Skip to main content

Restricting Anti-Circumvention Devices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cybercrimes: A Multidisciplinary Analysis

Abstract

Until recently, information was recorded in analog form. Early cave paintings may be the oldest known examples of information recording in analog form. The only way to copy a cave painting was to create another painting, close to the original. This situation continued for a long time until the development of the pantograph, an instrument that allows fairly accurate copying of planar line drawings. The subsequent invention of black and white photography provided the ability to faithfully copy images, beyond those of lines on a planar surface. The ability to produce color photographs extended the domain of images to color. Exceptions notwithstanding, in each of these cases, it was unlikely that a copy would have be mistaken for the original. This was due to the fact that it was virtually impossible to capture the precise value of any element in the original analog image. Further, the original and its copy would generally employ different materials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The preceding overview excludes consideration of text, which is digital.

References

  1. McLuhan, M. (1967). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Great Britain: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Diffie, W., & Landau, S. (2009). Privacy and security at risk. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 47–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. US Supreme Court. (1984). Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 417. Technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  4. US Congress. (1998). The Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Statutory Provisions (17 U.S.C. 1201(k)). Technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jefferson, T. (1813, August 13). Letter to Isaac McPherson. Technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  6. US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Docket No. 00-9185, Argued: May 1, 2001, Decided: November 28, 2001. Technical report, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Copy Protection Technical Working Group. Private conversation in the hallway at a meeting.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Retrieved from http://www.cptwg.org/

  9. Cinea. (2002, October 9). Cinea announced it was awarded a $2M grant from national Institute of Science and Technology to develop its anti-piracy technology to prevent digital camera capture of movies.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kraus, D. (2001, November 5). The Phantom Edit, Salon.com. Retrieved from http://dir.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2001/11/05/phantom_edit/index.html

  11. Official Journal C 180 of 25/06/99. Amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the Information Society. COM (1999) 250 final of 21/05/99.

    Google Scholar 

  12. FCC Press Release. FCC EXPLORES DIGITAL BROADCAST COPY, 8 August 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mori, R. et al. (1990). Superdistribution: The concept and the architecture. Transactions of the IEICE, Tokyo, E73(7), 1133–1146.

    Google Scholar 

  14. US Department of Commerce. (2001, December 4). Press Release. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/g01-111.htm

  15. AES. AES Homepage on the National Institute of Standards and Technology website. Retrieved from http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/

  16. Goldberger, I, & Wagner, D. (1996, January). Randomness and the Netscape Browser. Dr. Dobb’s Journal, pp 66–70.

    Google Scholar 

  17. San Jose Division United States District Court for the Northen District of California. United States of America v. Elcom Ltd., a/k/a Elcomsoft Co., Ltd. and Dmitry Sklyarov, Case No.: CR 01-20138 RMW. Technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  18. The pseudonym of the author Screamer. Retrieved from http://cryptome.org/

  19. Retrieved from http://www.dvdcca.org/faq.html

  20. Retrieved from http://www.macrovision.com/solutions/video/copyprotect/index.php3

  21. WAEA Specification 0598. Retrieved from http://www.macrovision.com/solutions/video/copyprotect/index.php3

  22. Attanasio, C. R. (1973). Virtual machines and data security. Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Computer Systems, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schneck, P. B. (1999, July). Persistent access control to prevent piracy of digital information. Proceedings of the IEEE (pp. 1239–1250).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schneck, P. (2011). Restricting Anti-Circumvention Devices. In: Ghosh, S., Turrini, E. (eds) Cybercrimes: A Multidisciplinary Analysis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13547-7_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics