Can someone offer advice? I have a Panasonic DMR-EH75V and am attempting to copy a friend's homemade VHS tape to DVD. She has recorded a number of videos, etc (in the early 1980s) on a tape and wanted to preserve a copy to DVD. Whether I try to copy this to the HDD or direct to DVD the Panny indicates it is copy protected and can't be copied. This is a homemade tape that is 20 years old so should proceed any copy protection schemes!! The tab has been removed to prevent the tape from being recorded over; can this impact? I tried taping over that but had used clear tape.
If anyone has suggestions I would appreciate the assist.

Macrovision copy protection was first included in a movie released on tape in 1985 so, somehow, she's got something on her tape that does have Macrovision protection... not sure how she'd have gotten it on tape, tho?

If that's the problem, only an illegal device can defeat that protection.

Could she have recorded over a pre-recorded tape maybe?

If so, that would explain the tab being removed. She could have put tape over it in order to record on it.

Or maybe someone else made the tape for her and she wasn't even aware that they had used a pre-recorded tape?

Can you fast forward the tape to say, 30 mins in, and try dubbing to hdd? If that doesn't work, the only thing I can think of is to, if you have another vcr, is dub the old tape to a new one, and cut off the first few seconds of the start of the old tape, in case this is a tape that had an old commercial movie , and the very start has the Macrovision signal on it.

I used to tape over commercial movies when I didn't want them any longer. I'd let the tape run a bit to get the pure black screen before the FBI warning message comes up, then start recording. After getting a dvd recorder, I had that warning come up and realized why it was happening.
After that, I always played tapes to just before the program started, rather than sticking the tape in and hitting dub.

Can someone offer advice? I have a Panasonic DMR-EH75V and am attempting to copy a friend's homemade VHS tape to DVD. She has recorded a number of videos, etc (in the early 1980s) on a tape and wanted to preserve a copy to DVD. Whether I try to copy this to the HDD or direct to DVD the Panny indicates it is copy protected and can't be copied. This is a homemade tape that is 20 years old so should proceed any copy protection schemes!! The tab has been removed to prevent the tape from being recorded over; can this impact? I tried taping over that but had used clear tape.
If anyone has suggestions I would appreciate the assist.

This seems to be a common problem with Panasonic recorders. My ES-20 does the same. You will also get the same "copy protected" problem with some TV channels and the Panasonic , even when the station is not copy protected.

The problem is the sync signal on the old tape. Over time lots of things happen, including tape stretch, the camera's tracking shifted, or whatever. Getting old, even for VHS tapes, isn't for sissies. Panasonics seem to be age discriminators.

I had the same "copy protection" issue with some of my older tapes. Try some easy stuff first. Turn off any stabilization features on the VCR (I realize it is counterintuitive, but sometimes works). Then add them in different sequences and see if that helps. Try changing the tracking of the VCR tape. The method should be in you manual.

Since I had a lot of old tapes, I purchased a Sima SCC-2 which helped only if I turned off all stabilization features on the VCR. Even then, it was marginal and tended to give me a blue screen in bad sync areas.

My final solution was to buy a Polaroid 2000g which does not have the problem and gives a better recorded picture. My Panny is disconnected and waiting to be given to charity. I re-did all my old tapes and am happy with the results. The picture is sharper and color truer. Even one which did not work with the Sima recorded on the Polaroid without the Sima. I have used the Sima for color and contrast corrections on some very old and poorly recorded tapes so it has paid its way.

This seems to be a common problem with Panasonic recorders. My ES-20 does the same. You will also get the same "copy protected" problem with some TV channels and the Panasonic , even when the station is not copy protected.

I have 3 Panasonic DVD recorders (E-500, E-65, EZ-17) and none of them have ever exhibited false copy protection on any channel recorded. I have not seen this mentioned as a problem with Panasonic recorders. Perhaps it is something unique to the ES-20, although I have not heard of it before. In general, Panasonics do not have this problem.

I have 3 Panasonic DVD recorders (E-500, E-65, EZ-17) and none of them have ever exhibited false copy protection on any channel recorded. I have not seen this mentioned as a problem with Panasonic recorders. Perhaps it is something unique to the ES-20, although I have not heard of it before. In general, Panasonics do not have this problem.

