AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdunnill /forum/post/16994571


This is a big yawn, as Slysoft, beyond the reach of U.S. copyright law, already offers a similar product.

Yep, good thing too
.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by zacharace /forum/post/16994615


Yep, good thing too
.

I was fortunate to have bought AnyDVD-HD when it was a third the price it is now. At the time, I had no need for it but I believed that Slysoft should be rewarded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Does anybody really care? The funniest part about all of this is that the MPAA actually thinks that this ruling will help stop piracy. What annoys me about all of this is all the money that is wasted on these kinds of lawsuits. I'm just glad that Slysoft is not a US company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,890 Posts
can some one explain how companies with software like REAL get cease orders and yet DVDfab et al is still going?


and this line is why we hate the MPAA and RIAA...


"While enforcement of such laws on individual citizens is prohibitively expensive for these organizations, it gives them room to lobby law enforcement to take on the fiscal burden and begin investigating and prosecuting citizens for such offenses"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
What makes it especially ridiculous is that commercial movie jukebox software like Real and Kaleidascape contains DRM, and is completely useless as a piracy tool. By shutting down legitimate options, the MPAA is only forcing people to use illegitimate ones.


Not to mention the bad will they generate with this sort of jackassery. You can't produce PSAs decrying the immorality of "piracy" and then do something so blatantly immoral as preventing people from using the media they do buy in the way they want to. It's pure idiocy to think you can have it both ways.


One of their more popular spots asks " You wouldn't steal a handbag , would you?" Well you might, if the handbag was owned by a cantankerous old ***** who kept breaking your stuff and tried to tell you what you can and can't do with the things you own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
The article linked is misleading imo.


This is the heart of it, "Judge Patel's ruling affirms what we have known all along: Real took a license to build a DVD-player and instead made an illegal DVD-copier." -CEO Dan Glickman states


Plus they're in the US.


For a consumer to get caught, you have to be advertising it to the world and/or for profit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,890 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by hbomber202020 /forum/post/16995145


The article linked is misleading imo.


This is the heart of it, "Judge Patel's ruling affirms what we have known all along: Real took a license to build a DVD-player and instead made an illegal DVD-copier." -CEO Dan Glickman states


Plus they're in the US.


For a consumer to get caught, you have to be advertising it to the world and/or for profit.

hypothetically speaking of course, lets say i copied 200 dvds to my hard drive, but didn't share any of them, completely personal use. If i got caught what would happen?


The MPAA would get NO money, I'd get fined by Law enforcement, how much would be up to a judge. probably not nearly as much as the trial will cost, no counting bad publicity.


That is just plain dumb.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,162 Posts
The DMCA is very clear on this. It is illegal to "build or sell" technology that bypasses crypto or copy protection. It is however not illegal to use such technology, at least as far as the DMCA is concerned.


So you can go ahead and rip away - just don't share it with others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_311 /forum/post/16995307


hypothetically speaking of course, lets say i copied 200 dvds to my hard drive, but didn't share any of them, completely personal use. If i got caught what would happen?


The MPAA would get NO money, I'd get fined by Law enforcement, how much would be up to a judge. probably not nearly as much as the trial will cost, no counting bad publicity.


That is just plain dumb.

How would you get caught in the first place?


All those details can only be speculated upon, court, fines, jail time, etc..Different courts, lawyers, lobbyists, judges, etc..


These cases take so long to play out, this was filed a year ago and just briefly glancing at more websites the only thing that was ruled upon today was a preliminary injunction against the sale of realdvd software.


Here is what the real problem is, they violated a contract, realnetworks. They pissed off mpaa, etc..and they were suppose to be producing dvd players, that's what their license was for and then turned around and made rip/copy software.

----

Patel said that despite the convenience RealDVD may offer users to back-up their movies, the software violates federal law and the CSS (content scramble system) license agreement RealNetworks signed with the DVD Copy Control Association.


"As a licensee to the [CSS] Agreement, Real had no authority to make RealDVD products that copy DVD content"


The case is going to trial, although no trial date is set. Probably won't be a trial for months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
more....straight from the 58 page exert of the judge's injunction ruling.


So some of you can relax...
Quote:
The DVD copying software was referred to by RealNetworks as "Vegas" as a play on a widespread Las Vegas tourism marketing campaign based on the notion that stories of wild antics transpiring in the gambling city remain there.


"Had Real's products been manufactured differently, i.e., if what happened in Vegas really did stay in Vegas, this might have been a different case," Patel wrote in her ruling.


"But, it is what it is. Once the distributive nature of the copying process takes hold, like the spread of gossip after a weekend in Vegas, what's done cannot be undone."


There is nothing to limit the number of times a DVD can be copied using Vegas or to prevent rented or borrowed DVDs from being duplicated, the judge said in a written ruling.

"While it may be fair use for an individual consumer to store a backup copy of a personally-owned DVD on that individual's computer, a federal law has nonetheless made it illegal to manufacture or traffic in a device or tool that permits a consumer to make such copies," Patel wrote.


"Importantly, such tools are unable to distinguish between personal use copies of personally-owned DVDs and other sorts of copies for other purposes; commercial, personal, or otherwise."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...BZ2P-ZC7FUMzow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
So this court case basically says it's legal to have backups for DVD's but it's illegal to create software to overcome the copy protection on DVD's.


My concern with this ruling is what the MPAA will do now that it is backed by this precedent.


Will they go after VLC since it uses libdvdcss to circumvent CSS playback protection? DVDFab, Shrinkto5, etc?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,799 Posts
As above. The moral of the story is if you want to build a DVD ripper/player/jukebox don't sign any agreements with the DCCA, use opensource workarounds instead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,890 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by gooki /forum/post/16995643


As above. The moral of the story is if you want to build a DVD ripper/player/jukebox don't sign any agreements with the DCCA, use opensource workarounds instead.

is there a benefit to signing such an agreement?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,038 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwpritchett /forum/post/16995638


So this court case basically says it's legal to have backups for DVD's but it's illegal to create software to overcome the copy protection on DVD's.

Yep. That's how the laws of the U.S. are written, post-DMCA. Pretty funny, when you come to think of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,799 Posts

Quote:
is there a benefit to signing such an agreement?

You get access to the CSS keys, and I suspect rights to use the DVD Logo.

Quote:
Will they go after VLC since it uses libdvdcss to circumvent CSS playback protection? DVDFab, Shrinkto5, etc?

No, well not for the same reasons, as those companies do not have contracts with the DCCA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,571 Posts
I saw several reports of Patel's decision, and I think they all overstated the importance of the ruling.


As I understand it (I'm not a lawyer), the judge just ruled that there is enough contradictory evidence that the question needs to go to a jury. In other words, neither party "won" and there is a case worth trying.


I applaud Real for pushing into this swampy area of "the law".
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top