Hello Paul,
Good stuff ... ;-)
> Paul: Scott, whether it is an original or a copy doesn't
> matter. When one "owns" property one has rights to its
> use.
Hmmm ... I think it does. Only because there is no such thing as an "original" on the Internet. That's the only point. So then you really own a "copy" of that property, or right to use it. And then, since it's so easy to copy ...
I'm suggesting that "one-use" tickets are much easier to do when everything isn't a copy.
> These rights may be limited or exclusive but rarely are
> they absolute. So your discussion of original vs copy is
> irrelevant to the discussion.
We obviously do not share the same opinion on this one. I see what you are getting at, but do not agree ... in a world where only copies exist, and these copies are made on an ongoing process for both legal and illegal distribution, I believe that it creates a technical hurdle that you do not yet recognize ... and I am failing to explain well.
> Paul: Not if it is encrypted and double keyed. You can
> have a transaction in which you grant rights and do not
> share keys.
These usually are one-use tickets ... not encrypted data. There is a big difference here ...
> ALready Citibank and others are using one time credit card
> keys for ecommerce transactions. So sharing doesn't
> involve transacting unless one desogns an obtuse system.
So a one-use ticket can be used to control a transaction, however this is not being used to encrypt data ... they are simply created signed keys, which have expiration and other parameters, and tracking them in a database. Once used, they are invalidated in the database.
The same process doesn't work the same for unencrypting data, such as an MP3. Once unlocked ... it's gone forever.
> Paul: Once again although this is interesting it is not
> relevant to say a transaction in which I purchase the
> right to listen to a music album over the internet and
> store that right in the form of a key in my personal
> directory for use wherever I happen to be. That is virtual
> property --- something I own and purchase for use in
> cyberspace.
I agreed with you that storing the key, the credential, is no problem. My statement was:
"The one issue with sharing is that once "shared" it can be copied ..." ... and I'll stand by this statement. I do not believe that you can find an example where this is not true.
To consume the MP3, I have to listen to ... I can now record it, and it's out. One shared, it's out ... ;-)
Scott C. Lemon |
