Alan H. Karp
Alan H. Karp – Making Money Selling Content that Others Are Giving Away
Communications of the ACM, Jan 2003/Vol 46 No 1
Karp is a principal scientist at Hewlett-Packard. He heads up the Virus Safe Computing Initiative, and there is a video of his Google TechTalk Presentation explaining their group’s approach to security, as opposed to HP’s other security teams, on YouTube (can also be linked from page above).
Karp’s security philosophy, the principle of least authority (POLA), limits the capabilities of programs themselves and attempts to put control in the hands of the authorized user. This philosophy has not been successful, and was even scrapped by the NSA, according to Karp. However, Karp says that, despite the inconveniences that come putting all your security chickens in the access control basket, we as users can avoid feature starvation, a phenomenon which occurs when we refrain from taking useful actions (such as adding attachments) or running useful programs because we are afraid of viruses.
Karp holds a BS from Rensselaer Tech and a PhD in Astronomy from University of Maryland. He was an assistant professor at Dartmouth before making the move to industry. After working at IBM for 15 years, he came to HP. Great links to his projects, notably Polaris, on Karp’s HP bio site.
He does not have much of an online presence in terms of social media, but he has written or collaborated on over 40 articles.
A list of Karp’s works can be found here. And this project of Karp’s is just plain exciting.
Karp wrote this piece in 2003, only two years after Napster was shut down and the desperation of industries reliant on copyrighted materials was bared for all to see. As Karp notes, the ability to reproduce exact copies with the same integrity as the original works is an issue that the music, publishing, and movie industries are going to have to adapt to rather than fight.
His main ideas:
1) Despite the invention of technologies that allow users to reproduce, industries who depend on their control of materials have survived. Karp points out the history of technological shifts, such as the invention of copy machines and video recorders. Publishing houses and production companies still produce books and movies, despite the availability of technology that lets users reproduce from originals.
Question: Should we really treat the advancements of digital reproduction capabilities the same as we treated the invention of copy machines? I say no, because we have to factor in integrity. A copy machine can copy text, but not the book experience. An mp3 replicates material and user experience.
2) Other industries – like the adult film industry – have embraced unregulated copying and file sharing and are thriving. Why? He leaves this question open, and I am interested in hearing what others have to say about this. I think that sharing sparks interest and creates communities in which more sharing takes place. Members of the communities then seek out material they’ve been introduced to and find new, available material in the process, which they then share. People are willing to pay for the familiar, and familiarity is bred within communities. A price tag and a copyright do not necessarily make for a commodity; user interest gives that file value, and sharing materials within communities generates such interest.
3) The industries that feel threatened need to look at the two aspects to profitable business, as Karp states: added value and barriers to entry. What can they provide that the competition can’t, and how are they going to maintain that ability to provide such unique services so their competition doesn’t drive them out of business?
4) Change is inevitable, and these industries must adapt. Their business model has been built around what these industries previously had to offer in the way of added value. Now that their goods are easily and cheaply reproduced and far more accessible than ever before, publishers and production companies have to repackage their products (Karp suggests with metadata) in order to continue to appeal to their audiences.
I’m glad Karp offered solutions, but I wouldn’t find his ideas comforting if I made money selling copyrighted materials. Do you think he was on the right track? Is metadata the key? Do we care enough about special features (iTunes Extras?) to pay for a movie, a book, or a song? These industries face the challenge of redefining and repackaging the user experience and selling it as something that can’t be found in the file itself.