular music service, iTunes, make use of DRM every time they

purchase a track from the online store. Apple’s iTunes Music Store uses a technology called

FairPlay to restrict a variety of actions, including how many times a track can be burned to a CD, or

how many computers are authorized to play the music. Additionally, iTunes purchased tracks are

encoded in a special format (known as AAC or Advanced Audio Coding) that further limits the

music to only play on iPod music devices. Because the AAC format is specific only to Apple’s

technology, any other devices may be off limits for iTunes purchased music. (FairPlay, n.d.; AAC,

n.d.) Another popular software company, Adboe, has integrated rights management in its PDF (or

Portable Document Format). Adobe Acrobat allows users to protect their own files with password

protection, or restrict the document from being printed by another individual. In the application of

Adobe’s format, it is a reminder that, “rights can be given as well as taken away through

technological means.” (Coyle, 2006, p. 327)

In addition to controlling content using rights management technologies, many stakeholders

have discovered that a closer look at business models, especially online, can greately affect how

consumers are interacting with the content. The best case study, so far, for combining DRM with

business models to reduce piracy efforts is in the music industry. Along with implementing DRM in

its devices and music software, Apple iTunes has also launched a new business model for purchasing

music online. For many years the music industry enticed consumers by packaging music in the form

of albums or CDs. This standard marketing technique worked well before the ability to unpackage

content and transmit individual files over networks resulting often in peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing.

While much of p2p resulted in illegal sharing of copyrighted content, those companies paying

attention realized that the old business model was not attractive to consumers. Many consumers

only wanted one or two songs from an album, and it turns out that they were even willing to pay for
 Digital Rights Management 6

them. iTunes became one of the first companies to implement a business model that would allow

consumers to purchase single tracks for 99¢ instead of purchasing an entire CD.

iTunes is a proven success, however Apple did not stop with offering single track downloads

either. The business model also works for the company because they opened up the music catalogs

to offer their customers any type of music they could possibly want. The music catalog of iTunes is

an example of what Chris Anderson (2004) has coined as The Long Tail, or the ‘less of more’ concept.

Anderson explains the Long Tail using another popular online music service, Rhapsody, as an

example:

Chart Rhapsody's monthly statistics and you get a "power law" demand curve
that looks much like any record store's, with huge appeal for the top tracks,
tailing off quickly for less popular ones. But a really interesting thing happens
once you dig below the top 40,000 tracks, which is about the amount of the fluid
inventory (the albums carried that will eventually be sold) of the average real-
world record store. Here, the Wal-Marts of the world go to zero - either they
don't carry any more CDs, or the few potential local takers for such fringy fare
never find it or never even enter the store.

The Rhapsody demand, however, keeps going. Not only is every one of
Rhapsody's top 100,000 tracks streamed at least once each month, the same is
true for its top 200,000, top 300,000, and top 400,000. As fast as Rhapsody adds
tracks to its library, those songs find an audience, even if it's just a few people a
month, somewhere in the country.

This is the Long Tail. (p. 2)

What iTunes, and now a few other online music distributors have been able to figure out is

the ‘perfect storm’ of marketing music online. The convergence of (1) DRM to satisfy the record

companies and content owners, (2) a catalog of music that pleases even the most pickiest of music
 Digital Rights Management 7

lovers, and (3) a pricing model that satisfies consumers enough not to pirate music tracks through

p2p. Unfortunately for the record companies and still many content owners, it has been the high

tech computer industry to innovate in this area. Even after evidence that a new business model for

online music distribution works, many stakeholders will not put their content online due to fears of

piracy.

