La gestion des DRM en perspective

Section 2- industrial preconditions

In order to better determine the implications related to the DRM, it is necessary to include/understand which are the various actors who can be concerned with these problems for then considering the bringings together of those at ends of interworking.

§1- actors

The stakes here, is to be interested in part of the active actors in the field of the GDN and having a need growing for development of these measurements in order to take into account economic realities increasingly more complex.

They are mainly four types of actors^26(*) who will have, so that the whole of the systems functions in a satisfactory and transparent way for the consuming users/, to cooperate and develop technologies which will have in fine being interopérables.

These categories interdependent and are primarily gathered on a side in the electronics industry general public^27(*) where the stake is in particular centered around the systems of reading and recording of optical supports (Audio CD, DVD) and in the data-processing industry^28(*) which is in the middle of what one can call computer equipement and includes in particular different components multimedia for the PC as well as the software systems of reading, compression/decompression, and transmission by Internet of works. And, other of the software publishers DRM^29(*) and specialists in technical protection.^30(*)

For each one of these actors, the stake is serious. Indeed, if one takes again one of the markets which interests these industries, Forrester Research envisages, for the music on line « an exponential growth of the sale of music in numerical form. The estimates of the market for 2004 vary between €900millions and €1 500 million to reach €12 000 million within 10 years is 19% of the total market ».^31(*)

Figure 3: Forecast of the sales of music on line^32(*)

In this respect, one will follow with interest the development of alliances in this sector with, for example, a recent bringing together between Contentguard (in which Microsoft reinforced its participation) and Time Warner to develop and « to ensure the promotion and the development of the solutions of distribution and management of the numerical rights ». ^33(*)

In the same way, Microsoft, which had been in lawsuit for three years with InterTrust^34(*) which showed it to have illegally borrowed some of these technologies to develop its solution DRM, decided to pour to him 440 million dollars in exchange of the access to its technologies of protection of contents. Thus, the prospect for an opening towards other markets encourages with a bringing together between the actors. ^35(*)

§2- interworking

Major stake of the DRM, interworking is the fact of working out a whole of standards « standards » between the various actors of one or more sectors. That so that, even if these standards are not any obligatory, insofar as the majority of the actors use them make consequently them almost obligatory. Indeed a product which would not be compatible with them would have enormous difficulties of developing on a given market.

Indeed, the whole of the produced and distributed contents must be readable by the users, i.e. those must be stored, distributed or diffused in a format which can be recognized by the whole of the readers sold in the trade independently of their source.^36(*) This asking, consequently, an effort of co-operation between the various actors of the sector so that a standardization can succeed most quickly. ^37(*)

With- the consortia and alliances

One will endeavor here to evoke some of the most influential groups and most advanced in the related fields with the management of the DRM. ^38(*)

In the field of the GDN, a crucial importance must be related as well to the standards of data compression as on the language of expression of these data even, more and more, on the languages of meta-data.

Historically, group WG11 is that which defined « standards of compression MPEG-2, used for numerical television then MPEG-4 used for the diffusion of video on Internet. The audio part of the specifications became famous «the MP3» (MPEG To bush-hammer 3). Standard MPEG-4 integrates a part IPMP (Intellectual Property Management and Protection) to allow an identification of work, a management of the rights of copy and elements of coding of the contents and to constitute a complete standard of video diffusion. MPEG envisages new formats, in particular integral MPEG-7 of meta-data XML (given complementary attached to the video which can identify work, describe the rights, describe the scenes, etc) and MPEG-21, which aims at defining a total architecture multi-media, integrating various objects and contents. MPEG 21 will include/understand in particular a module IPMP, as RDD (Rights Data Dictionary-- Dictionary from rights) and REL (Rights Expression Language-- Langage expressing the rights) ». ^39(*)

More precisely, Leonardo Chiariglione indicates: « That is why we cuts has «Rights Expression Language» (REL) so that rights butt has item digital edge Be expressed in A way that edge Be interpreted by has computer. With right exists to perform actions one something. Today we uses such verbs have: «display», «print», «Copy» gold «blind» and we humans (hopefully) know what we mean. Drank computers must to Be taught the meaning. This is why we need has «Rights Data Dictionary» (RDD) that gives the specifies off semantics Al the verbs that are used in the REL ». ^40(*)

The simplified diagram, below, indicates the basic functions of a REL with a whole of associated rights that the author calls « permissions use » (in yellow) ; localization or unit, time constraints, (pink) as well as obligations of payments, traceability, etc (in blue).

Figure 4 : DRM Information Structures - Rights Expression Model^41(*)

It will be noted that, at the time of a workshop at the European Commission, it was specified that interworking was very important and that it was necessary in this direction to try to privilege : «Much emphasis was placed one the need for open standards that guarantee interoperability, and nap called for «common platforms». Indeed, there was has majority in favor off open and interoperable standard. Summon stated that proprietary standard could risk creating bottlenecks for users' accesses to content, giving small channel to content «gatekeepers», who could not only monopolize accesses to content and distort competition, goal might also misuses to their position by restricting the availability off content, which could cuts wider farming implications for society. With failure to achieve interoperability would significantly increase costs and would Be major disincentive for users has ». ^42(*)

* ²⁶ One will take again the typology drawn up by Philippe Chantepie in his report/ratio  : Philippe Chantepie, Technical Measurements of Protection of works & DRMS, 1ère Left: an Inventory of fixtures, January 8, 2003, p 12-15.

* ²⁷ Sony, Matsushita, Philips, Thomson, Hitachi

* ²⁸ IBM, INTEL, Toshiba

* ²⁹ Microsoft, Real Networks

* ³⁰ Macrovision, Digimarc, Sunncomm Technologies, Nextamp

* ³¹ http://www.ondemanddistribution.com/fre/services/themarket.asp

* ³² http://www.ondemanddistribution.com/fre/services/themarket.asp

* ³³ Yves Grandmontagne, Microsoft and Time Warner Co invest in the numerical rights, April 6, 2004, www.silicon.fr

* ³⁴ This company, repurchased by Sony and Philips, is owner many technologies of multi-media encoding of contents.

* ³⁵ Michel Ktitareff, Microsoft pays $ 440 million his litigation with Intertrust: zoom on the strategy of the editor, April 13, 2004, www.atelier.fr, Jean-baptiste Known, InterTrust Lawsuit: Microsoft plays its numerical rights, 13/04/2004, www.01net.com

* ³⁶ From a legal point of view, one will specify for example that in a business TGI Nanterre, June 24, 2003, Association CLCV C/SA EMI Music France, the TGI states in particular that  : «  (...) the fact that the consumer cannot listen to CD on a car radio or a reader characterizes the inaptitude with the use of the product, when well even only certain CD are reached by this vice and some users concerned. The consumer by reading the mention «this CD contains a technical device limiting the possibilities of copy» cannot know that this system anti-copy is likely to restrict the listening of its disc on a car radio or a reader (...)  ». www.juriscom.net/jpt/visu.php?ID=267. In the same direction, TGI Nanterre, September 2, 2003, Mrs F.M. and UFC That To choose C/SA EMI Music France and co. Auchan France, Juriscom.net, 02/09/2003, www.juriscom.net/jpt/visu.php?ID=348, Deprez, Dian Guignot, legal topicality; Communication, Media and Publicity, Monthly letter November 2003, p.5-6.

* ³⁷ In this respect, Directive IP Enforcement, was in the middle of the problems and it would seem that «  the Parliament partly heard these remarks, ranges in particular of sharp voice by Eurolinux alliance, since the European deputies specified that the protection systems could be diverted if interworking required it for the free competition  ». In the same way, the Bill of transposition of the Directive May 22, 2001 on the royalties indicates in the talk of its reasons  : «  Moreover, as for the systems of conditional accesses governed by article 95 of the law n° 86-1067 of September 30, 1986 relating to the freedom of communication, it is necessary to allow to the manufacturers technical systems or to the owners of service who wish interworking to be able to negotiate the provision, in nondiscriminatory conditions, licenses of development of technical measurements. This provision, whose application must be carried out in measurement strictly necessary to the needs for interworking with other technical measurements of protection, does not derogate however from article 6 of directive 91/250/EC of May 14, 1991 and from the article L. 122-6-1 of the code of the intellectual property which determine the conditions of access to information necessary to the interworking of a software  ». Bill relating to the royalty and the rights close in the company to information, November 12, 2003, p. 1.

www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/aillagon/droitdauteur1103.pdf

* ³⁸ For a more deepened study, Philippe Chantepie, Technical Measurements of Protection of works & DRMS, 1ère Left: an Inventory of fixtures, January 8, 2003, 148p.

* ³⁹ Philippe Chantepie, Technical Measurements of Protection of works & DRMS, 1ère Left: an Inventory of fixtures, January 8, 2003, p. 19.

* ⁴⁰ Leonardo Chiariglione, Role off standardization in the DRM field, 25 Mars 2003,

www.chiariglione.org/leonardo/publications/brussels_drm/index.htm.

For a deepening of these concepts, one will be able to read Brian A. LaMacchia, Key Challenges in DRM: Year Industry Prospect, 2002 www.farcaster.com/papers/drm2002/drm2002.pdf

* ⁴¹ Renato Ianella, DIGITAL Rights Management (DRM) Architectures, D-Lib Magazine, v. 7, N. 6, June, 2001, www.dlib.org/dlib/june01/iannella/06iannella.html

* ⁴² European Commission, DIGITAL Rights Management (DRM) WORKSHOP, April 16, 2002, p. 3.

http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/multi/digital_rights/events/text_en.htm#workshop1 This was reaffirmed besides on April 19, 2004 in an official statement by the Police chief charged with the domestic market Frits Bolkestein. Royalties: the Commission suggests a European legislation on the governorship of the collective trust companies, DNN: IP/04/492, 19/04/2004,

http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guestfr.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/04/492|0|RAPID&lg=FR&display=