Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Finds First Actual DVD Copiers in U.S.

MattW writes: "Yahoo! is reporting that the first pirate DVD bust has occurred. Funny, isn't it, how the pirates don't need to crack any encryption to make copies of DVDs, but we have to ban DeCSS anyhow?"

179 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. 1 down... by xdistak · · Score: 2

    1 down, 39,000 more illegal DVD burning rings to go. Aw, well, it was worth the effort. Face it, trying to shut down these things is as pointless as trying to stop music piraters.

    1. Re:1 down... by arivanov · · Score: 2

      It is also slower. In one well known 3rd world country, I saw a DVD and VCDs of the Phantom Menace 2 weeks after it was on screen (before it even came to Europe).

      It took just one week after one of the reels got stolen in the US for the first copies to appear ;-)

      If they are starting to bust pirate DVDs now this means that the pirates have been printing for two years with no control. Unfortunately in order to tell somene that he/she is a laughing stock in the modern world you need to own the media. Hence, you cannot tell the ones that own the media that they are laughing stock.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    2. Re:1 down... by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      I had a chemistry lab at GaTech when Phantom Menace was released. The lab TA was aware of my propensity to acquire movies early after their release and made me a deal. If I could get a copy of Phantom Menace and put it on VHS by the end of the semester, he'd bring in a TV and VCR and we'd watch it in lieu of taking a lab final. Man, that was a great TA!

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  2. There it goes. by opermonkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    now the MPAA will have extra justification for any suits against DVD copying. Takes a greedy pirate to ruin it for the rest of us :-(

  3. Question: by Emugamer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone out there know anything about movie-> DVD schedules? They mentioned in hte article that there were 3 movies yet to be released on dvd and that these were "wholly inferior products"... Its my guess that unless they were burning these dvd's onto cheese wedges(mmm edible DVDS) that thses were just high quality rips burned onto a dvdr... which would explain the inferior product. Again this article is lacking in details ...

    1. Re:Question: by Magila · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actauly it is quite likely they were in fact DVD quality. Screeners (promotional copies sent to people like movie critics) are now often distributed on DVD, and these inevitably end up in pirates' hands.

    2. Re:Question: by rde · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used to get quite a few of these on video, and they were always indivdually coded, so that they could be identified in the event of duplication. They also had a monstrously annoying tendency to put a big "this is a sampler" message all over the screen every fifteen minutes.

      Course, if you're getting to see the movie/tv series/whatever months ahead of everyone else, you tend not to complain too much.

    3. Re:Question: by mrAgreeable · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've bought a few pirated VHS tapes while in NYC, mostly out of curiosity if they can actually get stuff that far before it gets released, and it was always some guy in a theater with a camcorder.

      "Wholly inferior" is a pretty fair statement.

    4. Re:Question: by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      Heck.. Now they all seem to have 'Call 1-888.... if you received this video illegally'. I've always wondered how many phone calls they get. Afterall, anyone legit enough to make the report probably doesn't realize they received an illegal copy to start with.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    5. Re:Question: by Dimensio · · Score: 2

      The only bootleg I have (FotR -- and I think that everyone has that) has a message stating that "Sale or Rental of this movie is ILLEGAL". Since we neither purchased nor rented the discs we received (they were gifted to us), I guess it's legal.

    6. Re:Question: by Coward,+Anonymous · · Score: 3, Insightful

      a message stating that "Sale or Rental of this movie is ILLEGAL". Since we neither purchased nor rented the discs we received (they were gifted to us), I guess it's legal.

      I was in a shop and they had a sign stating that shoplifting was a crime, I guess murder is legal. Stating that something is illegal does not automatically make everything else legal.

    7. Re:Question: by Dahan · · Score: 2

      No, fair use (for digital media, LPs, books, or whatever) has never allowed you to make copies and distribute them for free. Not even for "educational" purposes.

    8. Re:Question: by symbolic · · Score: 2

      I don't think the RIAA was clear about it meant with respect to its use of the word inferior. It's not that the product is inferior, it's that since the consumer can get it at a more reasonable price (and maybe sans any regional encoding or other crap), it provides them with an inferior revenue stream.

      For the record, I'm not at all in favor of copying or pirating. I am, however, strongly in favor of simply opting out of the game...no buy, no steal. Neither the MPAA or the RIAA amount to squat without revenue (read, our money).

    9. Re:Question: by mpe · · Score: 2

      Perhaps not, but crimes not covered by any laws at all are generally not crimes. Witness to this fact: Pirating DirecTV in Canada is legal, despite the fact that pirating most other satellite services in this country is illegal, simply because there is no law in Canada that covers American signals.

      IIRC there is actually a Canadian law which covers this. Which says something to the effect of "piracy only applies to IP actually for sale in Canada".

      This is likely why a crime like "Murder" is so broadly defined. If it said "Murder by knife" and there were no other crimes on the books, then shooting someone (the first time) might very well be legal until someone fixed the law.

      It's the reason why sensible laws address what is done, rather than how it is done. Stupid laws do things like going into intricate technical details or use specific trademarks for machines...

  4. Digital copies. by buzzbomb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.

    Could someone please explain to me how a digital copy could be "wholly inferior" to the original media?

    Not that I condone the actions of these people, but honestly...it's not like we're talking (S|X)VCDs...

    1. Re:Digital copies. by keiferb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, that was a typo. It should've read "holy".

    2. Re:Digital copies. by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      Because they were probably filmed by someone sitting in a theater with a camcorder.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    3. Re:Digital copies. by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      A garage DVD burner possibly has lower reliability and/or life than a professionally manufactured DVD. Note also that he says "inferior product", not "inferior picture". It also probably has a cheaper case and badly copied inserts.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    4. Re:Digital copies. by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Informative

      While I don't know the specifics of it, if they were burning these DVDs using computer equipment, it is likely that they were burning single layer DVDs, which would mean, given that almost every commercial DVD produced is dual-layer, that they must have pulled the original media, compressed it further to fit in 1/2 the space, and then burned that. If that is the case then it is an inferior copy. The other option is that they either used a two-sided disc, or put the movie on two discs, but either of those options is inferior from a convenience perspective (i.e. having to flip/swap the disc like old sk00l laser discs).

