DVDFab website blockked - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 29Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 07:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
UK to legalize making rips for personal use.
From Reuters in case some think this is a pre-April Fools joke.

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 07:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
dbone1026's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 11,335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Interesting ...

Cheers,
Damian

MSS.net blog (contributing editor) - http://www.mediasmartserver.net

Windows Entertainment and Connected Home MVP 2010-2012

dbone1026 is offline  
post #213 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 07:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
I don't see this happening in the U.S. though, especially with the revolving door of politicians and MPAA/studio clout (at least in the case of Chris Dodd).

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
post #214 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Paris/France
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh View Post

UK to legalize making rips for personal use.
From Reuters in case some think this is a pre-April Fools joke.

Bravo UK !

I really hope that it will be followed by France (and the rest of Europe). We might have a big chance for a change in the coming months, not because the government becomes reasonable, just because they will create a new tax that will allow us to do it (this "copy tax" already exists for CD, they just have to add DVD/BR to it). rolleyes.gif
Mr Eric is offline  
post #215 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh View Post

UK to legalize making rips for personal use.
From Reuters in case some think this is a pre-April Fools joke.
That Reuters article is dated August 2011. If it was going to happen, don't you think it would have happened by now?

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #216 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
You're right... in my haste, I Google'd UK legalizing rips and didn't notice the date. Here's another source, granted it's using TorrentFreak as its source.

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
post #217 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Paris/France
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 33
check here the official statement from UK authorities (dated March 2014, will apply in june 2014).
http://fr.scribd.com/doc/215022716/Copyright-Guidance-Consumers
Fully official as you can see here : https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-takes-important-step-towards-modernising-copyright

but reading this guideline makes me feel that nothing will change unfortunately :
Quote:
What if a DVD or other media is protected by copy protection technology?
Media such as DVDs are often protected by anti-copying technology to guard against copyright piracy, and this is protected by law. Copyright owners will still be able to apply this protection. However, if copy protection is too restrictive, you may raise a complaint with the Secretary of State.

That's exactly like it is right now in France : you have the right to make a copy for your private use, but if the original material is protected by DRM you can't break it. So in reality you don't have the right to make a copy...At least it seems that in UK the door is a bit more open than in France because you will be able to claim your copy right (biggrin.gif) if the protection is "too restricted" (what does that mean ?), and may be this will gave jurisprudence after a few complaints.
Mr Eric is offline  
post #218 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:45 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 22,022
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 961 Post(s)
Liked: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh View Post

UK to legalize making rips for personal use.
From Reuters in case some think this is a pre-April Fools joke.

It only says for DVD and CDs Not BDs. Or is that implied?

40TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
LED DLP
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is offline  
post #219 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
techflaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 28
It's the same everywhere: you got to pay a "you must be a pirate"-tax on any storage media cause you've certainly only bought it to store infringing content. The fact that you're already paying several times over (and are still not allowed to circumvent copy protections) isn't enough, according to clowns like this.
TheKrell likes this.

Tech Flaws
Things can only get better
techflaws is offline  
post #220 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 08:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post

It only says for DVD and CDs Not BDs. Or is that implied?
I'd expect the law would apply to "other types of media" as the article states, assuming this story is for real (having some doubts now that all other news articles seem to point back to TorrentFreak).

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
post #221 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 09:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jsmiddleton4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 3,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 28
"Copyright infringement isn't stealing"

Huh? It is against the law because its stealing.

E.B. White said, "I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day."
jsmiddleton4 is online now  
post #222 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 09:29 AM
Member
 
MishMouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
What would happen if a major movie distributor teamed up with Sony and made it so that the copyrighted material that they created will only play on a Sony player.
Isn't this the same as saying buy our disk, but we only will allow you to play it on certain machines in the way that we allow you to.
Aka: Region based restrictions, not allowing it to be played on a computer connected to a TV and not allowing that media to be played on other media devices?

What is to stop them from making the movie only playable on brand specific players?
With the thought: You already bought the disk, if you can't play it, it is your fault you didn't buy one that played on your player, which is the same argument used for regions and older units.
MishMouse is offline  
post #223 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 09:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Paris/France
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh View Post

I'd expect the law would apply to "other types of media" as the article states, assuming this story is for real (having some doubts now that all other news articles seem to point back to TorrentFreak).

this is 100% real, see the links in my previous post wink.gif and it applies to any media type, as long as it's not protected...
Mr Eric is offline  
post #224 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 09:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Paris/France
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by MishMouse View Post

What would happen if a major movie distributor teamed up with Sony and made it so that the copyrighted material that they created will only play on a Sony player.
Isn't this the same as saying buy our disk, but we only will allow you to play it on certain machines in the way that we allow you to.
Aka: Region based restrictions, not allowing it to be played on a computer connected to a TV and not allowing that media to be played on other media devices?

