Kaleidescape Settles Lawsuit With DVD CCA - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-10-2014, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wattheF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryn Ravenlocke View Post

You quite obviously have a Premiere Line system. Although they are steeply priced, they are designed for people with dedicated home theatres and as such, the price point, while high, is not nearly as bad as it sounds at first.

I think where most people (I could be wrong) are getting hung up is on the price of Kaleidescape's "economy model" the Cinema One. The Cinema One starts at $4,000 and only holds roughly 100 BDs. That's basically the collection of a casual viewer. But the price point for the Cinema One is hardly directed at the casual viewer, it is directed at avid enthusiasts. An avid enthusiast can do far more with $4K than get a glorified streamer that doesn't even feature the redundancy security of the Premiere Line. Either the price on the Cinema One needs to come way down, or the ability to affordably expand it needs to be added. Simply put, its price targets aficionados while its performance targets the casual HT hobbyist. That's where the disconnect is.

The price of the Premiere Line is steep, but short of the BD Vault (DV700), it is pretty much in-line with what I would expect out of a premium, plug-and-play, set-and-forget home theatre server.

AMEN! They are way off target with their pricing. I can buy 300-400 blurays over the course of time for that price and not have the huge upfront cost, which I just don't have. I do consider myself a HT enthusiast but I am on a budget. I buy about 2-3 bluray movies (on discount) a month and supplement with rentals. Works just fine for me. IMO even the premium package, with its higher capacity, is overpriced.
wattheF is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-10-2014, 10:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisb View Post

Not sure why there is a UV vs. Blu-ray conversation going on here. UV is great, but it is great as part of a Blu-ray purchase. With rare exception, outside of some day 1 purchases, you can purchase blu-ray's for equal to or less than online-only UV purchase and they come with the UV. Having the highest quality option (for easy loaning, viewing on the theater, putting on your server etc) while you have the full benefits of UV for times you want to view it that way, is the best of both worlds. You can use that UV license to download the full version onto your Kaleidescape system if you have one and you still have the disc. You don't have to worry about if someone drops the title on whatever store (vudu, flixster, etc never have all the titles available at the same time and some) or if the studio yanks viewing rights temporarily because they worked some deal with a TV station (as happened during the holidays with some titles).

Buying UV /w the Blu-ray is frankly throwing away money, quality and flexibility.

Totally different topic is "buying" online title that isn't UV, something that is locked to the specific store you bought it from, requiring you to always buy from the same location or struggle to flip between services to remember where your titles are. Frankly this is just silly and shows an obliviousness to the recent past of what happened with many "purchases" made from drm'd digital music providers. Purchasing blu-ray's in this case is the only logical choice unless you are treating your online 'purchase' as more of a longer term rental that you expect to lose (as folks essentially do with apps for mobile devices - when you switch services, upgrade to a phone that isn't compatible, provider simply stops showing the game in the store if you need to reinstall, etc.)

I've got so many discs with that UV 'convenience', but I've never really felt it was convenient to spend the time to cash in on a single one of them.
mo949 is offline  
Old 06-10-2014, 01:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
SMHarman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post


I've got so many discs with that UV 'convenience', but I've never really felt it was convenient to spend the time to cash in on a single one of them.

If you really don't want them you can put the codes up on ebay and make a few $$s.

AaronMK likes this.
SMHarman is online now  
Old 06-10-2014, 01:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
SMHarman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattheF View Post


AMEN! They are way off target with their pricing. I can buy 300-400 blurays over the course of time for that price and not have the huge upfront cost, which I just don't have. I do consider myself a HT enthusiast but I am on a budget. I buy about 2-3 bluray movies (on discount) a month and supplement with rentals. Works just fine for me. IMO even the premium package, with its higher capacity, is overpriced.

But you are buying the coding and developement that went into the GUI / a current small population of users.

 

You are buying the infrastructure that gives distribution of bit for bit BD quality

 

You are buying the cataloging and indexing that gives the neato scene selection etc.  Like this copy of Blade Runner, all 5 copies on one download etc.

