News Release

April 25, 2002

Banning 'Freedom of Engineering' Is No Remedy for Movie and Music Piracy, Scholar Says

WASHINGTON--Today, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hear testimony from News Corporation chief Peter Chernin and AOL Time Warner COO Richard Parsons. The hearing's topic is "Ensuring Content Protection in the Digital Age." Clyde Wayne Crews Jr., director of technology policy studies at the Cato Institute, had the following remarks:

"Panicked by escalating digital piracy post-Napster, Hollywood movie studios and record companies are seeking government-mandated copy protection. Two bills dominate the debate. One by Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.) and a companion House bill would prohibit the sale of digital devices that do not incorporate technology to shield digital content, and would make it illegal to remove or disable the technology.

"But what would such a law really mean? The essence of personal computing is freely copying and playing files, evidenced by such pro-consumer moves as growing MP3 support in electronic devices like DVD players. Hollings' proposal apparently would make such initiatives--as well as offerings like open source software media players--illegal.

"Digitization has created a genuine crisis for copyright holders. But legislation that turns content providers and the computer and consumer-device makers they depend upon into enemies is outrageous. Mandated copy protection is worse than the run-of-the-mill protectionism that Hollings usually favors, which is often directed at market rivals. Here, a complaining industry seeks to force its own market partners -- hardware makers -- to change their behavior so that it might thrive.

"Politicians have no legitimate authority to outlaw the development of entire categories of computing technology. More is at stake than simply a matter of a one-size-fits-all government standard having no place in computer programming, or the need to avoid 'premature' regulation: Legislators have no business telling us what kinds of machines and software we can invent for personal use--period.

"Movie studios and record companies have ample incentives to develop a wide range of workable copy protection technologies, and to develop legitimate partnerships with hardware makers rather than try to push them around in Washington. That effort can begin when today's Washington-created expectation that others will shoulder the burden of one's piracy woes is finally put to rest.

"Content providers should be supported in their privately driven copy protection efforts. But they must not be allowed to sabotage the freedom of engineering that the technology industry absolutely cannot do without."