Few entertainment companies have moved to take advantage of the

opportunities afforded by digital distribution because they believe that they must
first deal with the problem of piracy. As Bonnie Jacobson, the Motion Picture
Association of America's Vice President of Trade and Federal Affairs testified
before the House Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection, "Internet piracy is the single biggest impediment to digital
trade today." (Van Tassel, 2006, p. 13)

Content owners and publishers, such as the Motion Picture Association of American

(MPAA) and Recording Industry Assocation of America (RIAA) have been the most vocal

opponents of p2p and online music distribution while being the most vocal proponents of DRM

technologies. While it is understandable that these groups want to protect their commercial interests

against unauthorized uses, the tactics of these organizations have been displeasing to most

consumers. A rash of lawsuits against ordinary citizens for innocuous music downloading through

p2p, and automatically categorizing their customer base as pirates has made these organizations

unpopular. Joan Van Tassel tries to compare the DRM transaction to a movie box office. While the

box office is designed to be appealing, brightly lit, and even inviting, DRM technologies have not

reached such a significance. “Little attention has been paid to their attractiveness; indeed, they

appear to be created in a manner to repel consumers.” (Van Tassel, 2006, p. 4)

 Digital Rights Management 8

Many individuals and groups have come out against DRM, or at least against rights

management that is too restrictive. These individuals all cite that locking content behind the

protective walls of rights management leaves no room for other legal uses of content. Copyright law

does afford content creators limited protection of their creative works for a specified time, however

it also allows for other fair uses. Speaking specifically on how copyright can negatively affect the

work of libraries and archives, Michael Godwin exposes six examples of how DRM can ‘overstep

rights’: rights management can prevent access beyond copyright terms, it can limit the ability to

preserve or archive works, it can inhibit the creation of new or derivitative works, it can prevent or

make historiography difficult; DRM may prohibit fair uses of copyrighted works, and it can hinder

the use of materials in learning environments. (Godwin, 2006) DRM proponents believe that

copyright law gives them the authority to subject restrictive controls to content, alternatively,

opponets to DRM use the same laws as justification against restrictive rights management.

COPYRIGHT LAW & INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

The framers of the United States Constitution did believe that creative works of individuals

should be protected, but they also believed in the free expression of ideas. U.S. copyright law itself

was copied from English law, and according to Lawrence Lessig, the Founding Fathers made very

deliberate and specific improvements to the English law.

Our constitution makes the purpose of “creative property” rights clear; its
express limitations reinforce the English aim to avoid overly powerful
publishers.

The power to establish “creative property” rights is granted to Congress in a way

that, for our Constitution, at least, is very odd. Article I, section 8, clause 8 of
our Constitution states that:
 Digital Rights Management 9

Congress has the power to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by
securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries.

We can call this the “Progress Clause,” for notice what this clause does not say.
It does not say Congress has the power to grant “creative property rights.” It
says that Congress has the power to promote progress. The grant of power is its
purpose, and its purpose is a public one, not the purpose of enriching
publishers, nor even primarily the purpose of rewarding authors. (Lessig, 2004,
pp. 130-131)

The U.S. copyright law continues to define term limits for copyright protections. The

framers also built in structures, checks, and balances to ensure that no one entity could have total

control over creative works, also known as intellectual property. Once copyright term limits are

exhausted then content enters the public domain where it becomes free for anybody to use without

restrictions. The law also affords certain exceptions to exclusive rights of copy protected works

known as fair use rights.

Given what the Founding Fathers intended for copyright law, it was no accident that fair

use, and other exclusive rights were built into the law. The fair use rights have been an important

tool in the advancement of research initiatives, education, and the free expression of ideas. Under

current U.S. copyright law, fair use allows anyone to use or reproduce copies of copyrighted content

for the purpose of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and classroom use, scholarship, or

research. (17 U.S.C. § 107) Fair use rights have been tested many times due to technological

advances, and so far have been upheld. Well before piracy issues on the internet were even a

concern, the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) had many in the movie industry clamoring to

stop the existence of VCR and home recording technology. The indstury felt stronly that VCRs

enabled consumers to violate copyright and went to court to sue the creator, Sony Corporation of

America. “The case went to the Supreme Court, which decided that a company could not be held
 Digital Rights Management 10

liable for maketing a technology that some customers may use to infringe copyright.” (Van Tassel,

2006, p. 36) The VCR technology opened the door to succesive recording and storage technologies,

including CD and DVD burners, personal computers, and personal music devices. The AHRA also

“recognized that consumers could exercise personal use of the media they paid for.” (Van Tassel,