SMHarman is online now  
Old 06-10-2014, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wattheF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 131
That's great if I were rich and even then...meh

I am still a fan of physical media.
AaronMK likes this.
wattheF is offline  
Old 06-10-2014, 02:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,245
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 1019
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattheF View Post

That's great if I were rich and even then...meh

I am still a fan of physical media.


Especially since you can "rip" it and enjoy it full quality anyways.
AaronMK likes this.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 06-10-2014, 03:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
SMHarman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattheF View Post

That's great if I were rich and even then...meh

I am still a fan of physical media.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post


Especially since you can "rip" it and enjoy it full quality anyways.

Im not a customer either but I can see the value propostion to some people.

SMHarman is online now  
Old 06-11-2014, 10:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sebberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,268
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Yet another ruling/settlement that stifles innovation.
AaronMK likes this.
sebberry is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 12:48 AM
Senior Member
 
Aryn Ravenlocke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tempe, AZ, USA
Posts: 485
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Yet another ruling/settlement that stifles innovation.
Pretty much this. At this point, Kaleidescape is merely the Rolls Royce of disk library systems, doing exactly what the vast majority of HTPC owners do anyway. Forcing them to stop allowing individuals to add their discs to the server by simply inserting it into a player and selecting the rip option is going to have less than zero impact on the market in terms of consumers ripping media. Only the most affluent users are making use of Kaleidescape Premiere.
Sadly, if this is the future for Kaleidescape, it seems I will not be getting one after all. It has quite visibly dominated the top of my list of "investment wants" for years now. Now, here I am looking at a very real possibility of being able to go that route in just over a year. But if I'm not able to put my collection of over 3,000 titles onto the server, then I'll simply have to stick with my HTPC running XBMC and Media Browser 3.
Aryn Ravenlocke is online now  
Old 06-12-2014, 07:43 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,450
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1774 Post(s)
Liked: 3091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryn Ravenlocke View Post
Pretty much this. At this point, Kaleidescape is merely the Rolls Royce of disk library systems, doing exactly what the vast majority of HTPC owners do anyway. Forcing them to stop allowing individuals to add their discs to the server by simply inserting it into a player and selecting the rip option is going to have less than zero impact on the market in terms of consumers ripping media. Only the most affluent users are making use of Kaleidescape Premiere.
Sadly, if this is the future for Kaleidescape, it seems I will not be getting one after all. It has quite visibly dominated the top of my list of "investment wants" for years now. Now, here I am looking at a very real possibility of being able to go that route in just over a year. But if I'm not able to put my collection of over 3,000 titles onto the server, then I'll simply have to stick with my HTPC running XBMC and Media Browser 3.
But the decision only affects DVDs, which are (IMO) obsolete in terms of PQ. Blu-ray ripping was already restricted, and nothing has changed on that front.
AaronMK likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 10:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
SMHarman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Though it would be frustrating if you had a big ol pile of Disney DVDs and others that are not yet on UV, have no upgrade path other than a rebuy and that assumes they are out of 'the vault'
SMHarman is online now  
Old 06-12-2014, 11:46 AM
Senior Member
 
Aryn Ravenlocke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tempe, AZ, USA
Posts: 485
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
But the decision only affects DVDs, which are (IMO) obsolete in terms of PQ. Blu-ray ripping was already restricted, and nothing has changed on that front.

While up-converting by no means reaches Blu-ray quality , it is fairly sufficient in many respects, especially when applied to numerous television shows such as MASH, Frasier, Charmed, Cheers, the X-Files, and many, many others. Then there is the fact that many titles, especially some "fringe" titles, simply are not available on Blu-ray even if someone wanted to spend the money to upgrade (like MASH or Cheers for instance). It would also cost more than a Kaleidescape Premiere system to "upgrade" a sizable collection of movies to Blu-ray.


In our house, we have slightly over 3,000 titles on DVD. Considering that a few hundred of those are actually seasons of television shows, that makes just ditching DVD entirely a non-starter.


Even if an upgrade were not cost-prohibitive, until 100% of titles out there are available on Blu-ray or through UVVU (never going to happen), then the ability to load DVDs into the server will have a place.
Aryn Ravenlocke is online now  
Old 06-12-2014, 12:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
This is, although interesting, nothing new. Studios have been on a headhunt in recent years, mainly for an improvement to there falling bottom line. The disk standard is no different that the HDCP standard, it is all about copyright enforcement, and anti-piracy of there products. The studios and there lawyers have spent enough money overseas(except China) that even Europe is strictly enforcing US copyright and piracy laws.

