The DMCA: A Vital First Step

Date: 2002-02-28 12:11:51

This is the satirical paper I turned in for writing for engineers. Enjoy.

Unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted materials is a major threat to the United States. The proliferation of file-sharing services increases piracy, costing United States companies billions of dollars per year. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act provides a worthy first step towards the protection of the revenue streams of major corporations.

File-sharing services like Napster, Kazaz, and Morpheus make it easy for pirates to illegally obtain copies of music, books, software, and movies from the comfort and privacy of their own dorm rooms and homes. A recent survey of Walla Walla College's student network, conducted by the author, counted more than 80,000 songs available to download, most of them copyrighted and illegally distributed. The survey identified 1,400 movies waiting to be downloaded, including recent releases Gone in 60 Seconds and The Patriot and old favorite Top Gun. These movies are available for anyone to download without properly compensating the mega-corporations that funded their production.

According to the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), between US$20 and US$22 billion is lost each year to unauthorized copying (International Intellectual Property Alliance 2002, 2). In essence, this is money that pirates are illegally stealing from the corporations who funded the development efforts for the software, movies, music, and other copyrighted works. The IIPA's annual study, "Copyright industries in the US economy," reports that copyright industries are "one of the fastest growing segments in the US economy," growing 10.4% annually between 1995 and 1999, and that copyright industries contributed an estimated US$457.2 billion to the United States economy in 1999, 4.94% of the GDP (IIPA 2000, 1). Therefore, pirates steal 4.81% of the total annual revenue of the companies producing the books, movies, music, and software they steal. In light of the current recession, the GDP needs every last dollar it can get to contribute to an economic recovery.

Obviously, something must be done to protect the revenue streams of these patriotic mega-corporations. In order to protect their copyrighted works, media companies began including encryption in their products. This encryption allows the copyright holder to determine when, where, and why copyrighted works may be accessed. However, Internet hackers began to break these encryption schemes and told their pirate friends how to copy movies, thereby depriving the movie industry from significant amounts of revenue. Salvation came in the form of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), passed in 1998. "Congress has effectively allowed Hollywood to write a statue that turns copyright holder's wishes into federal law with severe criminal penalties for anyone who does not comply with those wishes," says Robin Gross about the DMCA (King 2001, 1).

The DMCA provides sufficient wiggle room to allow media companies to legally challenge anyone who has the potential to threaten their revenue stream. A hacker identified only by his online name "Aibopet" posted programs allowing Aibo owners to extend their robotic dogs to do things similar to extensions Sony was selling for upwards of US$150. Since this threatened Sony's copyrights in some trivial and inconsequential way, Sony successfully invoked the DMCA, forcing "Aibopet" to remove the programs, thereby protecting Sony's revenue stream (Wilson and Pham 2001, 1).

In an attempt to prevent digital music files from being endlessly copied and traded, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) created the Secure Music Digital Initiative and sponsored a contest to determine if its watermarking technology could be broken. Princeton professor Edward Felton led a team of graduate students and successfully broke the watermarking technology. Like academic researchers for centuries, he attempted to present a paper on his team's success . Since Professor Felton's research would have deprived the RIAA of revenue by allowing pirates to copy secure music files, the RIAA vaguely threatened Professor Felton under the DMCA, preventing him from presenting his research (King 2001, 2).

Russian programmer Dmitri Sklayarov presented a paper, based on his work at ElcomSoft, revealing how to break the encryption in Adobe's eBooks. ElcomSoft's puny excuse for allowing widespread piracy on eBooks was that their software allowed blind users to enable the read-aloud feature. Adobe contacted the FBI, which arrested Mr. Sklayarov and tossed him in prison (Levy 2001, 2).

From these two incidents, it is obvious that free speech among graduate students, university professors, and professional groups is catastrophic to the ability of major media corporations to extract the maximum amount of money possible from consumers. To ensure that no information that could potentially threaten copyright protection leaks out into the hands of pirates, the papers that researchers present must be carefully monitored. Academic papers already endure a lengthy peer-review process in order to ensure that only the highest-quality papers emerge. Perhaps a copyright industry review process should also be instituted to ensure that their interests are protected as well.

Media companies need protection for their copyrighted works, be they movies, music, or software; otherwise, they will have no incentive to invest money in the production of those works. Black Hawk Down, a recent war movie, cost US$95 million, a significant investment for a movie studio (Internet Movie Database 2002, 1). If the studio had no assurance that consumers would pay money for the privilege of seeing the movie, rather than sitting at home and downloading it on the Internet, it would have no reason to invest the money to make the movie. Without proper compensation, the movie industry would cease to function, sending shockwaves throughout the global economy, causing a massive economic meltdown. Obviously, it is critical for media companies to have protection for their copyrighted works, and the DMCA is one step in the right direction.

The DMCA takes an important step towards extending the power of media corporations over the customers they condescend to serve, but it fails to provide sufficient protection to stamp out all piracy. The Secure Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), which has been introduced by Senator Fritz Hollings, strengthens the power of copyright holders. "It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that 'does not include and utilize certified security technologies' approved by the federal government" with penalties of up to US$500,000 and five years in prison (McCullagh 2001, 1). Currently, the providers of piracy-assisting services like Napster and Morpheus are in a legal gray area, since they are not actually stealing from major corporations themselves. Under the SSSCA, however, they will be responsible for the actions of their users, thereby significantly reducing the amount of piracy.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is a critical step in the right direction towards protecting the revenue streams of major media corporations. It provides significant legal backing for major media corporations attempting to defend themselves against pirates stealing their copyrighted material. When worthy targets present themselves, the DMCA enlists the FBI as the copyright industry's personal copyright cops, as indicated by the Sklayarov case. This protection is necessary for the advancement of the economy, and it is this nation's patriotic duty to protect their God-given right to make money in our capitalist economy.