      I could be wrong though. Is there such a thing as a dual-layer burner?

    5. Re:Digital copies. by HeUnique · · Score: 4, Informative

      No - you're talking about CD-R copies which someone could come with a cam and records the film straight from the screen - in those cases the movie will be spread either in VCD or DivX format...

      In this case it looks like it's a byte-by-byte copy, which means of-course a full digital copy including the CSS copy protection info.

      --
      Hetz (Heunique)
    6. Re:Digital copies. by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      From the article:
      Some of the movies found haven't yet been released to video, including "The Lord of the Rings," "Training Day" and "Ali."

      How else are they going to get them.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    7. Re:Digital copies. by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure of the intent of your post, but I was referring to this quote in the article:

      Some of the movies found haven't yet been released to video, including "The Lord of the Rings," "Training Day" and "Ali."
      --

      These likely movie-theater-camcorder copies are probably where the MPAA gets off talking about "inferior products".

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    8. Re:Digital copies. by groman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually a lot of movie theaters nowadays use digital projectors, the movie comes on some sort of *gasp* digital media. Who operates the projector? People who more often than not like tech toys. It would take them a couple days to rip a theatrical quality movie to a DivX. :-)

    9. Re:Digital copies. by Querty · · Score: 2, Informative

      Screeners. Copies of the movies are now often sent in DVD format for review.

      There is a 2CD DivX of such a copy of LotR floating 'round the net. The quality of this DivX is excellent (much better than most DVD rips, so I assume that the source material is DVD)

      B.t.w. To the MPAA and other interested parties: I've seen LotR twice in the cinema, and yes, I will be buying the DVD when it comes out! The fact that I have access to a DivX rip doesn't change that!

    10. Re:Digital copies. by jrp2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Could someone please explain to me how a digital copy could be "wholly inferior" to the original media?

      Two issues I can think of, these commonets particularly apply to the unreleased movies:

      - They were probably filmed with a camera in a theatre, possibly with a few heads of other viewers in the picture, plus some coughing and random cell-phones ringing, audience reactions, etc. So, it may be a "digital recording" but it is digital to analog to analog to digital.

      - Doing a good master of a DVD is an art-form in itself. I am pretty sure these pirate films do not have 5.1 sound, anamorphic video, or any of the other things that make a good mastering really look and sound awesome. That takes access to the digital source, some really nice gear, alot of time and some very skilled engineers. This is probably not as noticeable on a $100 player and 10 year old TV, but VERY noticeable on a nice player, 5.1 sound, and digital 16:9 TV. Heck, even some commercial releases get re-released with new mastering done as the original was weak and the movie is popular. (Note: and they feel they can get diehards to buy a second copy).

      This is one of the reasons they are so freaked out about DECSS, as it allows for a pure copy with all the original quality included (a bit for bit digital copy). Now don't mistake my comments as backing up the MPAA, they could greatly reduce the pirate market by dropping prices and eliminating region codes.....but this is why they freak out about it.

      So, yes, I would agree, the pirate copies are almost certainly WAY inferior to a commercial DVD release of a movie. Not even comparable even.

      There is a third reason: That is what the MPAA PR guys are supposed to say. ;)

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    11. Re:Digital copies. by lightspawn · · Score: 2
      ...again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product


      This is the same "person" who (can anybody find the link)) whined that protection is necessary because with DVDs the pirates can make perfect copies for the first time.


      Which one is it, Sony boy?

    12. Re:Digital copies. by JohnyDog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's the movie i'm paying for. Not the cover, not the case, not the DVD-R. It could be (legally) purchased and downloaded over internet without medium, without case and it would be the same movie, the same thing i'm paying for.

      --
      People who like this sort of sig will find this the sort of sig they like.
    13. Re:Digital copies. by Sancho · · Score: 3, Informative

      I could be wrong though. Is there such a thing as a dual-layer burner?

      To my knowledge, such a beast should not be possible.

      Commercial dual-layer discs are made by "burning" (actually pressing) two separate layers and then glueing them together with a special adhesive that will allow the light through. One layer clearly has to be semitransparent (no pun intended) so that the laser can read the second layer.

      In order to "burn" a dual-layer disc, you'd need to have a laser that would puncture the lower layer during the burning process, but leave the top layer intact. Then a second pass would be required to burn the top layer without damaging the lower layer. I can't believe that would be stable, if such a thing is even possible.
      The other option would be to burn two layers and then glue them together. Right. That's gonna work ;)

      Sancho

    14. Re:Digital copies. by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 2

      Commercial dual-layer discs are made by "burning" (actually pressing) two separate layers and then glueing them together with a special adhesive that will allow the light through. One layer clearly has to be semitransparent (no pun intended) so that the laser can read the second layer.

      OK, so now I really don't get it. If this is true then it should be impossible for someone to create a bit-for-bit copy of a DVD and burn it using technology that doesn't require a huge investment. What, then, is MPAA's excuse for outlawing DeCSS? It would be far better, with less negative PR, for them to crack down on big operations; small operations could only produce an inferior product, which would give anyone who actually cares about product quality (90% of all DVD buyers) sufficient incentive not to buy pirated copies.

      Are they afraid of someone in China creating a virtual (2GB or so file) DVD and posting it for download? Notice how much a similar phenomenon has hurt the music industry: they're making more money now than they did before Napster.

      Honestly, it sounds to me like Valenti and company are just plain greedy, and in particular are gunning for the international market in a big bad way. I had recently heard that the MPAA was lobbying WTO to reclassify movies as industrial, rather than cultural, products, which would make it illegal for any nation to place restrictions on import or sale of movies...bye bye local motion picture industries. Hello, more really weird, somewhat bland movies with easily translatable international appeal. Billion dollar revenues suddenly become commonplace. Makes sense.