Right now there is no company that specialize in downloading disk to hard drive that is safe from lawsuits. AnyDVD is having it's legal problems, and has several lawsuits now pending against them. To me it reminds me of the late 80's and early 90's when the studios were actively engaged in pursuing film collectors. I vividly remember the LA collector who was shown with LA county deputies removing his B&W 16MM and color 35MM film cans from his residence. Some of which the guy had owned since the 1940's. The collectors argument in court was made on the fact that theses movies were available on VHS and that his collection was private and not used for earning revenue. The studios countered that film did not apply to VHS and the collection was copyrighted for commercial use, not private use and no former proof of transfer(ownership) was found, nor provided. So the collector lost, entered into a agreement with the studios and restocked his collection, for a price.

And also that is why content on Netflix, Amazon video, VUDU and the rest is ever changing. The studios negotiate pullback agreements with these companies. If the studios think there material is not being handled properly, or it ends up on kickass torrents, they pull it and sue. When i say studios, i mean all of them, cinema and TV.

Anyone on here remember when DVD was the next coming thing? Remember the push to have to buy the "rights" to watch the content more than once? The original plan was to have codes that prevented watching the content until a set of codes was entered, allowing for one showing. Like a rental on Amazon Prime or VUDU. After your code expired you had to purchase another set of codes. Luckily, marketing convinced the top bosses that this would kill a profitable upstart business, that was projected to be leaps and bounds over VHS sales, and the concept of pay per view on DVD was shelved.

My four years in distribution with Universal and Lions Gate showed me up front how nasty the studios can be when it comes to copyright infringement or the potential of copyright infringement or piracy. They do not take it lightly, and the FBI notice is not there because it looks pretty.

Blu-ray was touted to the studios for it's anti-piracy measures, not picture quality, so none of this surprises me that they would end the practice of not having the blue-ray disk to watch the movie, in the player.

I still use AnyDVD HD to rip my collection to my HTPC simply for 2056x1080 or 4096x2160 rendering of the source material. Yes, this is a "gray" not illegal activity. I purchase my disks for the same price everyone else pays. The only discounts provide for disks is purchasing thousands at a time. And then it is only a 10 percent discount, on certain titles. And i own the disk i have on my hard drive and stored in the cloud.

For the off subject posters, streaming far surpasses blue-ray quality. Sorry to disappoint you. Streaming can render a 4096x2160 image with no problems, Blue-ray can not.
Digital Cinema Initiatives(DCI) Version 1.2 makes no mention of blue-ray or HDMI 1.4a or HDMI 2.0

For your further reading pleasure on this subject here is a article done by Doris Toumarkine for the Film Journal. You will be impressed.

http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjourn...cd8d64bc8948e7

Or from the horses mouth,

http://www.dcimovies.com/
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 01:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMHarman View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by mo949 


I've got so many discs with that UV 'convenience', but I've never really felt it was convenient to spend the time to cash in on a single one of them.

If you really don't want them you can put the codes up on ebay and make a few $$s.
The above is a prime example of Piracy, and is illegal. The UV codes are for the owner of the disk, they can not be sold or resold. Read UV's fine print. Ebay is browsed by anti-trust groups looking for the next hit.

If you want to do something with the UV codes, give them away, that is legal as it was done without profit.

Profit is the key word here.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 02:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Aryn Ravenlocke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tempe, AZ, USA
Posts: 485
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Blu-ray was touted to the studios for it's anti-piracy measures, not picture quality, so none of this surprises me that they would end the practice of not having the blue-ray disk to watch the movie, in the player.

http://www.dcimovies.com/

DVD vs Blu-ray has always been one of the things about Kaleidescape though. In order to watch a Blu-ray disc via Kaleidescape, the user still needed to have the physical disc in the machine. That's why they developed the BD vault of theirs. It holds 350 discs and allowed full Blu-ray playback. Only after they made the deal with UVVU did that change somewhat. Now, through that partnership, instead of having the disc, the user can get a 1:1 copy through UVVU. The biggest upside there was that it saved a slot in the BD vault, an extremely costly piece of equipment.