2006, p. 36)

However, now with the advent of DRM technologies, many in favor of protecting fair use

rights believe that they are in threat. Carrie Russell (2003), speaking on behalf of the American

Library Association believes that fair use is under attack by DRM:

In the digital realm, DRM technologies are changing the ways in which
information is accessed and experienced, and they are undermining fair use. If
content providers’ interests are allowed, through DRM, to use technology to
“define” how patrons can access and use information, a DRM-enforced licensing
situtation will not only replace copyright and its user exemptions like fair use but
will affect the basic ways to which we interaction with information. (p. 32)

Unfortunately there are many content owners and publishers fighting for DRM exactly

because it would minimize the need for fair use. Representatives of these industries feel that given

the advancements in new technologies and the ability to license materials, fair use is no longer

effective and has outlived its time. “They argue that modern technology has minimized the

transaction costs of licensing works and enabled digital rights management, so there is no longer a

defense for using a work without the explicit permission of the copyright owner”. (Baksik, 2006, p.

410; Subcommittee on Commerce, 2005) Regardless, fair use rights still exist and DRM is used as a

tactic to lock users out of cotent that they are legally allowed to have access, if used under these

guidelines.
 Digital Rights Management 11

Fair use is generally upheld but certain provisions in the most recent update to copyright law

included in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998 have given stakeholders leverage

in abolishing certain rights. The DMCA is unpopular with many in the science, education, and

library communities. The most controversial section of the DMCA are the anti-circumvention

measures provided in the act. Section 1201 of the the U.S. code on copyright law states that “no

person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to” a work that is

protected by copyright. (17 U.S.C. § 1201) If the law stopped there this might not have been a

problem for opponents of the DMCA, however it does not:

In addition, section 1201 prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or importation

of a “technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof” that is
primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological
measure. In other words, not only is “circumvention” unlawful, but making and
distributing sofware or other means for circumeventing controls are also illegal.
(Crews, 2006, p. 94)

This loophole in the law has made it essentially impossible for cricumvention to be acceptable for

fair use, or even for works protected by DRM that are in the public domain. Librarians have been

vocal opponents to the anti-circumvention measures of the DMCA because they face many

collection development and archiving problems when considering DRM protected works.

For example, under DMCA, libraries have the right to circumvent DRM for a
work in order to evaluate whether they want to purchase it. However, they
cannot do so without the software tools to crack the work’s DRM protection.
But the distribution of those tools is illuegal under DMCA, and local
development of such tools is likely to be prohibitevely complex and expensive.
(Bailey, 2006, p. 125)
 Digital Rights Management 12

DRM does not only affect the library’s ability to preserve and purchase materials, technology

advancements in this area has also affected many patron services. Rights management solutions put

patron privacy at risk as well as foster library reliances on vendor specfic solutions, which may

hinder open access to information.

LIBRARIES & OPEN ACCESS

Librarians have traditionally been the greatest defenders of open access to information in

this country, although not the only group to come out in support of open access. Peter Suber,

currently at Earlham College has an excellent overview of what open access (OA) is and what it is

not. Open access is usually defined as “free online access to scientific and scholarly research

literature.” (Suber, Open-Access Timeline, 2007) Articles that are considered open access are

normally presented free of charge and without copyright restrictions and comparable with peer-to-

peer articles. Suber also points out that even though OA articles are free of charge they are not free

to publish, and usually focus on research conducted using taxpayer funding. (Suber, Open Access

Overview, 2006) Open access is completely voluntary and copyright holders are required to consent

to having their work available for printing, copying, reproduction, and sharing.