It is not very common and I have not seen the channel copy protection on my Panny but another in the forum did report it. I have definitely seen the copy protection warning with some old tapes which were not copy protected. Even here the sync has to be fairly well off.

Obviously, devenie has a similar problem, so it may be that recent Panasonics do have the problem while the older ones do not.

One major problem I have seen with the copy protection warning is if you are not watching, it can go right by you and you have no idea why you did not get a good copy. So, if it is a scheduled program and does not record, there are a thousand other reasons you can think of that caused it while it could also have been copy protection. I was fortunate since it came right up when I tried to copy a very out of sync VHS. All the other older tapes copied fine, but not that one.

I believe it has been established that some VCRs weren't too picky about macrovision copy protections. If you copied a movie with macrovision on one of these machines, the macrovision came with it. If you later used that tape for something else, even though it was not a commercial tape, it somehow kept the copyguard and would not copy on later machines. Maybe this is the issue.

I find this hard to believe since most recorders pass the tape through an erase head just before writing to it, so how could the copyguard signal not be erased along with the video and audio data? If it was laid down by a home machine, why wouldn't it be erased by pass through another home machine? And why wouldn't a commercial tape have the signal erased from it when you record over it?

Anyone Know the answers?

I once ran into a very odd situation with my Pio that's still hard to believe...

I was recording a show on basic analog cable, no copy protection on the show (rec. it many times before) when, suddenly, the rec. light flashed and a "Cannot record..." notice appeared on screen. I went to that channel (or I was on it at the time?) and noticed the rec. stopped, then picked back up w/o any intervention from me. It did this a couple of times thru the show. It refused to copy a couple of THE COMMERCIALS!

Ripley's Believe It or Not!? :confused:

Unless the culprit is only something right at the very beginning or end of the tape, and he can easily record over or erase it, it probably would just be easiest to invest in a Sima or similar device. Might find a good price online, or even a coupon to use for it at BB or CC there.

I believe someone here said recently that the EH75V will allow you to insert it between it's VHS and DVD sections. If not, he can just record from another tape deck.

Since it's for a home-recorded tape, I don't think I'd be out of line suggesting that sort of thing here. After all, it's sold legally just for such purposes - transferring home recordings, that is. At least that's what it says on the packaging :).

I agree. I doubt the DEVICE itself is illegal, but the use of it might be if you were to copy content that you have not paid for and were not entitled to. In this case, there can be no question that copyright issues with the content are non existent.

I was recording a show on basic analog cable, no copy protection on the show (rec. it many times before) when, suddenly, the rec. light flashed and a "Cannot record..." notice appeared on screen. I went to that channel (or I was on it at the time?) and noticed the rec. stopped, then picked back up w/o any intervention from me. It did this a couple of times thru the show. It refused to copy a couple of THE COMMERCIALS!
Can you figure out how you did this and then show us ALL how to do it too? I would LOVE to have this feature, as long as it only removed the commercials. PLEASE! :D

Can you figure out how you did this and then show us ALL how to do it too? I would LOVE to have this feature, as long as it only removed the commercials. PLEASE! :D
As I remember it, I had my left forefinger in my right ear, my right forefinger in my left ear and, with my other hand, I held my nose closed and hummed a tune... come to think of it, maybe it was the tune!? :D

As I remember it, I had my left forefinger in my right ear, my right forefinger in my left ear and, with my other hand...

You have three hands?! ;)

You have three hands?! ;)

He lost one to a shark.

