The idea is that only a central authority (or authorities) could update the contents of the DRUMS database, but that any outside application or service could query it.

For example, such outside applications/services could freely build their own databases for recommendation engines, artist biographical info & reviews, commerce, and so on. And, such outside apps/service may also choose to interconnect, which becomes a much easier task if they all start off by sharing common authoritative IDs for the different works...

Technically the infrastructure provided by the DNS system is all you need to implement this, and well suited to the task to boot! What's particularly nice about the DNS model is that storing, maintaining, and updating data for any specific domain is delegated to the domain's owner, not the central authority. This is precisely what you want for a database that would track ownership of IP. Of course, convincing people to include new data in their DNS records is damn near impossible so you pretty much have to reinvent the wheel which is unfortunate.

That said, building the system is the easy part. The hard part is bootstrapping it. Why should service providers bother to implement support for the system unless it is commonly used by content creators? Contrariwise, why should content creators bother to register with the system if service providers don't support it? To wit, the hard problem is not a technical problem, it's a social problem.

I think m's post offers one possible approach to solving the bootstrapping problem.

(Dan)

Hey Dan,

Regarding the question of whether service providers would bother to implement something like DRUMS...

I'd say that initially, the intention is to propose a step forward that actually stands a chance of getting the support of both conventional rightsholders as well as those with a new vision.

If that happens, there is a real shot. Obviously there would still plenty of hurdles to overcome, but if even a small portion of the p2p argument energy could be spent on discussing how to make something like this work, I suspect it can.

Also, I should note that it's not as if all providers would need to participate -- only those that want to build/provide DRUMS services...

-Scott

It's true that not all providers need to participate in DRUMS, but you still need a critical mass of provider support to make it worthwhile for creators to bother with it.

In the early nineties, there was an effort to make people's PGP public keys available through the DNS system. Technically speaking, the effort was a success. RFC's were written, the DNS record type(s) needed to support this are available, and modern versions of bind support this use. Practically speaking, however, this was and is a complete failure. Most PGP users make their keys available via the public keyservers, their web pages, or by attending keysigning parties. Although the technology needed to distribute public keys via DNS exists, virtually nobody uses it. Reading up on the history of this would probably be well worth your while since it might suggest how to save DRUMS from a similar fate or, at the very least, illuminate some pitfalls to avoid.

In order from DRUMS to succeed, you need to convince creators and service providers alike that it offers them significant value. I agree that DRUMS is a step forward... to somewhere. But where will DRUMS take creators, consumers, and service providers? What is the goal? One of the obvious benefits that DRUMS could facilitate is allowing creators and service providers to profit from content in new ways. But, playing devil's advocate, how will it do that?

Hi Dan,

I'd actually say that getting rightsholders to participate is the bigger challenge, as compared to ISPs. If substantial numbers of rightsholders do in fact choose to participate, then my guess is that ISPs would have no reason not to (keep in mind that ISPs are generally hunting for ways to add value to their services).

(and again, it might start off mostly with ventures that want to provide related services)

As I see it, something like DRUMS would need to be in place for most of the "alternative copyright systems" that I've seen discussed, and it could similarly benefit more conventional approaches.

I guess my point is that it seems like no matter what the final outcome, we'll want something like this anyway, and as I outlined it, I think it's something that can appeal to both "sides" of the debate...

-Scott