【Research Center for the Legal System of Intellectual Property】

Activities

Protection of Cultural Diversity and Protection of Copyright

Research Associate Yeyoung Lea CHANG

In March 2006, the French National Assembly approved a digital copyright bill that will require DRM (digital rights management) developers to reveal details of their technology by 286 votes to 193. Apple Computer that has "iTunes Music Store" and "iPod" objected this bill strongly, accusing it of "state-sponsored piracy". With a commanding share in the market, "iPod" is designed to play music tracks only from iTunes at this moment and iTunes is incompatible with other competitive music players. If French senators approve the bill, Apple's competitors will be able to infinitely know the FairPlay technology that is Apple's DRM technology. This would force Apple to lose its leading position in the market.

Behind the bill, there would be not only an economic intention that protects local digital content providers by requiring content compatibility among content providers in France, but also an intention that protects French culture from American culture enhancing its influence all over the world. Having actively implemented some policies for cultural protection such as the screen quota system, France believes maintaining and protecting each culture will preserve cultural diversity of the world. For example, "IP Strategic Program 2005" of Japanese government tells, "not only scientific technology but intellectual property in the broad sense of the term such as content or brand is enhancing attractiveness of a nation". From the viewpoint of IP, protecting own culture in each country could have a significant meaning in the respect of fostering each country's unique content or brand.

However, French senate approved the copyright bill by 164 to 128 on May 10 after removing the part of "technological measures should not be an impediment for interoperability in effect". Instead, the senate created a new independent regulatory entity to monitor interoperability. If a company that seeks "improvement of interoperability" requests, the regulatory organization will "make an effort for conciliation" only when the limit caused by the format is "independent of the restrictions that the copyright owner clearly defined". In short, Apple can refuse to reveal its DRM technology for the sake of the copyright owners like the artists who provide their music for iTunes as it has done so far. The effort to protect own culture must have conceded in the face of "protection of copyright".