    15. Re:Digital copies. by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually this is entirely possible. If the two layers of the disk react to different wavelengths you can easily burn the two layers..

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    16. Re:Digital copies. by baudbarf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To my knowledge, such a beast should not be possible.

      When I was younger, before CD burners were available to the public, I knew how CD's where made. Still, I remarked one day to my dad,"I can't wait until CD *RECORDERS* come out!"

      He looked at me with a look that said,"Ah, son, how much you have to learn about the world.." and said (out loud, this time),"Well, do you know how CDs are made?", probably as way of breaking it to me gently that it'll never happen.

      But I thought to myself,"Give them a year or two.. and they'll appear. I've seen much more amazing technological feats materialize with the right consumer pull.

      --
      You can run but you can't hide, except, apparently, along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
    17. Re:Digital copies. by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
      From DVDs. Seriously - there *are* DVDs made for all major films long before they hit video - often before they hit theaters (sometimes VERY long before, if they take lots of time shopping it around to distributors). They're known as screeners, and have annoying notices at the bottom saying things like "Not For Sale" and "Internal Use Only". They generally just contain the movie, and no extra features, although many have a few pages of text hyping the upcoming DVD or movie release.

      They are for reviewers, studio execs, distributors, etc. Sometimes you even see them with only partial special effects (that's pretty rare, though), or they are edited slightly differently than the final release (that's more common). A decade ago, they were released in VHS format, and now they are DVDs. Sometimes you also see DVD screeners of an episode of a series included in the press pack for that series (I just started seeing that).

      The biggest complaint I have with them is that the "Not For Sale, Authorized Use Only" often is on a 10 minute cycle or so, popping up every 10 minutes on the dot. I wouldn't care if they left it up the entire movie or show, but it really is jarring, as it tends to always pop up right at the dramatic or tearjerk scene, tearing you out of the movie you're supposed to be reviewing. You'd think they'd let an intern editor or someone spend an hour and hand place the notices so they aren't right in the worst spots.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    18. Re:Digital copies. by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 2
      "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.
      Could someone please explain to me how a digital copy could be "wholly inferior" to the original media?
      I think Jack Valenti was talking about the quality of Hollywood films, not the media.
      --

      ~shiny
      WILL HACK FOR $$$

    19. Re:Digital copies. by Sancho · · Score: 2

      Possibly, but I still think it would be quite unstable :)

      It would also require a degree of control that we *currently* don't have, media-wise.

    20. Re:Digital copies. by mark_lybarger · · Score: 2

      interesting points but i fail to see how DECSS allows for a pure copy (bit for bit digital copy). To my knowledge, DECSS is about unencrypting the original copy which in effect should change the actual bits. DECSS is about circumventing access restrictions, NOT copy restrictions. i can't even see how the MPAA is able to claim that CSS is for copy restrictions.

    21. Re:Digital copies. by jrp2 · · Score: 2

      but i fail to see how DECSS allows for a pure copy (bit for bit digital copy)

      I don't know what I was thinking.... excellent point. Ignore that part of my comment ;)

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
  5. Why do we have to keep reminding you! by knodi · · Score: 2, Informative

    DeCSS *IS* used for lots of DVD pirating. Just not through garages full of burners. And the article says that lots of the DVDs weren't released on DVD yet anyway, which means they were just a bunch of guys using Cams or Screeners from the 'net and burning them onto DVD. Lets face it, DVDs are incredibly easy to rip, and movies are even easier to rip without ever even touching the DVD format, thanks to the internet. What the MPAA needs to do is... Well, I don't know. There aren't any simple answers!

    --
    Austin is more fun than Dallas.
    1. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Well, I don't know. There aren't any simple answers!"

      I find it interesting they can claim losses to internet piracy when they don't even have an internet media. Because of that, they are saying that every single internet copy is a pirate copy and that they ose money to it.

      What they need to do, to stop piracy, is first lower prices. It's a little hard to pay $35 (in an extreme case, RoboCop Director's cut was about that much...) for a DVD when you know they cost pennies to make. $15 is far more reasonable, but they insist on gouging. No Duh are people going to pirate. The problem is, you just don't know what you are getting when you spend money on a DVD.

      Second, they need to provide an internet format. It is ridiculous that they look at how many people are trading movies on the web and then they say "we better stop them!". How come nobody in the industry saw this as a new market and leapt on it? That's a bit ignorant if you ask me, I'm not paying for their mistake. Seems like if 'billions of movies are flying around the web a year...' then somebody would be say 'we think we can make money from that new market.'

      The funny thing is, the people using DeCSS aren't typically making money from it. It makes you wonder if fair-use at least partially protects them. Oh well, they got their poorly written DMCA. Seems like it wouldn't be that hard to trap the MPAA or RIAA using the DMCA.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by bleckywelcky · · Score: 3, Informative


      I would find it hard to download an entire DVD (what? several GB or so...) on even a cable connection. Consider the bandwidth required to serve up these movies too, even a 2.56 Tb/s line would end up being swamped should enough people try to use the service. Even if some sort of standard allowed better compression rates than even DivX or MP3 could allow, the size of a DVD could still be more than half a GB. Besides the fact that when I watch a DVD, I want to see absolutely no evidence of any sort of compression... that's why I watch em (well at least nothing I am sohpistocated enough to notice). Even compressed DivX files don't look real great. I agree with you that $35 is highway robbery though - all of the DVDs should be kept under $20 (maybe, just maybe $25 - although I would prefer to not see that until a couple more years go by). New DVD releases would go for the usual $19.99 and not-so-new movies would go for $14.99.

      Implementing legit DVD distribution online would be difficult right now, hopefully new connection improvements in the future would allow such data transfer on an individual basis without loss of detail and value.

    3. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "Even if some sort of standard allowed better compression rates [ciol.com] than even DivX or MP3 could allow, the size of a DVD could still be more than half a GB"

      People think that is acceptable today. Go to Morpheus and do a search for 'DVD Rip', and you'll find lots of 700 meg files up on a 128k connection. As for the quality, the quality is pretty damn good. A little more artifact-y than a DVD.