What is to stop them from making the movie only playable on brand specific players?
With the thought: You already bought the disk, if you can't play it, it is your fault you didn't buy one that played on your player, which is the same argument used for regions and older units.

Why using conditional ? It already happened with Avatar 3D only distributed with some brands (Pana isn't it ?) in the begining. And I'm pretty sure it's going to happen again with 4K through the Sony streaming portal (or some exclusive deals with PS4 for example).
Mr Eric is offline  
post #225 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 09:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmiddleton4 View Post

"Copyright infringement isn't stealing"

Huh? It is against the law because its stealing.

Copyright Infringement is Copyright Infringement. It is only characterized as stealing by the powers that be because the great unwashed are too stupid to comprehend the meaning of "Copyright Infringement" but can readily understand what stealing is because that is what most of them do.

biggrin.gif Now, how is that for an inflammatory Friday statement. wink.gif

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #226 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 10:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by MishMouse View Post

What would happen if a major movie distributor teamed up with Sony and made it so that the copyrighted material that they created will only play on a Sony player.
Isn't this the same as saying buy our disk, but we only will allow you to play it on certain machines in the way that we allow you to.
Aka: Region based restrictions, not allowing it to be played on a computer connected to a TV and not allowing that media to be played on other media devices?

What is to stop them from making the movie only playable on brand specific players?
With the thought: You already bought the disk, if you can't play it, it is your fault you didn't buy one that played on your player, which is the same argument used for regions and older units.

These are entertainment disks -- disposable luxury items. They are already well within their rights to assume a business model that does exactly what you have proposed. If they were to impose such a restrictive business model for their product they might find their consumer base will be outraged and will boycott their product. On the other hand they may find their consumer base will bitch and moan but still hand over their cash because they still want the product and will pay the sellers price of cash + terms of use.

Why do you think there are so many campaigns promoting smart consumerism? Because consumers are inherently dumb!!
Bidders on ebay -- need I say more?

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #227 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jsmiddleton4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 3,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 28
"It is only characterized as stealing"

It isn't "characterized" as stealing. It is stealing. Which again why it is against the law.

All of the rambling to hair splitting to paranoid conspiracy plot explanations have one thing in common. "We're stealing but we think its okay and justified because..."

Apart from people who own and have paid for the disk from which a copy is made for personal archiving use all others are stealing the material.
XStanleyX and pittsoccer33 like this.

E.B. White said, "I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day."
jsmiddleton4 is online now  
post #228 of 575 Old 03-28-2014, 10:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by MishMouse View Post

What would happen if a major movie distributor teamed up with Sony and made it so that the copyrighted material that they created will only play on a Sony player.
Isn't this the same as saying buy our disk, but we only will allow you to play it on certain machines in the way that we allow you to.

That has already happened. For UHD material there is the Sony FMP-X1. Download only for rentals and ownership. Works ONLY in the US and ONLY with certain Sony 4K models. LG, Samsung, Panasonic, etc. 4K owners need not apply.
Wendell R. Breland is online now  
post #229 of 575 Old 03-29-2014, 12:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
techflaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MishMouse View Post

What would happen if a major movie distributor teamed up with Sony and made it so that the copyrighted material that they created will only play on a Sony player.
Some idiots would pay the premium, the rest will ignore it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmiddleton4 View Post

It isn't "characterized" as stealing. It is stealing.
Which is why the owner still has it. Makes perfect sense.

Tech Flaws
Things can only get better
techflaws is offline  
post #230 of 575 Old 03-30-2014, 07:42 AM
Senior Member
 
TimA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
While piracy has been the main point of discussion here, I believe control is the other main factor that will keep studios enforcing copy protection. Studios want to control how we use their content. They want more money if the movie is available on more than one device at a time. Once the DVD or Bluray media is ripped and converted into a MKV or whatever, we can do what we please, which is what the studios don't want. Software like Plex provides unlimited access to our media with storage and bandwidth as our only limiting factors. Due to the studio's desire for direct and constant control, we will never see a distribution model from them that gives us the complete flexibility and quality we require.
TimA is offline  
post #231 of 575 Old 03-31-2014, 04:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
You're right... they want to sell us the same content over and over. Greed rules.

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
post #232 of 575 Old 04-01-2014, 06:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
space2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
The studios are so worried about piracy. Well I say bull$hit to that. If they make good movies piracy does not matter. Look at frozen for example. Right now it is very hard to find it in some stores. It is selling like crazy on blu-ray.

I do not condone piracy, and have over 1000 purchased movies to prove it. But these hurdles that these companies are doing are just wasting time.
space2001 is online now  
post #233 of 575 Old 04-01-2014, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,644
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmiddleton4 View Post

"It is only characterized as stealing"

It isn't "characterized" as stealing. It is stealing. Which again why it is against the law.

All of the rambling to hair splitting to paranoid conspiracy plot explanations have one thing in common. "We're stealing but we think its okay and justified because..."

