EU Conditional Access Convention to be extended?

In 2008, the European Union (EU) ratified the (Directive 98/84/ECC) that defines a legal protection for Electronic Pay-Services. The objective was to enable a consistent anti-piracy protection in the EU to allow Pay TV, electronic distribution, and VOD services.

The Council of Europe has proposed a new version so called Conditional Access Convention that should extend to all its members. The Council of Europe has 47 members covering the quasi-entire European continent, plus Russia and Turkey. The EU has proposed to all its members to sign it to bootstrap the ratification process.

Such a wide convention would be useful to fight content piracy, at least in Europe.

INA versus YouTube

A French court has condemned YouTube to pay INA 150,000€ to INA because YouTube did not put in place any filtering system that would deter posting INA copyrighted content. INA is the French National Institute of Audiovisual. Its mission is to archive all broadcast content from French TV and radio stations.

Interestingly, INA hopes that YouTube will install an efficient fingerprint system to detect INA’s content. INA has developed its own fingerprinting technology: Signature. YouTube uses its own fingerprint technology: ContentID.

Thanks OC for the pointer

Google looks for a better balance with copyright

Yesterday, Google announced an initiative: “Making Copyright Work Better Online”. Google announced that in the coming months:

  • They expect to reduce the average answer to legitimate takedown notices to less than 24 hours.
  • In order to balance the two sides of the equation, Google will enhance the “counter notice” procedure that allows users to contest a takedown notice. Google does not give any details on the foreseen enhancements. The “counter notice” procedure of DMCA safe harbor is rather complex.
  • The autocomplete feature should ban any suggestion that would favor piracy. Make the following experiment. Type in the Google research bar HARR. I got as 8th suggestion “Harry Potter 6 streaming”. Of course, it pointed to MegaUpload. That should not happen anymore.
  • Violators of copyright will be baned form AdSense.

It will be interesting to monitor this initiative in the coming months.

Apple, Jailbreaking and Patents

Monday, September 13, 2010

Put together these three words and you obtain an explosive cocktail that will surely make the headlines. End of July, a new type of Jailbreaking for iPhone and iPad appeared. Two weeks later, Apple closed the hole. Unfortunately, one week later, somebody highlighted an Apple patent that was filed in February 2009 (There is a period of 18 months after filing while the text of the patent is not public). It was claimed that Apple patented a method to fight jailbreaking and even brick the phone in case of jailbreaking. Most of the news I’ve seen on the Net where making the same statement.
Thus, I decided to have a look on this patent. The title of the patent is “Systems and methods for identifying unauthorized users of an electronic device”. Where is jailbreaking? The patent is about identifying an unauthorized user, not about identifying an unauthorized action. To identify an unauthorized users, the patent proposes in sub claims many solutions such as voice identification (comparing to voice print of authorized users), face recognition, heartbeat sensor (I was not aware of this type of biometrics, has somebody a good pointer?), or proximity detection of a sensor such as NFC. Once an unauthorized user detected, the patent claims that the device collects some information such as keylogging, logging the Internet activity, taking pictures with geotag, or using an accelerometer to identify the current mode of transportation. Then it sends an alert to a responsible party with the collected data.
The patent describes also a larger definition of unauthorized user by

“[0039]As another example, an activity that can detect an unauthorized user can be any action that may indicate the electronic device is being tampered with being, for example hacked, jailbroken, or unlocked. For example, a sudden increase in memory usage of the electronic device can indicate that a hacking program is being run and that an unauthorized user may be using the electronic device. “

:Happy:
Even funnier

“As yet another example of activities that can indicate tampering with the electronic device, an unauthorized user can be detected when a subscriber identity module (SIM) card is removed from or replaced in the electronic device.”

Good luck for the many false positives. Jailbreaking is really a side issue in this patent. It is more valid against thefts than against jailbreaking. Would the device be able to detect jailbreaking, most probably would it be able to cancel the action. Of course, now it is legal to jailbreak the phone, at least in the US.

The lesson is that you should not trust too much what you read in the blogs. Build your own opinion. read the source documents. I am sure that very few of the journalists or bloggers that reported the news did in fact have read the patent.

Positive mood

This week end, my family purchased a DVD. When viewing it, what a surprise!! The usual scaring/threatening video sequence which explains that downloading movies fromP2P is bad was absent. It was replaced by a new message telling something like “By purchasing this DVD, you are supporting the jobs for the UK movie industry”. And at the end of the video sequence, a huge/heavy “THANK YOU” falls noisily onto the screen. Very Monty Python like (It is probably because it was a UK movie  :Happy:  )

This change is interesting. One of the rules I learnt in Communications was to always favor the positive formrather than the negative one. A positive message goes better through. You should use the negative form if you want to create fear (Lovecraft was very good at that. Sorry I’m digressing).

Will it have an impact on piracy? Probably not. Nevertheless, it may help to restore a little bit the reputation of content owners. This is also part of the battle.

I don’t know if this will be generalized on everyDVD. I think it would be a good idea.

Six new exemptions to DMCA

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

End of July, the US Copyright Office and the Librarian of Congress have announced six new exemptions that authorize circumventing protection measures as defined by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

  • It is possible to extract from a DVD (protected by CSS) small video sequences to create a new work, for criticism or education purpose. In other words, DVD is treated like book. Fair use allowed citing extracts of books.
  • Making mobile phone applications interoperable with other handsets. This was in theory already covered by fair use.
  • Jail breaking phones in order to be used on other carrier networks.
  • Circumventing video games for the purpose of good faith testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities; this is good news for security researchers.
  • Circumventing computer programs protected by dongles if they are bugged or obsolete.
  • eBooks if no edition allow access to speak aloud function or special formats displaying (in clear for impaired people)

I don’t know enough about the US regulatory system to assess that it is equivalent to an evolution of the DMCA or just a recommendation. IN any case, it is always the judge who has the final words. Any US lawyer who may answer this question?

YouTube won against Viacom

I regularly report news on the litigation between Viacom and YouTube. Wednesday, 23rd June was the latest event.
Judge Louis Stanton, in an extensive 30-page report, ruled in favor of Google. Judge Stanton selected a law that protects ISPs from copyright infringements if they quickly banish the infringing pieces of content. For instance, he explained that YouTube removed in one day the 100,000 videos that were cited in a Viacom takedown notice. It took Viacom several months to collect these infringing samples.
The lawsuit highlighted some embarrassing behaviours when analyzing the email exchanges. For instance, two founders of YouTube pleaded the third founder to stop posting infringing content on YouTube (at the birth of YouTube). Some documents showed that Viacom expected to acquire YouTube before Google. And many other stories…

As usual, the two opponents sides are orthogonal. I would suggest reading both point of views. For instance:

Is it the end of the story? No, Viacom goes on appeal.