      If the MPAA would put up a site where I could download it at 150k/s instead of 15, then it'd be worth $5 to me. I'd rather get the DivX version than the DVD version in most cases. Heck, if the DVD version was noticably better, then I'd have a reason to have both.

      They could do it. They just have this mindset that one person will buy a copy and then transfer it around. They are totally blind to the idea that if they price it low enough (yeah right) then buying it from them will be day/night better than getting it free. Imagine having instant access to a bunch of movies that can be downloaded really fast for like $5 a pop. I would certainly be better than getting in line and waiting roughly a day to get a movie on Kazaa.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      *sigh* I hope you're being sarcastic. The MPAA has no intention of doing anything but screwing us on this. First, they won't allow you to 'purchase' a copy of content unless it is on their media, meaning the price will be in the $20 range. Second, they want to maintain selling their crap on DVD because they can justify a ridiculous price on them. Third, with that legislation, they have 0 incentive to use new formats down the road. Their same old crap will always sell, they have no reason to improve it, and nobody else will be able to come along and do it better.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      *WheW* had me worried for a second there that the MPAA had some convincing propoganda out there.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:Why do we have to keep reminding you! by budgenator · · Score: 2

      I want to see absolutely no evidence of any sort of compression... that's why I watch em
      Sorry guy but my almost 50 year old eyes sees all kinds of compression artifacts when I play most commercial DVD's on my almost twenty year old TV. Just imagines the trash that the eyes of a twentysomthing would see on a HDTV.

      If you want to see them, play arround with some jpegs and blown them up about 200-800%, you learn to recognise the compression artifacts quickly. Them watch your dvd's and you see them there too. Carefull tho it's like the blue pill, you can't go back

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  6. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Whose law? Surely not God's law! God has said he who shareth the bread wreaketh of wine and spirits. That is the single greatest factor in promoting DVD copying!

  7. glad by ricOS/2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm actually glad they caught this guy. I agree with the MPAA and RIAA that piracy is bad (although I don't agree with their digital piracy campaigns), and the more actual pirates that can be shut down, the better. If they actually start going after the pirates rather than the consumers, it would be a nice start.

    1. Re:glad by ConsumedByTV · · Score: 2

      I have to agree that it is nice to see them busting actual pirates than consumers. However the MPAA and the RIAA have had a smear campaign against the consumers to the law makers of this (and others) country. This driving force is to convince people that backing up your own data is "piracy," that when they go after a consumer it is because they are pirates. So in effect you are cheering for something that at one point will be wholly indestinguishable from arresting consumers. Once they get you (and many others) in the computer literate field to agree this is good, its slippery slope to convice people you only meant mass copying.

      This is just one legit bust out of how many?
      How many people have been illegialy arrested?

      --


      "Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
  8. Is it really a bust? by AlaskanUnderachiever · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I mean I know it's technically a "bust" but come on. We're talking about two tower computers full of DVD-R burners from the story details. This sounds more like Uncle Joe's moonshine stand than the serious copy operations I saw overseas. I'd put this one on the same level as Johnny downloading music and burning all his friends a copy. Admittedly the amount of cash on hand leads one to beleive that it was a commercial venture, but the lack of "we've been investigating these fellas for quite a while" also makes me wonder if they didn't have a nice snortable sideline business as well and it was THAT business that got the whole shebang busted. When meth labs get busted locally there's usually a whole storm of other sideline illegal activities that also crop up... just my thoughts. .

    --
    Find out about my new childrens book: SS Death Camp Criminal Batallion Go To Monte Carlo For The Massacre
  9. A wholly inferior product? by Tom+Rothamel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.

    Hm... This is an interesting statement. I wonder if the people who they busted were actualy copying existing DVDs, or whether they were instead videotaping movies in theaters (or from other sources) and burning them onto DVDs. In the latter case, I don't think that CSS would be involved at all.

    1. Re:A wholly inferior product? by cyberformer · · Score: 2
      CSS is involved more if someone is copying a VHS tape to DVD, because they at least need to encode the picture using CSS (a feature built in to DVD recorders). Copying a DVD to a DVD doesn't require any knowledge of CSS at all: Just make a perfect bit-by-bit digital copy. To the copier, it's irrelevant whether the DVD contains CSS-encoded video, software, or random junk data.


      The latter case (DVD to DVD) is obviously a better deal for the buyer, though it won't necessarilly be the same as the official DVD. If it's made from a pre-release disk sent to insiders, it won't contain all those "extras" that go into DVDs, and could be an earlier cut of the movie than the one eventually used.

    2. Re:A wholly inferior product? by r_j_prahad · · Score: 2

      [...] dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said.

      No doubt Jack was referring to the original work here, and not the copy.

  10. Excellent point. by DaedalusLogic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Excellent point that copying the disc encrypted isn't a problem. Its like a cabinet we all have a key to. Any DVD player can just unlock it. Which raises the question is it possible to ever secure mass media from reproduction? Any schemes or ideas I've heard of ruin the ability to play the media in computers. Like the audio CD's that started popping up last summer. Look at the standards battle that unleashed with phillips saying they couldn't use the compact disc logo on those...

    1. Re:Excellent point. by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Any DVD player can just unlock it.

      The devil they say is in the details. DeCSS is a very weak encryption scheme, but even as such it wasn't cracked until a Finnish teenager found that a DVD player that had unprotected keys stored in it's firmware. If those keys had been protected according to CSS standards, DeCSS would probably not exist today.

      It is quite plausible that an encryptioon scheme could be embedded in something like a DVD player that would be much stronger than DeCSS; a scheme that would effectively be unbreakable for the life of the format, say 20 years. Thinks like DVD Audio and SACD have much stronger encryption than DVD does. Whether or not the execution of these schemes will turn out to be good enough to resist cracking is a much more debatable point. This is where attacks are most likely to succeed.