When it came to DVDs though, that's when a user could get by without a disc. The discs could be loaded onto the server and then the user could be done with the disc.

This ability to load discs is now disappearing. That's going to make the system far less functional. It also leaves DVD owners with one less solution that doesn't fall into the legal "grey area" of using AnyDVD to put the disc onto a HTPC.
Aryn Ravenlocke is online now  
Old 06-12-2014, 04:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryn Ravenlocke View Post
DVD vs Blu-ray has always been one of the things about Kaleidescape though. In order to watch a Blu-ray disc via Kaleidescape, the user still needed to have the physical disc in the machine. That's why they developed the BD vault of theirs. It holds 350 discs and allowed full Blu-ray playback. Only after they made the deal with UVVU did that change somewhat. Now, through that partnership, instead of having the disc, the user can get a 1:1 copy through UVVU. The biggest upside there was that it saved a slot in the BD vault, an extremely costly piece of equipment.

When it came to DVDs though, that's when a user could get by without a disc. The discs could be loaded onto the server and then the user could be done with the disc.

This ability to load discs is now disappearing. That's going to make the system far less functional. It also leaves DVD owners with one less solution that doesn't fall into the legal "grey area" of using AnyDVD to put the disc onto a HTPC.
This has been in court since 2004, was awarded and went to appeal court in 2009. They kept the wolf out as long as they could.

I do believe the lawsuit was filed for breach of contract and not copyright infringement or piracy.

Yeah that is a blow for Kaleidescape. They made enough off of there product to weather out the storm.

My form of the day read is, Giving up on Blu-Ray: Why i switched to the Cloud.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 04:31 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,450
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1774 Post(s)
Liked: 3091
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

And also that is why content on Netflix, Amazon video, VUDU and the rest is ever changing. The studios negotiate pullback agreements with these companies. If the studios think there material is not being handled properly, or it ends up on kickass torrents, they pull it and sue. When i say studios, i mean all of them, cinema and TV.


http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjourn...cd8d64bc8948e7

Or from the horses mouth,

http://www.dcimovies.com/
Just curious if you know for a fact that has ever happened with Vudu? Has any studio actually tried to sue Walmart over UltraViolet-licensed content?

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 05:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Just curious if you know for a fact that has ever happened with Vudu? Has any studio actually tried to sue Walmart over UltraViolet-licensed content?
I fully understand your question.

I'm not sure with VUDU, there was something about VUDU and WalMart and UV a few years ago. For those who do not know VUDU is part of Wal-Mart Entertainment, has been since 2009. Licensing content changes every time the contract is up for negotiation. Most programming is simply dropped over the price the studio wants for it to continue showing there content AKA Netflix. The other drop is piracy or copyright issues. Actually that is not a drop, that's a lawsuit.

Wal-Mart and Amazon sells more DVD's and Blu-Ray's, around 80 percent of production, then all the other's combined. Amazon gets more disk's than red box gets. Point is, the studios never really challenge the wholesale distributors much. It does happen, but rarely. Warner bros in 1997 made Wal-Mart blink, when they threatened to pull there dvd's from the stores. Warner Bros got there way, and the price they wanted with Wal-Mart, only a hand full of companies pull that off with Wal-Mart.

UV is part of the Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE, LLC), that is a lot of companies and DECE is what makes it work with anything digital. I think just Disney Studios and/or Google is the only non major members in DECE. DECE does all the consumer end of anything digital. DCI is the standard for commercial cinema, as DECE standards are not used in commercial cinema.

What i always found interesting is that Kaleidescape, Inc is a member of DECE. The DVD Copy Control Association, is a partner of DECE, and was the biggest bear for DRM security. Yet for what ever reason, internal or external DVD CCA has had it's target on Kaleidescape, and not on UV or Kickass torrents or other torrents that specialize in providing pirated commercial material.

I can also say i am well outside of my realm of knowledge on anti-trust, copyright, piracy when it comes to the consumer end of it, other than the simple basics.

