Skip to main content
Rights Management, Who Needs It?

I was appalled to receive an alert from FIPR, the Foundation for Information Policy Research, which reveals that the EU’s Internal Market Commissioner Frits Bolkestein, is arguing for wider adoption of rights-management mechanisms, which FIPR describes as the electronic locks which ensure, for example, that you can only use an ink cartridge from Hewlett-Packard with a Hewlett-Packard printer, or a battery made by Motorola in a Motorola mobile phone.

A European Citizen of the Future

Not content with paving the way for US-style, business-method patents and direct software patentability of computer programs, data structures and process descriptions, which will make it dangerous, if not impossible for smaller, innovative companies to challenge giant-multinationals, the EU appears prepared to work against the interests of its citizens. Instead of liberalising the market in car components, as an example, it is quietly pushing forward legislation that will make the electronic accessories, such as GPS systems, even more expensive.

By strengthening the protection of rights-management technology in Europe, Brussels is playing into the hands of the monopolists, delivering the future on a plate to the companies that are rapidly ring-fencing their products and services, which include digital content , such as games, video and music, live sports coverage and any other deliverable supported by electricity and Silicon.

FIPR’s chairman, Professor Ross Anderson, argues that instead of promoting rights management technology, the EU should be regulating it to prevent it being abused to set up monopolies that will hinder growth and job- creation.

“Rights Management technology”, says Anderson, “will also be used to subvert the Single Market - the European Union's single greatest achievement. Once most products have a software or online component, it will be legal and easy for vendors to charge different prices to people in different European countries - and indeed to people with different income EU to promote it will undermine one of the core purposes of the European Union.”

So, as businesses become increasingly digital in delivery and content, software will provide a greater proportion of their underlying value and that means that many businesses will become more like the software businesses. “Learning to deal with an industry that's not just globalised but software-driven will be a big challenge for governments over the next ten years”, says Anderson.

For you and me, such legislation will mean that car components may be cheaper but anything software driven will be more expensive and so while a chassis may hold a relatively similar price across the EU states, the final price may be determined by the electronics and by the way, rather like ink cartridges in your printer or which radar detector might fit on your dash, the manufacturer will be able to block cheaper third-party devices completely on a country by country basis.

In my eyes, this sounds like an end to any pretence of real competition in the European technology market. Worse still, the way that copyright legislation is heading, our ability to access any form of digital information will be restricted by our ability to pay for the privilege. Europe could have set an example for the rest of the world, outside the now deeply restrictive United States, to follow. Instead it appears to be offering its citizens a future of digital handcuffs and not digital rights.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.


In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…