Among the provisions affected include those requiring DRM technology suppliers to provide information to facilitate interoperability with other DRM schemes.  The Conseil Constitutionnel determined that the definition of "interoperability" presented in the legislation was too vague.  Otherwise it let the interoperability requirement stand, except that it stipulated that DRM suppliers should be entitled to compensation if they provide necessary technical information.

The Conseil Constitutionnel has injected a note of common sense about technology and markets that has otherwise been in short supply during the proceedings over the DADVSI bill.  For one thing, online content retailers are not public utilities.  Furthermore, one cannot wave magic wands over DRM technologies to make them "interoperable"; this can require the sharing of secret information (e.g., key material or key management schemes) that compromises the security of the DRM, or it can be impossible without drastic reengineering of the DRM -- as would be the case with the FairPlay DRM that Apple licensed for iTunes. 

French President Jacques Chirac now has the choice of adopting the legislation as amended by the Conseil or sending it back to Parliament for further deliberation.  Our view, as ever, is that a third course seems even more attractive: just drop it altogether.  The legislation as it stands now is not only vague but toothless as well as purposeless and wasteful (the latter through its creation of a new regulatory body).  The market for online content services -- in France and elsewhere -- is too immature for anyone to declare monopolistic behavior that requires legal remedies.

Get DRM Watch Newsletter

Click here to subscribe to DRM Watch