Bottom line, it is all about money.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 06:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 182 Post(s)
Liked: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
For the off subject posters, streaming far surpasses blue-ray quality. Sorry to disappoint you. Streaming can render a 4096x2160 image with no problems, Blue-ray can not.
Common layman assumption. It's only about resolution right? More is better!

What about bit rate?
AaronMK likes this.

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!

Glimmie is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 06:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glimmie View Post
Common layman assumption. It's only about resolution right? More is better!

What about bit rate?
Bit rate is a problem for real time viewing, i was talking about storage on your device.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 10:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sdg4vfx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern CA
Posts: 1,352
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
 ... the difference between Vudu HDX and Blu-ray is quite small ...
I have nothin' but respect for you and your posts. But unfortunately I have to completely disagree with you on this one.

I can't speak for the "average" viewer, but for most HT buffs and cine-files the difference is obvious (I do titles and vfx for film so almost all of my friends are with me in the latter category). Even my 12yo daughter comments/notices when we're watching streaming content vs blu-rays. To my eye the biggest offender is the reduced range of colors and shades of luminance in streaming materials.

Vainly, I keep hoping that future formats will improve picture quality rather than keep pushing the lower limits of what the "average" audience will notice or accept. But it doesn't look good ... Streaming UHD at any bandwidth less than 4x what HD is streamed at only means increased compression - the consumer is trading higher resolution for more degraded image quality (less colors, contrast, etc.).
Brian Hampton and AaronMK like this.
sdg4vfx is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 12:42 PM
Member
 
AaronMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsoccer33 View Post
I think if the DMCA was re-visited now, and that lawmakers actually read/understood what they were voting on (ie they can't rip DVDs to their iPads), they wouldn't vote the same way. Just a hunch.
The entertainment industry is a very entrenched special interest in the Beltway. Back then, the entertainment industry and lawmakers had a good "understanding" of one-another. Since nothing has changed in the meantime, the vote would be the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by robnix

You can do the same thing with itunes, but it's a violation of the TOS you agree to with each itunes purchase. Apple isn't alone in this.
OK, but let's not forget that ripping a Blu-ray is also against the rules.
I care about and respect copyright, but have no respect for legal frameworks and mechanisms such as the DMCA, EULAs, Tems of Service, etc. that have basically let companies call a purchase of a copy a license, and define as they see fit what constitutes copyright infringement and what are legal or illegal uses of that purchase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMHarman View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by mo949


I've got so many discs with that UV 'convenience', but I've never really felt it was convenient to spend the time to cash in on a single one of them.

If you really don't want them you can put the codes up on ebay and make a few $$s.
The above is a prime example of Piracy, and is illegal. The UV codes are for the owner of the disk, they can not be sold or resold. Read UV's fine print. Ebay is browsed by anti-trust groups looking for the next hit.

If you want to do something with the UV codes, give them away, that is legal as it was done without profit.

Profit is the key word here.
Actually, the UV fine print you mention is the key word. Profit is just the bottom line for the studios, and is what guides the UV fine print, but not the keyword in whether selling the UV code is legal.

I don't think whether the UV code and Blu-ray are considered separate copies has ever really been tested. That would be the real determining factor of whether selling the UV code is piracy. But then that question is probably moot since, as mentioned earlier, it comes down more to contract law at this point, and not whether a copyright was actually violated, that determines what is actually legal.

Last edited by AaronMK; 06-15-2014 at 12:47 PM. Reason: formatting
AaronMK is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 04:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronMK View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsoccer33 View Post
I think if the DMCA was re-visited now, and that lawmakers actually read/understood what they were voting on (ie they can't rip DVDs to their iPads), they wouldn't vote the same way. Just a hunch.
The entertainment industry is a very entrenched special interest in the Beltway. Back then, the entertainment industry and lawmakers had a good "understanding" of one-another. Since nothing has changed in the meantime, the vote would be the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by robnix

You can do the same thing with itunes, but it's a violation of the TOS you agree to with each itunes purchase. Apple isn't alone in this.
OK, but let's not forget that ripping a Blu-ray is also against the rules.
I care about and respect copyright, but have no respect for legal frameworks and mechanisms such as the DMCA, EULAs, Tems of Service, etc. that have basically let companies call a purchase of a copy a license, and define as they see fit what constitutes copyright infringement and what are legal or illegal uses of that purchase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMHarman View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by mo949


I've got so many discs with that UV 'convenience', but I've never really felt it was convenient to spend the time to cash in on a single one of them.

