A Simple Content Management System

[snyders]

Digital library: A scheme which for a symbolic fee allows sharing fo all existing content (films, books, music, etc) without violation of the copyright.  (Sort of Netflix but on-line).

A company  buys 1000 copies of  every existing film, book , song etc. The user can downlowad the content using a specialized program, which ensures that  once the copy is created at a local computer of the user  it  is removed from the computer of the company.  When the user finishes to watch the film, read the book, he "returns"  the copy back to the company (i.e. it is removed from his computer).

The user pays symbolic fee for the service (ex. 10 euro per month) for the ability ot download  any film, book, music, etc.
The fee increases if the user  keeps the file longer than certain fixed period (ex. 2 days for a film,  2 weeks for a book, 1 hour for a song).
The user of course can create a local copy of the content (the same way as the user could copy a book boroughed from the library) but then it is his/her legal responsibility.

Rough estimate: Assuming that 1000 films are produced per year during last 100 years, and a price of  5 eur per film, the company can buy
1000 copies of  each and every film for 500 million euros.

Comments

[vitus_wagner]

Only problem: As long as user have control over his computer, it is theoretically impossible to write
program which ensures that user doesn't have a copy of file on his computer when it is returned to the library.

Simplest scenario - user starts backup procedure while in the middle of wathing film.
Then it "returns" film to the library and restores it from the backup.

Now consider VmWare with its snapshots and ability to take a video from virtual machine screen.

[snyders.livejournal.com]

It's not a problem of the content management system. The system provides means due to which there is no violation of the copyright if the user behaves properly.

" (the same way as the user could copy a book boroughed from the library) but then it is his/her legal responsibility."

Also, there would be no reason to copy information on your computer, if you can always download it for free in instant time.

[vitus_wagner]

There are numerous reasons for user to make a copy:
1. User cannot be sure that he can always download from library. He knows thar library has limited number of copies.
2. User might want to read book using his palmtop computer which cannot be always connected to the Internet.
3. Library couldn't provide "special program" for each and every processor type and operating system out there.
4. User might thing that program provided by the library is malicious (and it is), and prohibit it from his computer for security reason.

Really only solution is to admit, that so-called "right holders" have no techinical means to control spreading of information, so they should have no legal rights to do so.

[snyders.livejournal.com]

I agree, that the user may prefer to keep a backup copy of his favourite films, books in order to be independent from the library.

Solutions:

a. ignore the problem -- its responsibility of the user. If the user wants to photocopy his favourite book in the library we can't stop it either.

b. provide for a small extra fee an option to keep a second copy.

In current P2P systems the user not only makes unauthorised copy for himself, but also participates in a process of creating such copies for others. The system proposed here will greately reduce the factor of sharing unauthorised copies (IF the service will be fast and reliable).

Another benefit is that the system can be used to distribute the revenue among the authors, based on the number of downloads. Ex. if there is an increased demand for some item, the system can buy extra copies, or if users wish to keep extra copies of some items for small extra fee, this fee can go to the authors.

[vitus_wagner]

If your imaginatory library would be hit by meteorite, most of its contents would be lost forever.
If any node of p2p system would be hit, most of the total network contents would be safe, because copies are distributed among many nodes. And TCP/IP network infrastructure is designed to withstand nuclear war.

I think that goal of saving cultural heritage of humanity is much more important, than goal of collecting revenue. With current storage prices it is already feasable to keep full copy of Library of Congress on each personal computer. And it should be goal to persuade.

[snyders.livejournal.com]

>If your imaginatory library would be hit by meteorite

It's an argument, but not a very strong one. The system will be distributed over the globe in order to provide fast service, so there will be no single point of failure. I agree that in P2P the level of de-centralization would be even better.

>I think that goal of saving cultural heritage of humanity is much more important, than goal of collecting revenue.

I agree. But I think it is also important do distribute revenue fairly in order to provide motivation for the authors.

The system I propose will probably not work for the most recent blockbusters, but it would allow to store all content that is more than just 1 year old and for which there is no rush demand. This is much better than 50-100 years of copyright that we have now.