There is some degree of uncertainty when it comes to deciding whether private intellectual property, like any other private property, can be rented.
The simple answer is: “Yes, whilst it remains private property”
That means whilst undisclosed and inaccessible, because privacy delimits private intellectual property. Use does not necessarily compromise privacy.
In the case of digital art this consequently means that if you permit someone access to your art, it is disclosed and cannot therefore remain your exclusive private property. So if you rent a digital video to someone on a DVD, then they have access to make a copy of the DVD, and you cannot effectively rent the digital work upon it. This is because unless you contract the recipient to nondisclosure (a rather disagreeable practice), you have effectively published the work to them.
In order to enable rent, you must therefore physically prevent access to the work and retain ownership of the physical container of the work. However, whatever information the work permits access to is not subject to rental – it has been disclosed to the renter.
So, CDs can be rented in that the physical media must be returned, but this doesn’t rent the music thereon – the music is effectively published to the renter.
Game cartridges can be rented, but the renter can still obtain the software, given access is provided via electrical contacts. If the software is encrypted, the renter is free to apply whatever methods to decrypt it.
Sealed, handheld video players can be rented, and effectively enable rental of the work therein, given that access is only available via the screen – though this can of course be legitimately filmed. What the renter cannot do is physically break into the player in order to access the digital work. This is because it is not their physical property and their rental agreement does not permit damage.
In this case, the video is not private (can be publicly performed and recordings can be redistributed), but the details of its encoding are private. To break in to the unit in order to obtain access to the digital encoding should therefore be considered a privacy violation.
The legitimate alternative is to purchase the unit – in which case damage is a cost borne, and a privilege enjoyed, by the owner.
Sounds pretty good. My only concern would be for workarounds where someone else technically owns your computer, like the phone company used to own phones in the U.S. and people just rented them. It’s hard to imagine going that route with our computers, but I can imagine the combination of lobbying power and terrorism hysteria could get some stupid laws passed. E.g., you can only connect to the network with an approved device from company X that you rent by the month. Of course, in that regime, freedom in general will be a memory.
Comment #000067 at
2007-01-03 22:10
by
Sure, it is conceivable that computers (general purpose or not) could become a proscribed good (state owned and provided on loan), but then as you indicate, a more fundamental imposition upon individual liberty will have occurred.
But, assuming we are able to purchase or rent computing devices, I think it’s useful to think about where and when delivery of IP actually occurs – and whether IP can effectively remain private in a rented device.
Naturally, I am ignoring copyright and patents.
Comment #000069 at
2007-01-04 08:22
by
Crosbie Fitch
There is some degree of uncertainty when it comes to deciding whether private intellectual property, like any other private property, can be rented.
The simple answer is: “Yes, whilst it remains private property”
That means whilst undisclosed and inaccessible, because privacy delimits private intellectual property. Use does not necessarily compromise privacy.
In the case of digital art this consequently means that if you permit someone access to your art, it is disclosed and cannot therefore remain your exclusive private property. So if you rent a digital video to someone on a DVD, then they have access to make a copy of the DVD, and you cannot effectively rent the digital work upon it. This is because unless you contract the recipient to nondisclosure (a rather disagreeable practice), you have effectively published the work to them.
In order to enable rent, you must therefore physically prevent access to the work and retain ownership of the physical container of the work. However, whatever information the work permits access to is not subject to rental – it has been disclosed to the renter.
So, CDs can be rented in that the physical media must be returned, but this doesn’t rent the music thereon – the music is effectively published to the renter.
Game cartridges can be rented, but the renter can still obtain the software, given access is provided via electrical contacts. If the software is encrypted, the renter is free to apply whatever methods to decrypt it.
Sealed, handheld video players can be rented, and effectively enable rental of the work therein, given that access is only available via the screen – though this can of course be legitimately filmed. What the renter cannot do is physically break into the player in order to access the digital work. This is because it is not their physical property and their rental agreement does not permit damage.
In this case, the video is not private (can be publicly performed and recordings can be redistributed), but the details of its encoding are private. To break in to the unit in order to obtain access to the digital encoding should therefore be considered a privacy violation.
The legitimate alternative is to purchase the unit – in which case damage is a cost borne, and a privilege enjoyed, by the owner.