      There is, of course, another issue - making a direct bit-for-bit copy of encrypted media. This is a problem of controlling the duplication hardware which will be very difficult to do world-wide.

      The CD player is a different issue altogether - the hardware does not support encyrption, and the schemes being tried now to protect ordinary music CD's are weak hacks being done on an ad-hoc basis.

    2. Re:Excellent point. by mark_lybarger · · Score: 2

      are you trying to say that a media doesn't get off the ground (mainstream) until piracy is available? i think CD's were well mainstream before consumer copying was reasonably priced.

    3. Re:Excellent point. by mpe · · Score: 2

      One is stored in the player itself, but the other is stored on the disk, in a special area inaccessible to DVD burners. (In fact, blank media comes with this key area zeroed out, so it can't be recorded on.)

      Which also has the effect of preventing someone using CSS to protect their copyrighted material...

    4. Re:Excellent point. by WNight · · Score: 2

      This is only true on DVD writable media. If you buy actual blanks and press them in a $100k machine this isn't true.

      This is beyond what any home user can do, but the Asian pirates have been doing it for years. They even forge the packaging (or at least the silk-screening on the disk.)

  11. DVD to VCD maybe? by DABANSHEE · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I somehow doubt that straight DVD piracy is truelly viable because of the current cost of blank DVD media, especially once all the other costs are added up.

    Give it a year or 2 though & it definitly will be.

    1. Re:DVD to VCD maybe? by mrscorpio · · Score: 2, Informative

      I posted this in a previous DVD thread:

      www.cdrecordable.com

      $2 blank DVD's.

      Once again, not affiliated with them at all. Just a business I have had good luck with.

      $2 for a blank DVD, vs. anywhere from $10 - $30 for a store-bought one. I'd say there's a market, sadly.

      Chris

  12. Digital Video Discs? by theCoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.
    [emphasis mine]

    Funny... I thought the whole reason the MPAA was scared of digital data was because it could be copied perfectly and not create a wholly inferior product. Or maybe it's inferior because Jack doesn't make lots of money off of it.

    (not that I support this sort of copying -- this guy was obviously a parasite, trying to live off the work of others)

    --
    "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
    1. Re:Digital Video Discs? by sean23007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, the difference is that the pirates use the latest in technology to dupe consumers into buying a wholly inferior product, whereas Hollywood just uses fame and fortune... to dupe consumers into buying a wholly inferior product.

      :)

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    2. Re:Digital Video Discs? by kindbud · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's wholly inferior because the bootleg "masters" were videotaped with a camcorder in the movie theater.

      If the master was not videotaped in the theater, the the MPAA member companies must have an internal piracy problem. Their own employees are bootlegging stuff off the production line before it is released. If the bootlegs were not made from videotaped masters, then internal piracy is the only explanation for how this busted operation could have been copying movies to DVD that haven't yet been released to video.

      In other words, we can add to their "sins" the fact that consumers are being punished for piracy committed by MPAA members themselves.

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
    3. Re:Digital Video Discs? by ohthetrees · · Score: 2, Informative
      It's wholly inferior because the bootleg "masters" were videotaped with a camcorder in the movie theater
      Not true, I have seen an illegal DVD of Lord of the Rings with my own eyes, and this was not a camcorder job. Some text scrolled across the bottom of the screen every once in a while warning us not to buy or rent this "screener version". I guess this was what got sent out to the academy members for the oscars?
    4. Re:Digital Video Discs? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course Valenti wants people to think that these DVD pirates are "duping" consumers, but I doubt it in most cases. When you buy a LOTR DVD for $10 from some guy on the street in New York, almost anyone would assume it's not legit. But people still knowingly buy illegal DVDs because they the legal ones aren't released yet.

    5. Re:Digital Video Discs? by darkonc · · Score: 2
      A good "wholly inferior product" is going to be made by digitizing from a copy of the actual film reel. -- I mean why not.... during the 8-12 hours that a movie theatre is closed, hook up a nice film digitizer and let the bastard run to your heart's content until it's time for the morning showing... At the very least, display it on the full screen and use a nice, high-quality DV camera to digitize each frame (synched, appropriately, to the projector). with the sound input jacked direct into the theatre sound system. (and nobody else in the theatre while you're doing it). For the purposes of image quality, this should be indistinguisable from a 'studio' DVD (minus the commentary track, etc.).

      In any case.. once the studio comes out with a good 'added features' DVD, there's nothing to stop the pirates from bit-coppying the DVD.

      I'm pretty sure that the existance of commercial DVD pirates sans-DECSS should be usable in those cases, though... Shows how CSS does bugger-all to prevent commercial pirating, while DECSS is mostly intended to simply allow people to legally view their DVD on an otherwise non(or ill-) supported OS.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    6. Re:Digital Video Discs? by jedrek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For the purposes of image quality, this should be indistinguisable from a 'studio' DVD (minus the commentary track, etc.).

      Which is, of course, complete and utter bullshit.

      You can not just sync frames - if only because NTSC's 30fps and PAL's 25fps are not film's 24fps. Transfering film to either of these formats is an art upon itself.

      A high quality DV is nowhere near the quality of a half-descent telesync setup. DV CCD's (at least what they have right now) is not up to snuff, especially insofar as color reproduction goes. If it wasn't, and the quality was so high, why bother shooting on film at all?

      The image quality may be indistinguishable in a 1/4sized window on a cheap monitor, but you're not fooling anyone.

      Besides, transfering film to a digital format, either by telesync or film scanner, is a costly process - both time and equipment wise. Not to mention the post-transfer work done on DVD material. It's much, much easier to steal a preview DVD or rip a laserdisc than to create a DVD-quality DVD yourself.

    7. Re:Digital Video Discs? by darkonc · · Score: 2
      You need the sync so that you can get the individual frames as nicely as possible. Once you do that it's gonna take some fun software to convert to 30/25FPSFPS. The first step, though, is getting each frame.

