The Digital Media Manifesto



D. Marti


Comments to "Interim draft of Digital Media Manifesto"




Comment on section 3.1.1

The approach suggested seems backwards -- instead of proceeding from the point of view of identifying the specific economic rights of copyright holders, it makes the users or user advocates have to document user rights, which are inevitably more diverse.

How about restructuring the recommendation as:

(This document should not jump to the conclusion that there should be DRM-related mandates in law, so I offer an "if any".)

Comment on section 3.1.4

Original text

Typically, the implementation of a standard require access to IP owned by third parties. The standards bodies require that such IP be accessible at fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.


This does not seem to describe the standards bodies as viewed from the point of view of a small-scale software developer. The minimum payments required for patent licenses mean that license pools as practiced today are discriminatory against small companies and organizations. In addition, the license bodies do not implement a uniform "research license requirement" that would allow, for example, source-only distribution of an MPEG encoder, with the royalties to be paid by the companies that compile it and sell it as part of a product.