If you really don't want them you can put the codes up on ebay and make a few $$s.
The above is a prime example of Piracy, and is illegal. The UV codes are for the owner of the disk, they can not be sold or resold. Read UV's fine print. Ebay is browsed by anti-trust groups looking for the next hit.

If you want to do something with the UV codes, give them away, that is legal as it was done without profit.

Profit is the key word here.
Actually, the UV fine print you mention is the key word. Profit is just the bottom line for the studios, and is what guides the UV fine print, but not the keyword in whether selling the UV code is legal.

I don't think whether the UV code and Blu-ray are considered separate copies has ever really been tested. That would be the real determining factor of whether selling the UV code is piracy. But then that question is probably moot since, as mentioned earlier, it comes down more to contract law at this point, and not whether a copyright was actually violated, that determines what is actually legal.
Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 05:07 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,450
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1774 Post(s)
Liked: 3091
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
If you can cite one single example to back that up, I'd really appreciate it. Any article you can offer that shows someone spend a single day in jail or paid a single dollar in court-ordered fines for selling a Blu-ray disc after registering the UV code would be perfect. Thanks.
AaronMK likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 05:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
If you can cite one single example to back that up, I'd really appreciate it. Any article you can offer that shows someone spend a single day in jail or paid a single dollar in court-ordered fines for selling a Blu-ray disc after registering the UV code would be perfect. Thanks.
DVDFab https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-o...-funds-140310/

The above is not UV, as i am having to search a lot of my saved info to find it. It is how the industry views ripping disks.

I will post the rest when i find it.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 05:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
If you can cite one single example to back that up, I'd really appreciate it. Any article you can offer that shows someone spend a single day in jail or paid a single dollar in court-ordered fines for selling a Blu-ray disc after registering the UV code would be perfect. Thanks.
DVDFab https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-o...-funds-140310/

The above is not UV, as i am having to search a lot of my saved info to find it. It is how the industry views ripping disks.

I will post the rest when i find it.
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cg...ext=historical

No not Ultraviolet, still looking, but Capitol records vs ReDigi inc. The one that started it really moving in the digital world.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 06:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
If you can cite one single example to back that up, I'd really appreciate it. Any article you can offer that shows someone spend a single day in jail or paid a single dollar in court-ordered fines for selling a Blu-ray disc after registering the UV code would be perfect. Thanks.
DVDFab https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-o...-funds-140310/

The above is not UV, as i am having to search a lot of my saved info to find it. It is how the industry views ripping disks.

I will post the rest when i find it.
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cg...ext=historical

No not Ultraviolet, still looking, but Capitol records vs ReDigi inc. The one that started it really moving in the digital world.
This is from www.uvvu.com

resell or redistribute the service, or to assign or transfer your Member account, or any part of UltraViolet, to anyone else either permanently or temporarily;
use UltraViolet for any commercial purpose;
publish, distribute or disseminate any topic, name, material, file or information that incites discrimination, hate or violence towards one person or a group because of their race, religion, nationality, transgender status, homosexual status or HIV/AIDS status, or that insults the victims of crimes against humanity by contesting the existence of those crimes; or
use UltraViolet, in whole or in part, in violation of any applicable law or regulation.
IF YOU VIOLATE OR CIRCUMVENT, OR ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE OR CIRCUMVENT, ANY SECURITY, CONTENT PROTECTION OR OTHER TECHNOLOGY OR ANY APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS OR REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH USE OF ULTRAVIOLET, YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO CIVIL AND/OR CRIMINAL LIABILITY.

for the full read https://www.uvvu.com/en/gb/terms

Still looking for the legal stuff. 5TB does not sound big, till you start to search thru it.
CinemaAndy is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 08:05 PM
Member
 
bobafetthotmail's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Afaik the only mentions about selling UV being copyright infringement come from sites in 2012 citing a guy selling stuff on Ebay and complaining after he saw his auctions locked down and his account suspended (or banned?). Point is, he was offering the codes over e-mail which is against Ebay rules, and that's the reason why Ebay did things to him. No other mentions anywhere (wikipedia cites the same incident to justify their statements).
A case of corrupted memories perhaps?


