« It's All About the Distribution - Free Speech, Telecomm and Copyright |
| Bush/Trump Mash-up Raises Copyright Questions »
April 28, 2004
The Best Defense is a Good Offense
Ed Felten continues his series on the recent Speed Bump conference at the Berkman Center with a discussion of some guidelines for designing effective stopgap security measures (Stopgap Security). His previous post on the conference (What is a Speedbump?) and my response (Defining Speedbumps).
In any case, Felten has three suggestions for stopgap designers:
- [Y]ou should look carefully at the lifetime cost of each stopgap measure, compared to the value it will provide you.
- [R]ecognize that when the adversary adapts to one stopgap, he may thereby render a whole family of potential stopgaps useless. So don't plan on rolling out an endless sequence of small variations on the same method.
- [R]emember that the adversary will rarely attack a stopgap head-on. Instead, he will probably work around it, by finding a tactic that makes it irrelevant.
Well, my first thought based on these guidelines was that the RIAA was hosed. In the long run, attempting stopgap measure after stopgap measure is inevitably doomed. As Felten says, "there is no good solution" in the copyright owners' war on P2P infringement.
When confronted with an untenable position, however, I like to turn the problem around and consider it from the other point of view. Rather than think about how they can best defend their existing business models, the RIAA should consider how best they can destroy the business models for illicit filesharing. In other words, what are the weaknesses of illicit filesharing and how best can they be exploited? Why should the RIAA struggle to find stopgaps? Why shouldn't the pressure be on illicit filesharers to develop stopgap responses to RIAA attack?
Number one on any list of attacks, of course, has to be to provide a convenient, legal alternative. Generally speaking, P2P filesharing systems are unable to provide universal access, efficient search engines, and numerous value-added services that a convenient, legal alternative could.
I believe that if the RIAA thought along these lines, they could create a successful, new business model that would thwart anything illicit P2P could attempt to do in response.
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Big Thoughts
- RELATED ENTRIES
- That Sound You Hear is the Anti-Neutrality Dam Breaking
- Having (Mostly) Failed with Authors, Amazon Makes a Pitch for the Readers
- And No Kill Switches, Either
- Uncle Amazon Knows What's Best for You (and Itself)
- Muddying the Natural (Patent) Waters
- Congress Restores Bulk Unlock Rights
- When is a Game a Clone?