The road less traveled has been particularly long and rocky for University computer science professor Edward Felten.
Since developing an innovative method of breaking the code intended to protect digital music files from being copied, Felten has been involved in a complicated legal battle with some of the record industry's most powerful forces who threatened to sue if he published his research.
On Nov. 5, the Federal District Court in Trenton is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case Felten filed against such formidable defendants as the Secure Digital Music Initiative, Verance, the Recording Industry Association of America and the federal government last June.
Though the court granted Felten permission to legally publish his research results last August, the defendants maintain their right to veto publication of scholarly papers pertaining to the particular "watermarking" copyright technology Felten has been investigating.
By persisting in light of the defendants' repeated motions to dismiss the case, Felten hopes to protect both researchers and publishers involved in similar copyright cases in the future.
Watermarking is a method of preventing the illegal copying of digital music files by embedding security data into the sound waves themselves. If the song were copied or tampered with, as it would be in pirated music, the sound itself would be affected.
New digital music players would be manufactured so that they only played watermarked music, thus eliminating the problems of copyright enfringement.Felten's crusade against research censorship began last year when he and a research team took up a challenge issued by SDMI to break the code of their watermarking technology. Denying the $10,000 cash prize offered to participants, Felten endeavored to make his findings public for the sake of further research.
Before Felten and his team were able to publish their results in April, as they had planned, he received a letter signed by a representative of both RIAA and SDMI warning that if he published his results he would be sued under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
However, the claim that Felten's scholarly report fell under the jurisdiction of the DMCA was allegedly unsubstantiated, he said.
"The copyright law makes it a crime to copy material; this isn't about copying material at all, it's about disseminating technical means," University computer science professor and Felten's friend Andrew Appel said.
Though Felten said accusations that his research violated the DMCA have "no merit," he decided to take legal precautions by obtaining permission to publish his results from a Federal District Court in Trenton. The penalty for a first offense violation of the DMCA is a fee of up to $500,000.
The UFENIX Association joined him as plaintiffs in the case "because they wanted to publish the paper of ours that originally got this started," Felten said.
The court granted Felten and his team the permission to publish his research and present it at a UFENIX Security Conference this past August. Felten said that the work was "well-received" and "highly rated by conference reviewers." All information discussed at the conference is now available on the web.
The issue is far from being resolved. After the initial lawsuit had been filed, all the defendants changed their positions and gave Felten permission to publish his work with one stipulation: They wanted to reserve the power to veto any future papers dealing with watermark technology.
Many of Felten's colleagues at Princeton and other universities and private institutions are conducting follow-up research and "all have this cloud hanging over them that the recording industry is likely to sue," he said.
Regardless of the court's ultimate ruling, Felten has resolved to continue his research. "We think the work has a number of uses," he said. "It tells people who are trying to develop a watermark system what hurdles they must leap."
Felten also emphasized the importance of discovering whether or not it is possible to hide information by using such encryption techniques.
Felten summarized his justification for pursuing the case simply: "Essentially, we prefer knowledge to ignorance."
Read More
As endowment tax looms, Princeton asks departments to make plans for ‘permanent’ budget cuts, warns of potential layoffs
Christopher Bao and Annie RupertusPrinceton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Princeton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Newark airport disruptions snarl student travel plans
Cynthia TorresNewark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. As a result, some students flying home for the summer have changed their flights.
Newark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. Some students flying home for the summer and may be effected by delays and some students changed their flights.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ’03 ‘plagiarized’ small portions of his senior thesis, experts say. But how serious is it?
Sena ChangA review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.
A review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.