Broadcast flag

Abstract: The creative industries have frequently expressed concern that they can't compete with freely available copies of their content. Competing with free is particularly concerning for movie studios, whose content may be more prone to single-use consumption than other industries such as music. This issue has gained renewed importance recently with the advent of new digital video recording and distribution technologies, and the widespread availability of Internet piracy. We examine competition between "free" and paid video content in two important contexts: the impact of legitimate free distribution in one channel on sales through paid channels, and the impact of illegitimate free distribution in pirated channels on sales through paid channels. We do this by studying the impact of movie broadcasts on DVD demand and the impact of piracy availability at the time of broadcast on DVD demand. Our data include all movies shown on over-the-air and cable television during an eight-month period in 2005-2006. With respect to the impact of movie broadcasts on piracy and sales, we find that movie broadcasts on over-the-air networks result in a significant increase in both DVD sales at Amazon. com and illegal downloads for those movies that are available on BitTorrent at the time of broadcast. With respect to the impact of piracy on sales, we use the television broadcast as an exogenous demand shock and find that the availability of pirated content at the time of broadcast has no effect on post-broadcast DVD sales gains. Together our results suggest that creative artists can use product differentiation and market segmentation strategies to compete with freely available copies of their content. Specifically, the post-broadcast increase in DVD sales suggests that giving away content in one channel can stimulate sales in a paid channel if the free content is sufficiently differentiated from its paid counterpart. Likewise, our finding that the presence of pirated content does not cannibalize sales for the movies in our sample suggests that if free and paid products appeal to separate customer segments, the presence of free products need not harm paid sales.

Abstract: Encryption propertizes copyright. Prior to the rise of encryption, intellectual property wasn't really property. Instead, these rights consisted of rights to sue to block use or seek damages for after-the-fact use. Encryption makes possible before-the-fact limits on use of the sort that we associate with physical property. Copyrighted works are becoming real property in a way that will never happen for trademarks or patents. This essay traces the role of consent and refusal for copyrighted works in the context of mass media entertainment. Early phonograph and movie projector manufacturers sought to limit the use of the equipment to specified music or films, almost certainly in an effort at price discrimination. With the rise of radio, we see similar use restrictions imposed by the record companies, but these restrictions should be seen first as a form of raising rival's costs. The fight over home-taping use of the VCR should be seen in consent terms as well, where entry was clearly facilitated by the absence of any requirement of advance consent from copyright holders. Now with the current dispute over a possible broadcast flag for digital TV, we may complete the path started by Edison and his contemporaries. In considering the extent to which we should embrace full propertization of copyrighted works through encryption, we should expect transaction forms to vary with transaction costs and technological possibilities and should not somehow privilege a narrow set of institutional arrangements that arose under different constraints.

Abstract: While the public and the media have been distracted by the story of Napster, warnings about the evils of "piracy," and lawsuits by the recording and film industries, the enforcement of copyright law in the digital world has quietly shifted from regulating copying to regulating the design of technology. Lawmakers and commercial interests are pursuing what might be called a technical fix: instead of specifying what can and cannot be done legally with a copyrighted work, this new approach calls for the strategic use of encryption technologies to build standards of copyright directly into digital devices so that some uses are possible and others rendered impossible. In Wired Shut, Tarleton Gillespie examines this shift to "technical copy protection" and its profound political, economic, and cultural implications. Gillespie reveals that the real story is not the technological controls themselves but the political, economic, and cultural arrangements being put in place to make them work. He shows that this approach to digital copyright depends on new kinds of alliances among content and technology industries, legislators, regulators, and the courts, and is changing the relationship between law and technology in the process. The film and music industries, he claims, are deploying copyright in order to funnel digital culture into increasingly commercial patterns that threaten to undermine the democratic potential of a network society. In this broad context, Gillespie examines three recent controversies over digital copyright: the failed effort to develop copy protection for portable music players with the Strategic Digital Music Initiative (SDMI); the encryption system used in DVDs, and the film industry's legal response to the tools that challenged them; and the attempt by the FCC to mandate the "broadcast flag" copy protection system for digital television. In each, he argues that whether or not such technical constraints ever succeed, the political alignments required will profoundly shape the future of cultural expression in a digital age.

Abstract: Winner, ICA 2009 Outstanding Book Award given by the International Communication Association. and Winner, 2009 CITASA Book Award given by the Communication and Information Technologies Section of the American Sociological Association While the public and the media have been distracted by the story of Napster, warnings about the evils of "piracy," and lawsuits by the recording and film industries, the enforcement of copyright law in the digital world has quietly shifted from regulating copying to regulating the design of technology. Lawmakers and commercial interests are pursuing what might be called a technical fix: instead of specifying what can and cannot be done legally with a copyrighted work, this new approach calls for the strategic use of encryption technologies to build standards of copyright directly into digital devices so that some uses are possible and others rendered impossible. In Wired Shut, Tarleton Gillespie examines this shift to "technical copy protection" and its profound political, economic, and cultural implications. Gillespie reveals that the real story is not the technological controls themselves but the political, economic, and cultural arrangements being put in place to make them work. He shows that this approach to digital copyright depends on new kinds of alliances among content and technology industries, legislators, regulators, and the courts, and is changing the relationship between law and technology in the process. The film and music industries, he claims, are deploying copyright in order to funnel digital culture into increasingly commercial patterns that threaten to undermine the democratic potential of a network society. In this broad context, Gillespie examines three recent controversies over digital copyright: the failed effort to develop copy protection for portable music players with the Strategic Digital Music Initiative (SDMI); the encryption system used in DVDs, and the film industry's legal response to the tools that challenged them; and the attempt by the FCC to mandate the "broadcast flag" copy protection system for digital television. In each, he argues that whether or not such technical constraints ever succeed, the political alignments required will profoundly shape the future of cultural expression in a digital age.