4 ms·
The only way to produce such a pair of numbers is by using the restricted material as a source -- therefore the numbers would be a derivative work. This is alr
by derekp7 14y ago
The only way to produce such a pair of numbers is by using the restricted material as a source -- therefore the numbers would be a derivative work. This is already covered under copyright law.
Now there is a twist to this concept -- plausible deny-ability. Let's say Bob posts a non-infringing work encrypted with a one time pad (randomly generated), and also posts the one time pad too. Both files would appear to be random text until put together. Further, someone else, Bill, produces a "random" number by XORing the Bob's one-time pad with an infringing work, and uses the result as a one-time pad to encrypt another non-infringing work, and posts both of those files. The two one-time pads can recreate the infringing work by XORing them together. But you can't prove who's "random" file was actually randomly created, and which one was produced as a derivative work. Who do you send the take-down notice to?
- harshreality 14y agoThe initial example presents the same which-part-is-infringing conundrum as the more convoluted example you presented. - restricted material is X - generate Y randomly (using a typical cryptographically secure RNG or PRNG, zero-bias, with an entropy source unlikely to be observed by anyone else) - Z = X xor Y There is no way to prove that it wasn't Z generated randomly, with Y = X xor Z. It's clear that the only way to generate both Y and Z is to have the restricted material, but you don't know which piece is tainted and which isn't. You have to know which piece was generated first to know which one is infringing (the non-infringing one had to be used as input for the infringing one).
- wmf 14y agoThat just encourages the powers that be to take a "shoot 'em both and let God sort it out" approach. Also, the metadata that says Z = X xor Y will be seen as infringing.
- Dylan16807 14y agoI doubt that metadata will be infringing. It doesn't have any real information content.
- takluyver 14y agoI think my case is essentially identical to yours. One of my two numbers (the 'key' of the one time pad) is randomly generated, so it can't be a derivative work. But there's no way of telling which that is.
- derekp7 14y agoThe main difference is that the case I presented, although it may seem to be a stretch, there is a plausible reason for the two random-looking files to be present on one site (or the other). Whereas if each site only had one random-looking file, in neither case was there a plausible reason for that file to be there.