Apart from people who own and have paid for the disk from which a copy is made for personal archiving use all others are stealing the material.


Copyright infrigement breaks the law. It is not theft. Theft deprives the holder of control over something he or she owns - if someone steals your car, you can't drive it.

Reference

"Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects that take away the owner's possession, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[11] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft. For instance, the United States Supreme Court held in Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property. Instead, "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright: '[...] an infringer of the copyright.'" The court said that in the case of copyright infringement, the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law—certain exclusive rights—is invaded, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[1]"

So it is not legal, and is mostly targeted at distribution and profit. With the impact that the RIAA has, the definition is becoming tighter in that the "distribution and profit" is not as important.

It is against the law, but it's not theft.
Kelson likes this.
hernanu is offline  
post #234 of 575 Old 04-01-2014, 02:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by hernanu View Post

Reference

"Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects that take away the owner's possession, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[11] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft. For instance, the United States Supreme Court held in Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property. Instead, "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright: '[...] an infringer of the copyright.'" The court said that in the case of copyright infringement, the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law—certain exclusive rights—is invaded, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[1]"

It is against the law, but it's not theft.
So now one validly questions the use of the terms "pirate" and "piracy" to describe the infringers of copyright and/or their actions. Given your quote above, those terms seem grossly misapplied.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #235 of 575 Old 04-01-2014, 02:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,644
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

So now one validly questions the use of the terms "pirate" and "piracy" to describe the infringers of copyright and/or their actions. Given your quote above, those terms seem grossly misapplied.

Again, from the same reference:

""Piracy"

The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne in 1710, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557 received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603.[6] The term "piracy" has been used to refer to the unauthorized copying, distribution and selling of works in copyright.[7] Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection."[8] Article 61 of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale."[9] Piracy traditionally refers to acts of copyright infringement intentionally committed for financial gain, though more recently, copyright holders have described online copyright infringement, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer file sharing networks, as "piracy."[7]

Richard Stallman and the GNU Project have criticized the use of the word 'piracy' in these situations, saying that publishers use the word to refer to "copying they don't approve of" and that "they [publishers] imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them."[10] Certain forms of Anti-Piracy (such as DRM), are considered by consumers to control the use of the products content after sale."

Seems like a term that has a tradition of being applied to copyright infringement. Like stealing or theft, it is a more sensationalistic term applied to a more mundane action. Originally it was also targeted at infringement of exclusive rights for purposes of systematic profit.
hernanu is offline  
post #236 of 575 Old 04-01-2014, 04:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 459
Well I guess that settles that.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #237 of 575 Old 04-03-2014, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
olyteddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,494
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 259
Anyway, after a couple pages of bloviation on the definition of the word 'the'...Finally some new news: AACS-LA speaks: Slysoft fined $30k, comments on DVDFab case
olyteddy is online now  
post #238 of 575 Old 04-03-2014, 08:10 AM
Member
 
MishMouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I hope the court of common sense takes over on this.
If not technically anyone who owns a media server is breaking the law if the content on that server was not approved by the industry, even if the movie is owned by the consumer it would still be illegal to have it on the server since it is not in the content that the industry intended it to be in.
This would also mean any devise that has the capability of streaming media from that server would also be illegal.
Aka: Smart TV's, Blu-Ray machines, and set top boxes.
MishMouse is offline  
post #239 of 575 Old 04-03-2014, 08:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Paris/France
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 33
FYI, anyone who owns a rip of a movie is breaking the law. Whether you have or not the original discs is irrelevant.

But owning a device able to read/stream a video file can't be illegal, unless all video files are made illegal (= say goodbye to your personal Xmas, holidays, birthday, wedding videos...)
Mr Eric is offline  
post #240 of 575 Old 04-03-2014, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,644
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Eric View Post

FYI, anyone who owns a rip of a movie is breaking the law. Whether you have or not the original discs is irrelevant.

But owning a device able to read/stream a video file can't be illegal, unless all video files are made illegal (= say goodbye to your personal Xmas, holidays, birthday, wedding videos...)

From the European Union copyright directive:

Article 5(2) allows Member States to establish copyright exceptions to the Article 2 reproduction right in cases of:

photographic reproductions on paper or any similar medium of works (excluding sheet music) provided that the rightholders receives fair compensation,
reproductions on any medium made by a natural person for private use which is non-commercial provided that the rightholders receives fair compensation,
reproduction made by libraries, educational establishments, museums or archives, which are non-commercial
archival reproductions of broadcasts,
reproductions of broadcasts made by "social institutions pursuing non-commercial purposes, such as hospitals or prisons" provided that the rightholders receives fair compensation.

So a pretty restrictive directive, which members have to comply with, allows for reproduction as long as the author receives fair compensation (you have the disk).
hernanu is offline  
Reply Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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