Keys of the Kingdom
Consider the following poem:
as of also man
city than food
so people build now
down low
animal
All by itself it is a simple little poem, and not a very good one. But this poem is a dangerous piece of verse. So dangerous that it is illegal for me to tell you how this poem was created.
I kid you not.
Buried within this poem are sixteen numbers. If I were to tell you what the sixteen numbers were, or how to find them in the above poem, I would be in violation of the law. That is because this particular string of sixteen numbers is the key to unlocking HD-DVDs. Anyone with a new HD-DVD player who knows these numbers can break the encryption on any HD-DVD movie. Quite simply, knowing the number allows you to pirate movies in all their high-definition glory. That is why the Motion Picture Association of America wants to keep the number secret, and that it what makes it illegal.
But locks only work if you can protect your key. If they key gets out, it would be like locking your door but hanging the key on a little nail right beside the lock. The problem with digital keys is that they are impossible to keep secret.
As a case in point, yesterday someone posted the numbers on the social site Digg. The MPAA became aware of this, and demanded Digg remove the offending post. It was then deleted, and the member who made the post was banned. Outraged at this act of censorship, Digg members rallied. They made posts with the number faster than they could be deleted, and faster than users could be banned. Within hours the site was flooded with posts and comments containing this numerical key. This went on all day. Digg management deleted posts and banned users, while Digg members kept posting the key, daring management to ban them.
Finally, faced with lawsuits on one side and killing their user base on the other, Digg management sided with the users. They stopped deleting posts, stopped banning users, and even posted the number key themselves. The mob had won, and news of their victory reached the BBC by morning.
On one level this incident is just another example of how our connection to information has shifted. Before the expansion of the web our source of information lay in publishers and newspaper magnates. The keys of the kingdom were held by the few. Now those keys can spread across the globe almost instantly. The keys are now in everyone’s hand, and the media moguls can’t stop the signal. Their deeply guarded key is now an open secret.
But on the other hand we seem to be content with the illusion of freedom. What fired up Digg users was the perception that they were being censored. In fact, all Digg did was delete articles that were in violation of their user agreement. The HD-DVD key has been known for months, and anyone interested in cracking the encryption on HD-DVDs could easily find it. What the Digg uprising did was convince users that THEY were in control. As soon as their protest was finished, they went back to their old patterns, linking to trendy sites, feeding the circus.
Fundamentally, nothing has changed.
Watching this play out, I wonder if we engage in the same behavior on sites like BraveHumans? We have the keys in our hands. What do we want to do with them?
May 3rd, 2007 12:11
Interesting…mob mentality being masked as “democracy”. I think this scenario aptly describes what most U.S. citizens believe democracy is.
If I remember right, the First Amendment did not guarantee that people would act upon my free speech, but only that I was allowed to speak. I forgot that profit was involved here, though…. So, which principle rules: royalty protection as legally instituted, or “the customer is always right”? Digg chose the latter.
I’m not for skirting royalty and copyright issues, but I’m not appreciative of MPAA’s or RIAA’s tactics, either. When product quality drops or new options become available, consumers look for new providers, a new delivery method, or a new product. Both organizations are in denial about this principle of free markets…the principle that allows their “union” members to become wealthy…to speak as they want…for or against whom they want.
Rick
May 3rd, 2007 13:16
I think I am misunderstanding your point, Brian. The Digg incident was a crime. Intellectual property is property. I fail to see how Digg and his users had any more business giving out the key than he would giving out the key to my home to a burglar, if it somehow came into his possession.
Copyright is not the problem; copyright is the solution to the crime of intellectual property theft. I hate to think what the lawyers who get into the act are going to do to Digg.
May 4th, 2007 14:32
Rick,
Yeah, it was clearly a mob mentality. It was interesting to watch as it unfolded. I actually think Digg did the best they could under the circumstances. When banning users wasn’t working, they actually shut the site down at least once. They deleted files, and opened again, hoping that things would settle down, but it started all over again once the site was up. This went on for hours. However, once they relented, within a couple of hours things were back to normal. Now they have some breathing room to address the issue.
Lily,
Yes, what Digg users did violated the law (not to mention the Digg terms of use), but what they did was not equivalent to giving out keys to your house. Not even remotely.
Your house is a private space, and contains your private property. DVDs are sold to the public for personal use. Making the key public did not allow anyone access to someone’s personal space or private property. What the key does is allow you to use a DVD which you have purchased in a way not approved by the film distributer. Such as watching the DVD on your computer screen instead of a TV screen. Distributing the key in and of itself does not deprive anyone of property or even profits. Distributing the key is not stealing in any way. A better analogy would be that it is the public distribution of a trade secret.
If the key is used to make a complete copy of the film, and if that copy is distributed to others, then THAT is essentially stealing. However, the key could also be used to make backup copies of your DVD, transfer a copy to another format, or to incorporate small samples into an academic or creative work. All of these traditionally fall within fair use. It is perfectly legal for me to import a music CD onto my iPod, and since CD’s aren’t generally encrypted it is easy for me to do that. To do the same with a DVD also falls under fair use, but to exercise that right one needs to break the encryption law.
But I digress. The real intent of my post was how such laws have no teeth. The old model of centralized control over the news, entertainment, even government is quickly dying. The distributed nature of the internet means everyone can cut their own keys, and everyone can create a voice.
What I notice however is that people seem to be content simply going through the motions. Digg users shout out the key as if it was being suppressed, when the key had been known for months. Bloggers react to the news thinking they are making news. People speak with authority on discussion boards, thinking that makes them an expert. What the Digg incident shows is that WE control the message, but we seem content with business as usual.
May 4th, 2007 14:54
Apologies first: this comment is off-topic because I couldn’t find a way to e-mail you directly. I’m new to this site (see my comments to Susan on the last post) and already a fan. I moderate The Soccer Mom Vote and would love to post your poem “I Am Not Afraid” there, with appropriate citation and a link back here. Permission to do so? Please let me know.
May 4th, 2007 14:57
Nicole,
Absolutely, feel free.
Brian
May 16th, 2007 00:01
[…] this post, Brian raised a great question: Watching this play out, I wonder if we engage in the same behavior […]