Hollywood and Silicon Valley: Together at last?

A new industry agreement on digital copyright issues says the government should stay out of enforcement. But it's a little late for that, says one expert.

By Katharine Mieszkowski

Jan 15, 2003 | Federally mandated copy-protection? Laws to prevent consumers from making copies of their DVDs and burning mix CDs? Never mind, don't worry about it. On Tuesday, trade groups representing the computer and music industries told the government that they don't need Congress to help them sort out digital copyright problems.

In a list of seven principles, signed on to by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Business Software Alliance (BSA) and the Computer Systems Policy Project (CSPP), representatives of the music and tech industries pledged to oppose government-mandated technology to stop consumers from copying copyrighted songs and video. Instead, the technology and music companies agreed to collaborate on creating their own technical solutions to preventing the swapping of copyrighted materials.

Press releases announcing the deal called the agreement "groundbreaking." At least one news organization followed suit and labeled the agreement a "landmark" in its headline. Hollywood media companies have long been at odds with technology companies over how best to handle copyright issues, with Hollywood viewing each new gadget or advance in software engineering -- a TiVo personal video recorder, iPod or new peer-to-peer network -- as yet another way to circumvent copyright and intellectual property protections. Meanwhile, technology companies have been frustrated with the entertainment industry's refusal to accept the implications of new technology and its steadfast determination to roll back the tide through lawsuits and lobbying.

So does the new agreement signal a cease-fire in the digital copyright wars? An industry-led détente?

Not quite, says Fred von Lohmann, a senior staff attorney for the digital watchdog group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). He explained to Salon why an agreement among the three lobbying groups might not have any real appreciable impact for peer-to-peer file-sharers and DVD-copiers.

What do you think of this agreement?

I don't think this agreement marks any particular global settlement of the debate ... The agreement doesn't mention "fair use" at all. I think that it's a great example of why letting interindustry negotiations dictate our rights is a bad idea. In this day of copy-protection and the DMCA [Digital Millennium Copyright Act], to not address fair use head-on is, I think, a big mistake.

The MPAA [Motion Picture Association of America] has to my knowledge not come out [on the agreement] one way or the other, the Consumer Electronics Association similarly is not included, and none of the consumer groups were consulted.

To my knowledge, the library community, the EFF, the Consumers Union, none of us were invited to participate.

While it's interesting to see this particular group of inside-the-Beltway organizations strike a deal, I don't think it gives us a long-term vision for the future.

Because too many other constituencies are left out?

Right. Not only are we seeing public-interest groups being left out entirely, but we're seeing huge portions of the industry apparently not signing on, including the MPAA. As I understand it, the fundamental deal in it is that the content side gives up the Hollings bill [which would have mandated copy-protection technology in computer hardware] and the technology side backpedals somewhat on [their demands for] DMCA reform.

Of course, the ironic thing is that the chief proponent of the Hollings bill is the MPAA. So it's a cheap concession for the RIAA to give the Hollings bill up, since it wasn't their main priority. It's sort of an example of horse-trading somebody else's horses.

Again, I think all of this is interesting from an inside-the-Beltway, D.C.-maneuvering point of view, but I don't think that it marks any meaningful change on the ground for consumers or for the actual innovators who are building new technologies.

So, consumers are still going to be in the same position?

Yeah. How does this change the fact that we're seeing copy-protected CDs being introduced? That we're seeing more and more digital-rights management appearing on digital television?

The public's fair use and other legitimate rights are being eroded, and unless a statement of principles strongly supports those rights, it's sort of overlooking the most important thing for the people who are most directly affected.

Next Page: The government can't butt out --- it's already in too deep

• View blog reactions