From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@invweb.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 09:43:42 +0800
To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Subject: Re: Hughes Markets? (Was Re: Copyright commerce and the street	 musician protocol)
In-Reply-To: <v0311073fb08806bd261a@[139.167.130.248]>
Message-ID: <199711070123.UAA26060@users.invweb.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <v0311073fb08806bd261a@[139.167.130.248]>, on 11/06/97 
   at 06:44 PM, Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com> said:

>--- begin forwarded text


>X-Sender: hutchinson@click.ncri.com
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 14:52:30 -0500
>To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
>From: hutchinson@ncri.com (Art Hutchinson)
>Subject: Re: Hughes Markets? (Was Re: Copyright commerce and the street
>musician protocol)
>Cc: dcsb@ai.mit.edu
>Sender: bounce-dcsb@ai.mit.edu
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: hutchinson@ncri.com (Art Hutchinson)

>Robert Hettinga wrote:

>>A whole bunch of people are now talking about these cash-settled recursive
>>auction processes, and they're a direct, and now obvious, consequence of
>>bearer (or at least instant) settlement markets for information on geodesic
>>networks. When you add anonymity to the transaction, you pretty much have
>>the final straw for "rights" tracking. Watermarks just tell you who the
>>information was stolen from, for instance. So, one more industrial
>>information process bites the dust.

>Whoa!  Hang on here.  Sure, watermarks will tell you who information was
>stolen from, but they're just a stalking horse... a weak second cousin to
>*persistent* content control technologies (such as IBM's Cryptolopes and
>Intertrust's Digiboxes).  These allow rightsholders to manage a wide
>range of parameters (including price, usage context, and any other
>variable for which you can imagine having a certificate).  Whats
>fundamentally different about what are generically referred to as secure
>envelopes, is that they can maintain controls *indefinitely*
>(persistence), across an un-
>known, ad hoc, web of distribution over which one otherwise has no
>control.  And yes, this can all work even in a completely disconnected
>environment (laptop at 35,000 feet).

>They allow rightsholders, if they so choose, to *continue* being rights-
>holders in a highly networked, digital world, and in a wide range of new
>ways, based on entirely new (or old) business models, that take advantage
>of rich/elaborate conditions for usage (e.g. you can view this picture
>anonymously, but it will cost you 2X as much, and you can only get it at
>low resolution, and you can't view it at all unless you can prove that
>you don't live in the Middle East).  No certificate for these conditions?
>Sorry, no content.

>They are based the same basic stuff (public key cryptography of course)
>that *can* fuel wild anarchic visions of anonymous exchange.  ;)

>But they aren't at all deterministic of any particular economic model.

Well how exactly does one prevent data from being stolen once it has been
unlocked? I pay my 2X to view the picture anonymously and now I copy it
save it and distribute it worldwide. I fail to see how any
encryption/watermark scheme can prevent me from doing so.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNGJtMI9Co1n+aLhhAQGFlAQAokcnZwm0n4yfPfKge6oJD01xU2OgwAAG
ewQpeRZZWBvo86OgYEH9cNOX8JnGodmA70KeRNeyK1MeZl62RFj76IrPZkCCCB9w
42g9Y9AKevmKC+mVWhW7Q1IaidRs6nCj/uIzCtPwS/dIwdISE9bTyAbZIXV1xEOz
hboWKKX/fXM=
=Hoo8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----