W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > August 2011

Re: PaySwarm and illegal sales? With ODRL? Compared to CCN

From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 11:24:38 -0700
Message-ID: <4E5A87E6.5010102@sunshine.net>
To: public-webpayments@w3.org
On 8/27/11 2:13 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> Web. We've lived and breathed this stuff for a number of years. It was
> not apparent to us how CCN could be used to reduce piracy. So, what I
> need from you at this point is a link to a paper or article describing
> exactly how it would reduce piracy.

I do not know of such, other than the statements by Van Jacobson in 
his explanatory videos. Since I'm not experienced in this field, and 
you are, I must defer to you on this unless we can get someone from 
CCN or NDN here; because my belief that it would reduce piracy is 
admittedly based largely on an abstract attempt to grasp a projected 
new system that might benefit me personally and that in itself 
probably disqualifies me. Of course, you may also be subject to bias, 
but a least in your case you have specific experiences with the 
struggle itself.


[Steven:]
>> However,
>> before you have worked out code examples for [the use cases] I'd prefer if you
>> merely linked to them, or quoted them in the standard text manner,
>> rather than merging them into the document.

[Manu:]
> I don't understand this request. Are you asking us to not lift the
> text, not re-write the text, or something else? What do you mean by
> "standard text manner"?

I see I was not clear; but that's at least partly because I didn't and 
don't fully understand what your original request was; what did you 
mean by 'merg[e] your use cases into the PaySwarm use cases document'? 
  The document I wrote where I gave those use-cases was a 
self-contained essay, published on the W3C site, and as such my 
assumption is that anyone can make use of it as long as they follow 
appropriate legal and ethical guidelines for fair use.  Did you mean 
by 'merge' some other special use beyond that? (If so, I'm not sure 
this discussion is appropriate for the general list and perhaps we can 
carry it on back-channel).


> I think
> that you're correct in that we really need to have a chat with the CCN
> folks. Could you take an action to get them in touch with this group?

I could attempt that, but I have no real reason to think I am the 
right person to do it, since I do not have personal contacts there, 
and further I do not have the background to be able to ask specific 
questions (and thus find the right people to answer your questions). 
And CCN appears to have multiple outreach channels for people to 
interact with them: If you are seriously in need of knowing things 
about CCN/NDN before going ahead with WebPayments, perhaps if you read 
the "How To Engage With Us" sections on this page:
http://www.parc.com/work/focus-area/content-centric-networking/
you will find an appropriate route.
FWIW, I'll also note that the first CCNx community meeting is 
September 9, 2011:
http://www.ccnx.org/


>....I think the "Certificate of Authenticity" route
> is favorable to the DRM route. I'm starting to get the impression that
> we want to see the same thing happen. :)

Yes. Direct authenticity from the creator to user, without 
middle-manager having 'opened the package', is a major thing that 
attracted me to CCN and caused me to say that I thought piracy would 
be reduced thereby. If WebPayments can do the same thing without CCN, 
the result might be the same.


> I think [PaySwarm can provide this sort of assurance], do the e-mails
>  that I wrote previously describe how that might happen?

Yes. I'm uncertain at this point if the scalability and simplicity of 
CCN, as described in the 2010 video by Jacobson, can be matched; but 
that's essentially a speed issue and a PaySwarm system might well work 
within the necessary ranges to function in the existing web (or not; I 
think it's hard to say at this point and depends on other factors). I 
think the trust and WebID being functional is the big one; if those 
work, then it seems like it may do the job and is probably worth a try.


> http://purl.org/payswarm#Contract
> Most of it may be fairly foreign, but that digital contract contains a
> number of digital signatures that can be used to verify the entity

I'm not familiar with Json (I googled it; http://www.json.org/). I 
take it you are using it because there will be so many different data 
handler formats encountered, and this will be a universal intermediary?

Anyway, overall the PaySwarm examples in the link above do seem to 
handle much of what I'd envision as necessary in basic digital 
transaction/interaction. But we're talking about a huge range of human 
interaction, and I can't honestly say if you've got all the terms that 
you'd need; I was in the ODRL working group for several years and 
although I didn't dig deep enough to completely understand it at all 
levels, I was forced to at least encounter the more esoteric use-cases 
when reading candidate release specifications: things like down-stream 
rights, multiple vs. single owners of property, transferable rights, 
etc. Here's the ODRL 2.0 Model Draft Specification; it covers social 
web and and constraints on actions in some detail:
http://odrl.net/2.0/DS-ODRL-Model.html

I assume you're not going to try to cover all that: and that ODRL can 
be embedded into the PaySwarm data to deal with things you don't cover?

Steven
Received on Sunday, 28 August 2011 18:25:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 28 August 2011 18:25:03 GMT