The Digital Media Manifesto

 

Source

L. Chiariglione

Title

Response to "Comments on Complete draft of Digital Media Manifesto"

No.

030924chiariglione01

 

Commented text is in italic


The Excutive Summary and Introduction is clear.

One suggestion is that the list of steps at the end of the Introduction could be broken up into two sections.

 It is clear as you read on that some of the steps are only policy actions requiring lobbying outside of the DMP, while the remaining steps are technical work that could be accomplished withing the DMP.

Your words seem to make tje DMP a lobbying organisation. This is not the intention. The DMP should, besides developing technical specifications and recommended practices develop "Recommended Actions". These may require some "follow up", but I would hesitate calling them "lobbying".

However at first glance, one could easily fall into the trap of coming to the conclusion "fine, these are admirable goals, but it could hardly be accomplish within the DMP".

Of course individual companies may decide to lobby but I do not think lobbying should be part of the mission of the DMP.


 Section 2.

This section is a little long.  I guess it is good to guide the reader along with the historial development but I got lost in the forest until I came to the section on "Acting on two fronts to break through"

 So I guess the 6 sections prior to that was a result of dicsussions that led to the Action.  It was probably useful during the development of the Manifesto, but probably could be moved to an appendix for those who are interested to read further.

As much as those participating in the DMM discussions had benefits from what appear in those sections, so will those who did not take part in the discussions. Don't forget that these matters may appear as "obvious" to us, but they are not for many people outside.

 I beieve the last 3 paragraphs are the most relevant to this section.  It tells you what the Objectives are and how to get there and the benefits. Hence the DMP.


Section 4:

On the development of RA. How are these RA supposed to work? The problem with the free world is that people are allowed free speech and unfortunately, it may remain just an opinion or policy of the DMP.  DMP will need a lot more momentum behind it for this to affect the change, some of which are so deeply entranched in business and governmental policies.

The value of the Recommended Action will stem from two elements: the fact that they are good and the fact that they come from a body that (hopefully) will be supported by the major stakeholders.

 To put it bluntly, if I may.  Why would the people setting business policies listen to what is being said in the RA. They will carry on with business as usual until, the competitor takes some action or the government legislate it.

I like to take the example of the US. When there are some thorny issues involving different business players (and of course affecting the citizens at large) the government/congress says: you have better find an agreement quickly, or else we will legislate (meaning - my interpretation - we will create such a mess that you will bitterly repent not having found an agreement among yourselves).

So, what is the gauge of the success of the RA? Is the scope to draft the RA and then release it to the relevent parties.  Any feedback and further action would be more that we can hope for? I am afraid that would be the only posible deliverable for the RA.


 Finally on the benefits

The potential benefits to the different parties seems to be a promise of better control over one's rights, better access, potential increase in service offerings.  For DMP to be a real revolution, it will need to offer something more.  There really needs to be a paradigm shift.

Paradigm shift is a beautiful expression and we are all for it. Read http://contrib.chiariglione.org/030724chiariglione01.htm#Hurdles_in_deciding_digital_content_distribution

to see what current players think of it. To be a credible proposition the DMM needs to look at the first step (which does not mean that people have no dreams of their own).

The mobile communication exploded not because it is fully interoperable or protected the user privacy.  In fact, it was the contrary.  In the initial stages, none of the telcos have roaming arrangements with one another and you cannot send SMS to someone using a different service provider.  And today one is flooded with SPAM, or gets calls in the middle of the night while he/she is on holiday.

However, the mobile communications flourished because it provided a new paradigm. 

Yes, but the control remained in the hands of existing players.

The mobile phone is attached to the person, when you call the number you expect the person to answer and not the secretary or someone who happens to be close to the phone.  To the user it provides the always connected feeling.  It frees the person to conduct his affairs while on the move.  To the teenagers, the SMS is a must have as it allows them communicate and express themselves in a manner not possible before.

Personally, I would like to think that there is some revolution in DM. However, for the moment I am resigned to feel the DM is somehow caught in a situation where it is a nice to have but not a must have item.

This is because you want to have your paradigm shift now. Keep it for later.

So likewise, it seems to me that the DMP is saying it would be nice to resolve this problems.  I am not hearing a group of industry players saying we must solve this.

15 years ago there was no group of industries asking for MPEG.