      I realize that separately digitizing each frame is the better way to do it, but DV is DV. I think that the real limit for DV is more likely to be the monitor than the camera -- especially for people who haven't yet gone to DV capable televisions.

      As for the cost: even for someone who's only looking at selling a few thousand copies of each movie, that's still over a hundred thousand in gross income from a single movie. It's enough to pay for decent quality -- in both time and equipment. -- of course, this only talks about what's technically feasible. When you're dealing with scam artists, you're just as likely to end up with hi-8->cdrom quality as a reasonably well done film->dv transfer. (I mean, why do the work if 75% of your audience isn't going to notice the difference anyways -- it's still going to be better than VHS).

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    8. Re:Digital Video Discs? by The+Cat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ironically enough, this is the answer to their "problem" even though they'll likely never see it.

      "Pirated" "bootleg" "warezed" copies (whatever the term of the day is) will always be an inferior product even though they may be a perfect copy.

      There's a fundamental difference between product and copy. Businesses have an incentive to produce good products which customers are willing to pay for. w4r3z d00dz have no incentive other than if they happen to feel like it to make copies available.

      Like it or not, profit motivates people to work hard. Hard work is what is being paid for, not the bits themselves. Fortunately, it isn't possible to yet copy hard work. If it were, then I doubt so many businesses would fail.

      Agriculture is another fine example (from the last time this was discussed). With one bag of oranges, it is possible to grow enough oranges to last an average family for decades, at a cost of near zero (water, 10 square yards of dirt, plant food?). Yet, we pay $4 for a carton of orange juice once a week. Why? Because that carton of orange juice is a better product, even though one can have unlimited w4r3z3d oranges. The convenience of not having to tend an orchard is more valuable than $16/month.

    9. Re:Digital Video Discs? by Jeremi · · Score: 2
      w4r3z d00dz have no incentive other than if they happen to feel like it to make copies available.


      Cash money isn't an incentive for pirates? People do pay for pirated stuff, you know.


      Fortunately, it isn't possible to yet copy hard work.


      In the case of digital content, it's extremely easy to copy the results of hard work. That's the issue here.

      [...]The convenience of not having to tend an orchard is more valuable than $16/month


      That's not a good analogy -- copying a CD or DVD is nowhere near as difficult as tending an orchard.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    10. Re:Digital Video Discs? by The+Cat · · Score: 2

      Cash money isn't an incentive for pirates? People do pay for pirated stuff, you know.

      Objection. Argumentative.

      There's a difference between warez and people who are actually trying to sell "pirated" DVDs. Opening up a storefront makes for a much larger radar blip than some random link or IP-address-only FTP site.

      It's also expensive. So people will buy this valueless corporate data from a warez site, but not from a licensed vendor? Why? Why wouldn't they just rip it and put it on their web site? Is it really only a question of price?

      In the case of digital content, it's extremely easy to copy the results of hard work. That's the issue here.

      A very skillful sidestep of the original statement, but the argument stands. It is not possible to copy hard work. A zero-effort copy is worth exactly zero. It has no value by definition. Products, OTOH, have value because they are not zero-effort. Businesses have an incentive to perform that effort. Warez d00dz do not.

      That's not a good analogy -- copying a CD or DVD is nowhere near as difficult as tending an orchard.

      I never claimed it was. You have responded to three points by throwing up a red herring the size of Nebraska in the first case, and sidestepping the issue in the other two.

      I'll proceed under the assumption this isn't a troll by saying the analogy stands if the premises are accepted: hard work cannot be copied. Businesses are willing to put the effort into making a polished product for sale (a carton of orange juice), when it is only a matter of a little time and effort to produce unlimited oranges (an orchard or even one orange tree) for the customer. Yet people buy millions of dollars worth of orange juice every week.

      Growing an orange tree is not all that complicated. It's time consuming (like looking for fr33 stuff), but not complicated.

    11. Re:Digital Video Discs? by mpe · · Score: 2

      If the videos are not currently available on DVD, where did they get them from? Cameras in theaters?

      Not currently available on DVD does not mean that DVD masters, even pressed discs do not yet exist. They could just as easily originate from a stock of DVD in the process of being shipped to retailers.

    12. Re:Digital Video Discs? by Jeremi · · Score: 2
      Objection. Argumentative.


      Overruled. :^)


      Opening up a storefront makes for a much larger radar blip than some random link


      Who said anything about opening up a storefront? You can sell unlicensed CDs off of a table on the street corner (which is quite common), or from your home over the Internet. It's not terribly difficult to do.


      So people will buy this valueless corporate data from a warez site, but not from a licensed vendor?


      Because the warez site can sell it for only slightly more than the cost of reproducing the media (e.g. $1.99 for a movie, $2.99 for Windows XP), whereas the licensed vendor has to pay the content producers, and must therefore pass costs of production on to the buyer (which is why legally sold movies and software cost tens or hundreds of dollars).


      It is not possible to copy hard work.


      Sure, but neither is it necessary to do so. One need only wait for the results of the hard work, and copy them.


      A zero-effort copy is worth exactly zero. It has no value by definition.


      You have a very strange definition of value. Under a capitalist system, if I can sell something for $5, then it is worth $5 to me, no more and no less. What an item is worth has nothing to do with how much it cost me to produce it. As a silly example, I buy two lottery tickets. Both cost me exactly $1 to procure, but one is worth millions and the other is worthless.


      Products, OTOH, have value because they are not zero-effort.


      Absolutely wrong. Value is not determined by cost of production, but solely by the price the buyers are willing to pay. See above.


      Businesses have an incentive to perform that effort. Warez d00dz do
      not.


      Again, warez d00dz (at least some of them) have incentive as well, people will pay them money to do so.


      Businesses are willing to put the effort into making a polished
      product for sale (a carton of orange juice), when it is only a matter of a little time and effort to produce unlimited oranges (an orchard or even one orange tree) for the customer. Yet people buy millions of dollars worth of orange juice every week.