For whatever it's worth...
When my DMR-ES45VS DVD Recorder/VCR 'fried' the other day (repeated "U6" error code - the thing became completely inoperable - out of nowhere) I returned to Costco & replaced w/upgraded to DMR-EZ475V model yesterday.
(Model # may or may not relate to regular consumer models: really weird - & frustrating - how Costco's Panny line doesn't correspond to their usual product line-ups re. plasma displays &, I guess, other consumer electronics. To Costco's credit, they took back my 1 1/2 yr. old useless machine & I walked out w/newer one: maybe w/their upgraded "90 day' only policy that wouldn't happen anymore.)
Anyway... I'd 'Timer-recorded' a bit from Charlie Rose PBS show that I wanted to keep that eve. Not wanting to keep the extra material/other interviews, I erased it from DVD-R & sat next day, remote in hand, to record only the 'pertinent' part of the show during afternoon repeat the following day/today.
- The *^&%!! wouldn't record the show exceprt i wanted (& I'd erased it from last night's segment... (Grrr)
There was a "P" light on the front of the unit, standing for "copy-protected" according to a single line of text in the manual (which I finally referred to while 'freaking out' that the machine wouldn't record the darn program...).
There was no relevent reason for this mishap (!).
I eventually (actually, QUICKLY) turned off the recorder, turned it back on (impatiently waiting as it booted up & wasted more time "reading" the disc) and - when it was finally ready to record, recorded what was left of the interview (after missing the best part from the beginning of the interview).
People - this Blows.
Is this machine going to haphazardly going to do this in the future: 'decide' for No Legitimate Reason that the OTA television program is copy-protected? ...
Decide NOT to record that movie on TCM I programmed it to record at 4AM some night?
I really love the machine's awesome "LP" record mode picture quality, but if this happens again I'm ridding myself of this source of major frustration Pronto!

Warning: Point 5 contains a bit of a rant!

In reading dndata's tale of frustration a few things came to mind:

1. Though content providers have *some* rights to protect their copyrights, its' clear that balance between those rights and the legitimate rights of consumers is completely out of whack.

2. No implementation of technical means to protect copyright holders should make equipment fro which one pays good money less useful, or even useless, for its intended legitimate purpose.

3. Consumers should complain to retailers and manufacturers, and should not hestitate to return this crippled garbage at the first opportunity.

4. Perhaps consumers should consider some sort of class-action lawsuit, though I'm not sure who the target(s) should be.

5. It seems that governments act with alacrity to protect the *rights* of big business, but are not nearly so quick to look out for the interests of the consumer. I live in Canada, and recently the the movie industry asked that it be made a crime for someone to take a videocam into a movie theatre! Imagine that! The government, of course, was very quick to say, "We'll do it ASAP." It used to be that copyright violations were *civil* offenses, not criminal offenses. That meant that those with deep pockets would pay to go after those perceived as violaters. Now the taxpayers pay to have the authorities go after those who are perceive to infringe the copyrights.

The civil way provided *some* balance, the criminal way provides very little.

While I "feel your pain", the above rant is naive at best. First of all its hard to organize consumers to do anything as single organized entity against anyone (let alone targeted at a specific group such as content providers). The closest one can come is small organized boycotts that don't really affect the target's bottom line other than perhaps the adverse publicity (assuming the boycott organizers have enough media savvy and clout to get their "cause" covered by the media - ironically, in this case, the news media is more often than not ultimately owned by the same parent entity as the content providers so good luck with that approach). People are generally enamored with their gadgets and seem to have little incentive to fight "the man" as long as they get some illusion of technological freedom as far as content is concerned and are therefore willing to use even "crippled" devices such as VCRS, DVD recorders, Tivo's, or iPods. Besides, with lawsuits, especially class action lawsuits, the only real winners are the lawyers who win no matter which side prevails.

Second, the genie has pretty much been out of the bottle for FAR too long on this one - if consumers thought their "rights" were being violated by implementation of technical means to "protect against copyright infringement" then the fight should have begun way back in the early 80's after the Betamax suit (which highlighted fair use provisions in the law - btw fair use isn't a "right") when Macrvision first showed up on the scene and well before (in the case of the US) the Digital Millenneum Copyrght Act which basically short circuited (and appears to be at least incompatible with) fair use. Lack of significant, universal public outrage at the heavy handed tactics of the RIAA and other similar groups to use untested laws stemming from the DMCA to sue 10 year old girls, wheelchair bound war veterans, stroke victims, and even dead people for file sharing (regardless of intent or even knowledge of doing so) pretty much seals our present fate.

Finally, it doesn't help when the general populace is fairly clueless when it comes to technology and associated laws and isn't in any real hurry to educate themselves. And frankly this extends to the content providers as well - who have demonstrated themselves to be suprisingly slow on the uptake to redifine their business models in the wake of these emerging/evolving technologies such that everyone wins rather than shackling everyone with this DRM cr@p and deluding themselves that they are technologically savvy for doing so - morons!