While open access seems similar to automatically entering works into the public domain, it is

not quite the same. Some authors apply special stipulations to open access works like prohibiting

commercial use or disallowing distribution of “mangled or misattributed copies.” (Suber, Open

Access Overview, 2006) In this country, works currently enter the public domain after the life of

the author plus seventy years. These copyright terms have increased drastically since its inception in

1790; which was one fourteen year term that could be followed by a renewal of another fourteen

year term. (Bailey, 2006) In 1962, copyright law started to change rapidly:
 Digital Rights Management 13

Eleven times in the last forty years, Congress has extended the terms of existing
copyrights; twice in those forty years, Congress extended the term of future
copyrights. Initially, the extension of existing copyright were short, a mere one
to two years. And in 1998, in the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act,
Congress extended the term of existing and future copyrights by twenty years.
(Lessig, 2004, p. 134)

What this has meant is that in “the twenty years after the Sonny Bono Act, while one million patens

will pass into the public domain, zero copyrights will pass into the public domain by virtue of the

expiration of a copyright term.” (Lessig, 2004, p. 124) This has not been good news for libraries

and archives; many depend on these public domain works to enhance their physical and digital

collections. Considering the limitations of the DMCA already mentioned, once many DRM

protected works enter the public domain, it may even be impossible for libraries to access these.

Another worry of libraries is how digital, DRM protected works may be handled once

acquired by the repositories. Digital works are not the same as physical works, and the reason many

libraries have been able to operate is the ‘Right of First Sale’ or ‘First Sale Doctrine’ afforded in title

17, section 109 of the copyright law. This right makes it legal to sell, loan, rent, or dispose of any

purchased copy of a copyrighted work. (17 U.S.C. § 109)

When intellectual works were in paper (or other tanngible forms), they could
only be controlled at the object-ownership or object-access levels ( library
controlling the circulation of a copy of a book is an exmaple of the second case).

Physical posession of a work, such as a book, meant that the user had full use of
it (i.e., the user could read the entire book and photocpy pages from it). When
works are in digital form and are protected by some types of DRM, this may no
longer be true. For example, a user may only be able to view a single chapter
 Digital Rights Management 14

from a DRM-protected e-book and may not be able to print it. (Bailey, 2006, p.
116)

Because of the cost of implementing digital collections and the limitations caused by copyright,

many libraries have turned to vendor solutions to continue to give their patrons a quality of

information access that they are no longer to provide on their own.

Now that many works are born digital or more easily available in digital environments, many

libraries have come to depend on their relationship with vendors that supply access to these

materials. There is no doubt that access to content via these types of solutions are beneficial to

libraries, many of the titles offered to libraries in subscription databases may have been out of reach

to certain libraries before today. However, because of the nature of digital materials, the fuzziness

of ‘first sale’ rights in the digital environment, and the fact that institutions do not actually own the

content they are providing through vendors, libraries have lost control of their collections and to

providing open access to information to its patrons. Because much of the content provided by

vendors is enveloped in DRM technologies, libraries have a growing list of concerns about the

quality and privacy of the access they are providing. Among their concerns are hardware and

software dependencies, compatibility, security, fair use, privacy of their patrons, preservation,

licensing, unified access, support, training, and collection development. (Bailey, 2006) Vendor

solutions offered to libraries are more commonly presented through subscription journal databases,

but many are offering their patrons e-books, digital audio books, and even movies available for

download. These services are not always without headache to patrons, most are only offered on

certain platforms or using specific devices or software, and many are available to libraries at a

growing cost.
 Digital Rights Management 15

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT OUTLOOK

The development of copyright law in this country has been debated and developed by

offering a balance of control and access. As with any good debate, there are two sides, those for and

those against. In the case of Digital Rights Management, those that are in favor would like tighter

controls of content and those against are more interested in looser controls to allow for fair uses.

Programmers and designers of DRM technology are in favor of tighter controls because their

business depends on the use of these technologies. Creators of content want to benefit from their

intellectual property and would not like to see their works pirated, copied, or sold without their

permission. The most vocal proponents of DRM are the publishers of content. This last group has

the most to lose to piracy and they have the most to gain monetarily.

For as many proponents there are to DRM there are an equal amount of vocal opponents.

The reason for opposing DRM include the belief that it hinders free speech, strengthens the ‘digital

divide’, and keeps material out of open access repositories. Several groups have come forward in the

anti-DRM debate, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Free Culture movement,

created after the publication of Lawrence Lessig’s book by the same name. Like many content

publishers and media companies, these groups are constantly lobbying their views and involving

themselves in copyright debates in the government. Many are trying to reverse what they feel are

harmful provisions to copyright law, like the DMCA.