      Sure, because the time and effort it takes to make your own oranges outweighs the time and effort it takes to just buy a carton of juice. Such is not usually the case with digital data.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  13. most acronyms in one headline by 56ker · · Score: 2, Funny

    In related news slashdot tries to break the world record for the number of acronyms in one headline.

  14. Perfect Banner ad by bluntmanspam · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I went to this article, I got a flashing red banner ad with the words "COPY DVD'S!!!!" in big white letters.

    Now that's what I call targeted advertising. Did anybody else get this, or was it a fluke?

  15. Re:Good. by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Funny
    Maybe DVD pirating will finally come to a halt.
    Dude, your so right its scary! You're call on the warez front is on, 'cause they crippled, like, the entire western Hemephere with the takedown of one labs computer's, they're 15 burners, and $5,200 in benjamin's.

    Like whom has 15 dVd burner's anyway? I know they, I mean the one guy, are going down like a HELLIUM BALLON!

    Thanks

    --
    Yeah, right.
  16. Wild Speculation by Picass0 · · Score: 2

    Funny, isn't it, how the pirates don't need to crack any encryption to make copies of DVDs, but we have to ban DeCSS anyhow?

    It doesn't state any such thing in the story. Where are you getting your details?

    1. Re:Wild Speculation by Zara2 · · Score: 2

      Very simply, They had DVD-RW (or some other competing format) type of burners. All of these sorts of devices just make a copy of the cd. So there is no reason to decode the movie, you just copy it with all of its protections enabled. Why would you spend the hours needed to decode it and copy it to an unencrypted mpeg-1 file when you can just leave it there for cheaper and do it faster?

      --

      Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!

    2. Re:Wild Speculation by Colol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As has been brought up over and over from the beginning of DeCSS time, CSS does not prevent bit-by-bit copying. CSS prevents playback on unlicensed (in theory) players. The point there, of course, is to drag in more profits by charging consumer electronics manufacturers to license the CSS decryption.

      It's like a password-protected PKZIP file -- I don't need to know what's in it to be able to copy it, I just copy it to another disk.

    3. Re:Wild Speculation by Zara2 · · Score: 2

      To be honest I would have to check agian. It was the stuff that came with the drive. Just did a straight copy. I just happened to have to have my game of GTA3 interupted because he wanted to test it. ;)

      --

      Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!

  17. you may now go back to snuggling with Jack Valenti by MattW · · Score: 2

    Maybe DeCSS is being used for lots of pirating -- but so are ReplayTVs, VCRs hooked up to each other, photocopy machines, etc. The fact is, you don't ban photocopiers because they can infringe on a book copyright, and you shouldn't ban DeCSS because it can infringe on a DVD copyright, because it has a legitimate use. And again, DeCSS doesn't enable any real pirating you can't do anyhow. bit-by-bit rips of DVDS, still encoded, can be transferred and burned out, and digital copies can be ripped after decoding by reading the video output.

    What does the MPAA need to do? Obviously, they need to donate a lot of money to Senator Fritz Hollings, so he'll try to make american consumers pay for extra technology to police us. After all, it's worth assuming that every American is just a criminal waiting to commit so we can get more content online and encourage broadband adoption, right?

  18. It seems to me... by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    .. that if they are busting guys with only 15 DVD burners, then they really aren't reclaiming much money. They must be making ridiculous amounts of money on DVD's to want to shut down somebody so small. Maybe they need to lower their prices some?

    As for the 'wholly inferior' comment, is it possible that the DVD's he was talking about had no special features? Granted, I know he's trying to make it sound like pirated DVD's are ripping people off (they arent if they're getting movies out faster...) but it's difficult to imagine that they were able to also get the extra footage that often accompanies DVD's.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  19. Once again, attributions are wrong by kindbud · · Score: 5, Informative

    The proper attribution is clearly written at the top of the article as seen on Yahoo. The story originated from John Borland at CNET News.com. That is who should be given credit for the story, not Yahoo. And you might have actually linked to the original article so that the originating site - a source of many /. discussions - could have realized a little revenue from the referrals. Nothing wrong with Yahoo, it's a very convenient place to find stuff from all over, but very little of the written content there is original to them.

    Here is the article at the original publisher's site. Ironically, as I am looking at it right now, the accompanying advertisement is about a CD Burner sale at Gateway.

    And of course, the article fails to mention that the LOTR and Ali bootlegs were videotaped in the theater, and that is why they were available before the movies were released on video or DVD. It always amazes me that the MPAA chicken-littles allow us to assume that most of the piracy problem is due to their own insiders bootlegging stuff before it is released. You'd think they'd want to make sure we all knew that this stuff was bootlegged with a camcorder in the movie theatre, not ripped off the production line by one of their own.

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
    1. Re:Once again, attributions are wrong by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      I agree that it's best to cite the original source, but when CNET licensed their content to yahoo, they could only assume that people would see it there.

      It's not as if people are copying the whole article and posting it in the comments here....

      Oh wait. :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Once again, attributions are wrong by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 2
      And of course, the article fails to mention that the LOTR and Ali bootlegs were videotaped in the theater, and that is why they were available before the movies were released on video or DVD. [...] You'd think they'd want to make sure we all knew that this stuff was bootlegged with a camcorder in the movie theatre, not ripped off the production line by one of their own.
      Yeah, but people would think: "Wait a minute... It'll always be possible to record a movie with a camcorder! Copy-protecting DVDs makes no sense at all!" And that's something they probably do not want people to think...
      --

      ~shiny
      WILL HACK FOR $$$

  20. Who was this guy? Who bought his gear? by crovira · · Score: 2

    Sounds suspicious to me...

    This very small fish just happens to get busted when the --AAs are trying to brand us all as thieves.

    How much was his gear worth? Maybe a tax-deductible hour or tow of Valenti's pay?

    I smell a rat.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  21. "wholly inferior product" by fire-eyes · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.

    Well, when you copy a wholly inferior product, you get the same thing out, right?

    Jagoffs.

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  22. No, some actualy are inferior by unformed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at the titles: "The Lord of the Rings," "Training Day" and "Ali."