While this is somewhat tangential, this still relevant to the discussion about UV licenses and stuff.
https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-consum...vation-140608/
The MPAA is concerned that innovation in the film industry will be ruined if consumers get the right to resell movies and other media purchased online.


Jokes about "innovation in the film industry" (or lack thereof) aside, it does not make me very positive towards the future of UV licensed media.
bobafetthotmail is offline  
Old 06-15-2014, 11:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
TK Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sun Diego
Posts: 899
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsoccer33 View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by imagic
...they'd be in Best Buy...
Magnolia, inside of Best Buy, sells the K System.

TK Doom

Unreal Tournament Forever
Project Gotham Racing too!
 

TK Doom is online now  
Old 06-16-2014, 05:27 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,450
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1774 Post(s)
Liked: 3091
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post

Ultraviolet was a rocky launch. It took a while to define, and make it understandable to those who knew nothing about it. It was a hard sale, even with studio support to get others on board this platform.

I am almost positive that litigation has been done, and the actual disk and UV was made as two complete entities, each separate on how they delivered content.

There was many examples of consumers buying disk's with UV and either selling the disk, keeping UV, or keeping the disk and selling the UV code, to "recoup" some money. The UV code is permanently attached to the disk it was packaged with. This area is not gray, it is very black. It is Piracy. There are plenty of court rulings to support this, some just heavy fines, some evolved jail and/or prison time. I do not want to pay any fines, and i damn sure don't want jail or prison.

Since the content producer made it, they have every right under law to get money for it. They also have the right to sue for damages and lost income, and if piracy laws were broken, it becomes a criminal matter. What bothers me about 95 percent of anything computer related, is that people seem to believe just because it is out there, it must be free or they can make a profit for themselves, off someone else's ideal and work.
If you can cite one single example to back that up, I'd really appreciate it. Any article you can offer that shows someone spend a single day in jail or paid a single dollar in court-ordered fines for selling a Blu-ray disc after registering the UV code would be perfect. Thanks.
DVDFab https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-o...-funds-140310/

The above is not UV, as i am having to search a lot of my saved info to find it. It is how the industry views ripping disks.

I will post the rest when i find it.
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cg...ext=historical

No not Ultraviolet, still looking, but Capitol records vs ReDigi inc. The one that started it really moving in the digital world.
This is from www.uvvu.com

resell or redistribute the service, or to assign or transfer your Member account, or any part of UltraViolet, to anyone else either permanently or temporarily;
use UltraViolet for any commercial purpose;
publish, distribute or disseminate any topic, name, material, file or information that incites discrimination, hate or violence towards one person or a group because of their race, religion, nationality, transgender status, homosexual status or HIV/AIDS status, or that insults the victims of crimes against humanity by contesting the existence of those crimes; or
use UltraViolet, in whole or in part, in violation of any applicable law or regulation.
IF YOU VIOLATE OR CIRCUMVENT, OR ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE OR CIRCUMVENT, ANY SECURITY, CONTENT PROTECTION OR OTHER TECHNOLOGY OR ANY APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS OR REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH USE OF ULTRAVIOLET, YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO CIVIL AND/OR CRIMINAL LIABILITY.

for the full read https://www.uvvu.com/en/gb/terms

Still looking for the legal stuff. 5TB does not sound big, till you start to search thru it.
I'd like to point out that I do not sell UV codes, I sell physical discs that are protected by the first sale doctrine. Thanks for trying, not a word in there about not selling discs. I did my research ahead of time.

The violation of any contract can result in a trip to civil court, That's not the same thing as breaking the federal copyright laws that the FBI is always warning about. And, lawyers can load a TOS up with all the language they want, it still doesn't mean a thing unless you know how to read legalese and its been tested in court. Moving along now...

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
 

Tags
frontpage
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off