Digital Rights Management does not have a great reputation with most consumers, and it

will be difficult to prove the necessity to those that believe that the copyright balance has been

turned upside down. Most will agree that DRM solutions do not have to be bad solutions, that is

unless the technologies are able to be implemented in a way that protects the balance of copyright
 Digital Rights Management 16

and free expression of ideas. Carrie Russell describes what a “Good DRM” system would look like

if it could exist:

A “good DRM” system, obviously, would allow fair uses. Instead of having a
system skewed in support of the content community’s interests, good DRM
would also provide rights to users as well as copyright holders

Libraries should be able to lend digital works. “First sale” allows that once a
lawful copy is purchased, the owner should be able to lend or give away that
copy. Works in the public domain must be clearly labeled and be free of DRM
controls. DRM systems should only collect that information on individuals
necessary to complete transactions. Personal data should not be collected and
stored.

Good DRM would facilitate archiving and the continued availability of works.
DRM should not be dependent on a particular hardware platform or software
application, so the library buyer continues to have choice in the marketplace.
Finally, the development of DRM standards should be an open process that
allows for public participation and is not solely dependent on meeting the needs
of the entertainment industry. (Russell, 2003, p. 34)

These are high expectations for the progress in Digital Rights Management, but some good work is

already underway in protecting intellectual property and advancing research and free expression.

An important licensing scheme was born out of the Free Culture and Open Access

movements called Creative Commons (CC). The non-profit group was developed to apply licensing

options to individuals offering digital and analog content. The content creator is able to attach their

own licensing scheme and present the terms of those licenses in plain English to interested

individuals. Creative Commons also allows participants and easy way to search and create derivative

works on content they find through the many CC licensed works. While CC does not offer legal
 Digital Rights Management 17

advice it gives helpful recommendations and educates users in the best methods for licensing,

understanding copyright terms and limitations, and accessing content under many national and

international jurisdictions. (Creative Commons)

DRM middleware is another method of controlling rights on copyrighted material.

“Middleware – a software layer that exists between the network and applications like DRM – could

authenticate and authorize users and secure content and ensure user privacy.” (Russell, 2003, p. 34)

A common example of middleware is the authentication that connects many college and university

students to online journals and databases. The authentication normally uses a unique identification

number, recognizing them as a valid student at the university and allowing them access to a variety

of resources. DRM middleware could also act as a layer to authorize fair uses of a document by

prompting the user through a set of verifications. (Russell, 2003)

The most promising development in DRM, however, has been in the area of Open Source

Digital Rights Management. Endorsed by Open Access advocate, Lawrence Lessig, Sun

Microsystems own Open Source DRM project entitled, Open Media Commons, has got a lot of

attention from even DRM haters. Lessig comments that,

In a world where DRM has become ubiquitous, we need to ensure that the
ecology for creativity is bolstered, not stifled, by technology. We applaud Sun's
efforts to rally the community around the development of open-source, royalty-
free DRM standards that support 'fair use' and that don't block the development
of Creative Commons ideals. (Buskirk, 2006)

Sun’s focus is to promote interoperability to a more transparent system of rights management. The

problem is that there needs to be buy in from the other participants in the development of

compatible devices in order for Sun’s technology to really benefit the consumer. Some do have
 Digital Rights Management 18

doubts that an open source DRM solution will really work, especially since many of the publishers

of content are interested only in closed systems, but it may just take buy in from one or two major

providers to push DRM to the next level.

Only a few months ago did Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, publish an open letter asking for the

end of DRM. This announcement shocked many people, knowing that Apple’s own iTunes music

store has been a model of success that has also revolutionized how consumers purchase music.

