[IETF-IDRM] Fwd: Re: [IDRM] DRM Taxonomy work -- drm framework...

[Thomas Hardjono]

>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:21:24 -0700
>From: Mark Baugher <mbaugher@cisco.com>
>Subject: Re: [IDRM] DRM Taxonomy work -- drm framework...
>X-Sender: mbaugher@mira-sjc5-6.cisco.com
>To: Jason Petrone <jpetrone@cnri.reston.va.us>
>Cc: ietf-idrm@lists.elistx.com
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
>List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-idrm-help@lists.elistx.com>
>List-Post: <mailto:ietf-idrm@lists.elistx.com>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:ietf-idrm-request@lists.elistx.com?body=subscribe>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-idrm-request@lists.elistx.com?body=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.elistx.com/archives/ietf-idrm>
>List-Help: <http://lists.elistx.com/elists/admin_email.shtml>,
>  <mailto:ietf-idrm-request@lists.elistx.com?body=help>
>
>At 10:25 AM 5/21/2001 -0400, Jason Petrone wrote:
>>On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 10:47:39AM -0400, Sam X. Sun (@S2000) wrote:
>> > I think it's a good application model to classify in end-to-end DRM
>> > relationships in terms of content provider and distributor, and 
>> distributor
>> > and content consumer.
>>
>>It might be advantageous to also express the relationship between content
>>creator and content provider.  Under the current content delivery system
>>content providers(publishers, record labels) pay authors, songwriters, etc.
>>based on sales.  Creators rely on the providers to monitor sales, and 
>>sometimes
>>do not receive the full compensation they are due, simply because they do not
>>have direct access to sales figures.
>
>That's a good point.  We have been treating the content provider as the
>representative of all rights holders in the value chain under the supposition
>that the content-provider's enterprise has established mechanisms for
>clearing the transactions among all that have claims to a work.
>
>My understanding is that the rights-holder relationships are much
>simpler for movies than for music, where movie studios generally hold all
>rights to their works but record labels don't (see
>http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20010518/tc/9847_1.html
>for example).
>
>
>>Imagine a system where the author of a book would receive notification from
>>Barnes & Noble whenever a copy of her book was sold.  This would give her 
>>much
>>more bargaining power with her publisher, should it claim sales were 
>>lower than
>>they were.  I am told this is a real problem for authors of books and music
>>which sell slowly.
>>
>>The prerequisites for end-to-end DRM need to be defined.  MPEG-21 outlines
>>four broad requirements for DRM:
>>
>>Identification
>>Description
>>Management
>>Protection
>
>Another good point.  I think we consider the MPEG-21 taxonomy in light of
>Internet requirements.
>
>Mark
>
>
>>These sound right to me, though it still leaves the difficult task of 
>>defining
>>each in a general sense, and not just for motion pictures.
>>
>>Jason