Congress Ponders Internet Piracy
Digital Rights Management

by Jonathan Yarowsky
NATO Washington Counsel

In previous editions of In Focus, we have provided brief updates on an issue that increasingly looms as a major concern of content providers, of consumer electronics manufacturers and technologists and of policymakers here in Washington and abroad: the protection of digital content or digital rights management. The concern has only intensified with the expansion of the online marketplace.

For NATO members, digital rights management is not merely a distant policy fight between other interests. Theatre owners have always been on the interactive “front line” with the viewing public, and have thrived on the primacy of theatrical release of motion pictures. There is a reason why studios release movies in the theatres first – they are the best venues for viewing movies. That being said, studios are constantly looking for ways to increase their revenue intake from films, and the Internet and digital technology provide an additional avenue for additional release. On the one hand, this development has the potential to help theatre owners because it would allow studios to make stronger investments in making better movies as they increase their revenue from this additional source. On the other hand, studios seeking to move forward the release date of first-run motion pictures on other “platforms” could impact moviehouse attendance. This is precisely why the digital revolution needs to be closely watched – and embraced as new uses of the theatre venue provide a welcomed “next stage” in the business model for many of our members.

Copyright piracy is an abiding issue for theatre owners. Piracy of movies destroys the incentive for artists and creators to bring fresh visions and products to U.S. consumers and certainly denies theatre owners the revenue stream justly earned by their enterprise. As Congress and the private sector consider how to defeat piracy in an ever-changing technological world, theatre owners must be willing to do their part to protect entertainment product at a cost that is not prohibitive.

For all of these reasons, we are closely tracking the developments briefly described below.

Prompted by calls from a diverse range of content creators seeking to provide their product online to the growing number of consumers utilizing the Internet, a number of committees in both the House and Senate have begun hearings regarding the protection of copyrights in the online marketplace.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee moved quickly in the second session of the 107th Congress to focus attention on how to protect copyrights in the international arena, and whether additional international agreements or protocols are required to prevent piracy. Meanwhile, the Senate Commerce and Judiciary committees have focused on whether a technical standard for digital rights management should be established for the protection of intellectual property online. The debate centers on the tension between those in Congress seeking to encourage the private sector creation of uniform standards, and those who fear that valuable time will be lost unless the federal government moves actively into the area and helps direct and enforce the standards-setting process. In the near future, we expect the House Judiciary and House Commerce Committees to move into the policy debate over digital rights management as well.

As is often the case, the policy struggle is as much about “jurisdiction” as it is about the substance of the issue. Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, has already introduced legislation to address the subject. Two buildings away on Constitution Avenue, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has already stated publicly that no digital rights management legislation “will pass Congress this year without the significant investment of Judiciary Committee.” Given this jurisdictional conflict, as well as the substantive issues that will need to be debated, it will be difficult for Congress to move legislation this year without significant agreement from content providers, the electronics equipment industry and consumers about the proper approach.

As noted above, on the copyright owner side, Hollings has introduced S. 2048, the Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act. This bill, which is supported by a number of movie studios and record companies, gives “representatives of digital media device manufacturers, consumer groups, and copyright owners” one year to create a standard for online copyright protection. If one is not created by the private sector in that timeframe, the bill grants the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to move forward to create those standards itself. While S. 2048 also provides consumers with the right to make a copy of a file (for audio or video home use), it clearly strengthens the control and protection of copyrighted material for the owners of such works.

By contrast, on the consumer and consumer electronics side, representatives Rick Boucher (D-Va.) and Chris Cannon (R-Utah) have introduced H.R. 2724, the Music Online Competition Act of 2001. H.R. 2724 seeks to create a new system that would ensure that online music services not owned by the major labels have “non-discriminatory” access to all copyrighted music at a fair price. Following Boucher’s strong support of fair use of copyrighted material by consumers, the bill also addresses the new practice of placing copy protection on CDs so they cannot be played or copied onto a computer’s hard drive.

You can be sure that as the policy debate unfolds, we will be watching closely to ensure that movie theatres – which stand at the crossroads of both content and technology – continue to grow and thrive in a digital world where “public policy” struggles to keep apace with technological change.

 

Current Issue Previous Issues Newswire Search  Table of Contents