Apple’s technology has been heavily scrutinized for being too proprietary and keeping consumers

locked into content and devices licensed solely by Apple. Steve Jobs took a huge leap of faith by

claiming to the record companies that; “DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music

piracy.” (Jobs, 2007) Jobs’ announcement has its fair share of doubters, but the idea that several

larger companies are stepping up to copyright holders on behalf of their customers has turned many

consumers in support of these companies’ efforts, including Apple’s

Digital Rights Management efforts have heated the copyright debate. On one hand many

content providers are concerned about offering their content digitally because they fear widespread

piracy; on the other hand many consumers want seamless access and choice when it comes to media

they consume. These debates are unlikely to subside quickly or easily, but defenders of free speech

and open access, such as libraries and the EFF have tried to push education efforts to stop large

media companies and content publishers from taking rights away from consumers. The efforts of

Creative Commons has educated many content owners in the successful licensing of their works,

ease of this process has even allowed creators to share their works online, often bypassing the cost

and control of vendors and publishers. Publishers are correct that content is easier to share online,

but many content creators are finding that they can market their materials faster, easier, and cheaper,

often without the help of a middle man. Consumers are also discovering that the online pricing
 Digital Rights Management 19

models are cheaper and more convenient than traditional pricing schemes. And the Long Tail has

proved that many are willing to pay for content online, if they are presented with a variety of content

at reasonable prices.

The internet has given the average consumer and information seeker more possibilities for

access than ever before. Upholding the balance of copyright protections provided to our society by

our Founding Fathers will not be an easy task, but it will be necessary to continue to promote the

freedom of ideas in the digital world. Digital Rights Management can be implemented in a way that

does not have to take away from the structure of copyright law and can keep the rights of all parties

in tact.
 Digital Rights Management 20

References

AAC. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2007, from TechEncyclopedia from TechWeb:

http://www.techweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=AAC&x=0&y=0

Anderson, C. (2004). The Long Tail. Retrieved 4 April, 2007, from Wired:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html

Bailey, C. W. (2006). Strong Copyright + DRM + Weak Net Neutrality = Digital Dystopia?

Information Technology and Libraries , 25 (3), 116-139.

Baksik, C. (2006). Fair Use or Exploitation? The Google Book Search Controversy. Portal: Libraries

and the Academy , 6 (4), 399-415.

Buskirk, E. V. (2006, April 3).

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/commentary/listeningpost/2006/04/70548. Retrieved

April 21, 2007, from Wired:

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/commentary/listeningpost/2006/04/70548

Circumvention of copyright protection systems. (n.d.). Retrieved from 17 U.S.C. § 1201:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00001201----000-.html

Coyle, K. (2006). The Automation of Rights. The Journal of Academic Librarianship , 32 (3), 326-329.

Creative Commons. (n.d.). Retrieved April 21, 2007, from http://creativecommons.org/

Crews, K. D. (2006). Copyright Law for Librarians and Educators: Creative Strategies and Practical Solutions.

Chicago: American Library Association.

FairPlay. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2007, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay

Godwin, M. (2006, January). Digital Rights Management: A guide for librarians. Retrieved April 5, 2007,

from American Library Association:

http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/woissues/copyrightb/digitalrights/DRMfinal.pdf
 Digital Rights Management 21

Jobs, S. (2007, February 6). Thoughts on Music. Retrieved 21 2007, April, from Apple:

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

Lessig, L. (2004). Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture And

Control Creativity. New York: Penguin Press.

Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord. (n.d.). Retrieved from 17

U.S.C. § 109: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000109---

-000-.html

Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use. (n.d.). 17 U.S.C. § 107 .

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html.

Rosenblatt, B., Trippe, B., & Mooney, S. (2002). Digital Rights Management: Business and Technology.

New York: M&T Books.

Russell, C. (2003). Fair Use Under Fire. Library Journal , 128 (13), 32-34.

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection of the House Committee on Energy

and Commerce. (2005). Fair Use: Its Effects on Consumers and Industry, Hearing. (pp. 43-

55). 109th Cong., 1st Session.

Suber, P. (2006, March 10). Open Access Overview. Retrieved April 21, 2007, from

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm

Suber, P. (2007, February 7). Open-Access Timeline. Retrieved April 21, 2007, from

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm

Van Tassel, J. M. (2006). Digital Rights Management. Burlington, MA: Focal.