Legal policy and digital rights management

Proceedings of the IEEE

Volumn 92, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 997-1003

  Owens, Richard ^a   Akalu, Rajen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Digital rights management (DRM); International institutions and emerging trends; Law; Policy

Indexed keywords

BANDWIDTH; DATA PRIVACY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; LAW ENFORCEMENT; PUBLIC KEY CRYPTOGRAPHY; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS;

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT (DRM); INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND EMERGING TRENDS; TECHNOLOGICAL PROTECTION MEASURES (TPM); TELECOMMUNICATIONS BANDWIDTH;

COPYRIGHTS;

EID: 21244449140     PISSN: 00189219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/JPROC.2004.827366     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. S. Bechtold, "Digital rights management in the United States and Europe," Amer. J. Comparative Law, 2003, to be published.
2. D. Burk and J. Cohen, "Fair use infrastructure for rights management systems," Harvard J. Law Technol., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 42-83, Fall 2001.
3. L. Brandeis and S. Warren, "The right to privacy," Harvard Law Rev., vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 193-220, 1890.
4. J. Cohen, "DRM and privacy," Berkeley Technol. Law J., vol. 18, p. 575, 2003.
5. J. de Werra. (2001) The legal system of technical protection measures under the WIPO treaties, the digital millennium copyright act, the European union directives and other national laws (Japan, Australia). ALAI Congr. [Online]. Available: http://www.alai2001.org/2001_conference/1_program_en.htm
6. Digital Choice and Freedom Act (DFCA), H.R. 5522, 2002.
7. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.A. § 107.
8. A. Drassinower, "A rights-based view of the idea/expression dichotomy in copyright law," Can. J. Law Jurisprudence, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-21, Jan. 2003.
9. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Servs., Inc., el al., 504 U.S. 451 (1992).
10. Eldred v. Ashcroft. 239 F.3d 372 (D.C. Cir. 2002), aff'd (the occasional retroactive extension of the term of copyright was unsuccessfully challenged by L. Lessig and others).
11. E. Felton, "A skeptical view of DRM and fair use," Commun. ACM, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 57-59, Apr. 2003.
12. J. Feigenbaum, M. Freedman, T. Sander, and A. Shostack, "Privacy engineering for digital rights management systems," in Proc. Digital Rights Management Workshop, 2001, pp. 76-105.
13. B. Fox and B.Brian La Macchia, "Encouraging recognition of fair uses in DRM systems," Commun. ACM, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 61-63, April 2003.
14. D. Gervais, "Collective management of copyright and neighboring rights in Canada; An international perspective," Can. J. Law Technol., vol. 1, pp. 21-50, 2002.
15. J. Ginsburg, "Copyright control over new technologies of dissemination," Columbia Law Rev., vol. 101, pp. 1613-1647, Nov. 2001.
16. _, "Copyright legislation for the digital millennium," Columbia - VLA J. Law Arts, vol. 23, pp. 137-179, Spring 1999.
17. Harper & Row v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539 (1985).
18. B. Hugenholtz, "Code as code, or the end of intellectual property as we know it," Maastricht J. Eur. Comparative Law, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 308-318, 1999.
19. Consultation paper on digital copyright issues, Industry Canada and Dept. Can. Heritage. (2001). [Online]. Available: http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/ internet/incrp-prda.nsf/vwapj/digital.pdf/$FILE/digital.pdf
20. Privacy and digital rights management (DRM): An oxymoron?, Information Privacy Commissioner. [Online]. Available: http://www.ipc.on.ca/scripts/index_. asp?action=31&N_ ID=1&P_ID=13323&U_ID=0
21. Technical protection measures: Legal protection of TPMs, I. Kerr, A. Maurushat, and C. Tacit. (2003). [Online]. Available: http://www.pch.gc.ca/ progs/ac-ca/progs/pda-cpb/pubs/protectionII/protection_e.pdf
22. Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3734 (2003).
23. Open Source Initiative [Online]. Available: http://opensource.org/ licenses/
24. (24] ProCD v. Zeidenberg, 86 F. 3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996).
25. R. A. Reece, "Legal incentives for adopting digital rights management systems: Merging access controls and rights controls," Berkeley Technol. Law J., vol. 18, p. 613, 2003.
26. Rudder v. Microsoft Corp., 47 CCLT (2d) 168 (Ont. SCJ), 1999.
27. P. Samuelson, "Intellectual property and the digital economy: Why the anti-circumvention regulations need to be revised," Berkeley Technol. Law J., vol. 14, pp. 519-562, 1999.
28. _, "Anticircumvention rules: Threat to science," Science, vol. 293, p. 2028, 2001.
29. T. Sander, "Golden times for digital rights management?," in Proc. Financial Cryptography 5th Int. Conf. (FC 2001), P. F Syverson, Ed., pp. 64-74.
30. P. Sirinelli. (2001) The scope of the prohibition on circumvention of technological measures: exceptions. ALAI Congr. [Online]. Available: http://www.alai2001.org/2001_conference/1_program_en.htm
31. D. Solove, "Conceptualizing privacy," California Law Rev., vol. 90, p. 1087, 2002.
32. M. Trebilcock et al., The Law and Economics of Canadian Competition Policy. Toronto, ON, Canada: Univ. Toronto Press, 2002.
33. B. Trompenaars, "Legal support for online contracts," in Copyright and Electronic Commerce Legal Aspects of Copyright Management, B. Hugenholtz, Ed, New York: Kluwer Law, 2000.
34. Universal City Studios v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001).
35. Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, 82 F. Supp. 2d 211 (SDNY 2000).
36. World Intellectual Property Organization copyright treaty. CRNR/DC/94, art. 11 [Online]. Available: www.wipo.int/treaties/ip/wct/index.html
37. World Intellectual Property Organization performances and phonograms treaty, CRNR/DC/95, art. 18 [Online]. Available: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/ ip/wppt/index.html
38. H. Yu, D. Kundur, and C. Lin, "Spies, thieves, and lies: The battle for multimedia in the digital era," IEEE Multimedia, vol. 8, pp. 8-12, Jul.-Sept. 2001.