    Most likely, these are screeners, or some sort of other illegitimate copies from either a promo video or the distributed film. The quality is --not-- the same as a truly produced DVD, (though it is pretty damn good.)

    Overall, I have no qualms about them arresting these people. This isn't just casual piracy. This is fairly serious bootlegging which, as much as I hate to say it, does impose an adverse effect on the studios' bottom line.

    Imagine, would you rather pay $10 for a pirated DVD or go pay $7/person to go see it in the theatre. For those people that have surround sound systems and large tvs, there's not really much argument.

    1. Re:No, some actualy are inferior by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Interesting
      • would you rather pay $10 for a pirated DVD or go pay $7/person to go see it in the theatre. For those people that have surround sound systems and large tvs, there's not really much argument.

      Hey, maybe some of us like spending two hours having our seat kicked, eating $10 popcorn, listening to cellphones going off, and enjoying the rich gossip and giggles of eleven year old girls in an R rated movie. And I'll tell you what, I'd like to shake the hand of the guy that thought up the idea of monthly/annual tickets. No, not the hand, what's the word? ... throat.

      Every wonder at what point the question became "What's the better experience?" to "What's the least shitty experience?"

      Before anyone starts on the "why do you put up with it?", I'll mention that I've seen exactly three movies in theatres in the past three years, one of which was made in Hollywood. The other two were subtitled, which meant I saw them in nearly empty theatres, except for the guy who exclaimed "Is it all in Japanese?" two minutes into Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

      I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is really very little reason to cut Hollywood any slack at all any more. Cutting the bullshit out, their argument is this: if we can't control every aspect of your life, we won't keep making content.

      Two points. First, that's not true. Greed and coke habits will take care of that. Second, would it really be such a great loss? I don't agree with commercial piracy, but I'm rather at a loss to understand why there's such a market for it.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:No, some actualy are inferior by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      Look at the titles: "The Lord of the Rings," "Training Day" and "Ali."

      Most likely, these are screeners, or some sort of other illegitimate copies from either a promo video or the distributed film. The quality is --not-- the same as a truly produced DVD, (though it is pretty damn good.)


      I have some first-hand experience here.

      I just got back from NYC a few weeks ago. While walking through Chinatown, I started looking at the DVD's on sale on the street. You know, the kind where the chinese girl covers the table over with a blanket until you walk up, in case a cop comes by...

      So I see a "Lord of the Rings" DVD for $10. I figure what the hell, I'll get it. It was worth the price alone for the cover of the DVD, which claims that the DVD stars: "Liv Tyler, Een Micolen, and Kate Branchtt." It also says this on the cover:

      "... REMARKABLE...STUPE
      NDOUS
      ENTERTAINMENT."

      I pop the DVD into my laptop, and the [shitty] menu comes up with chinese characters. I click on the left side of the screen, and am treated to the TEASER TRAILER from LOTR! The other available item on the disc is a chinese-subtitled episode of Hercules starring Kevin Sorbo.

      I think I can safely say the description on the back of this DVD sums up the contents nicely:

      "Story fairy tale with WOMAN ON TOP, the quirky story of Isabella a top-notch chef and glowing beauty who suffers from motion sickness."

      Truly a classic DVD worth owning, illegal or not!

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
  23. This is kinda funny.... by Linuxthess · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just last week I commented to my dad about how there must have been a major bust of pirated DVDs in the Bronx.
    Being that I'm a traveling salesman, and everyday I'm traveling from one side of the Bronx to the other, I noticed that the DVD hawkers don't "carry" them in stock any more. From Fordham Road, East Tremont Ave, Jerome Ave, Kingsbridge Ave, Southern Blvd, Westchester Ave and a few other hotspots they just blinked out of site. One day I went to meet a couple of distributors in the commercial neighborhood-less area called Hunts Point, and there they were, the piraters themselves, with cajas y cajas del los DVDs.
    Of course I stocked up, but that was 3 weeks ago. I havent seen them since.

    --

    I sig, therefore I was.
  24. Re:Waaaay off topic, but too funny to pass up. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
    Maybe you could highlight the funny parts?

    There is no way I am gonna read that entire paragraph. Seems like a real hoot though (*cough*).


    Hm. Yeah, in re-reading, it does strike me as having come from one of those inner spirals where I didn't realize just how far I'd wandered from the herd.

    Ah well. I guess you can go pirate a Pauly-Shore DVD if you want some cheep laughs which don't require any input energy whatsoever.

    Weirdly enough, I just found in the last five minutes an article which talks about how Alzheimer's is much less prevelent in those who actively use their brains during their lives. You have lots of medical insurance, I trust?


    -Fantastic Lad

  25. A wholly inferior product. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Quote, J. Valenti MPAA Chief Executive:

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product,"

    How is it wholly inferior? Are they skipping every 64th bit? Are they failing to copy the FBI warning at the beginning of it? Maybe they're disabling the commercials that you can't fast forward past.

    See, I've ALWAYS been against people making copies, and selling them. But damned if this asshole doesn't make it impossible for me to have any sympathy.

    1. Re:A wholly inferior product. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

      Quite a few of the pirate movies I've seen come with the flimsy case, most in fact. As for the inserts, they aren't the official ones too be sure, but many look quite professional. Maybe the pirates are hiring 2nd year graphic art students, I dunno. Hell, maybe they *are* graphic art students.

      Jack, in case you haven't noticed, the product isn't the MPAA. And if you try to make the product the MPAA, we'll reject it. Even some of the stupid sheep you call customers will reject it. The product is movies, and it doesn't matter who sells it, for some people. It used to matter to me, but the more slack I give you, the more you want... now you want to force digital copyright conrtols onto my computer? The pirates may want to steal, but at least they aren't trying to make me a Disney digislave.

    2. Re:A wholly inferior product. by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      Did you see the Valenti-Lessig debate a few months ago? I actually had my own mother sit down and watch that. She's about as computer savvy as a trained chimp (no offense, ma!) and knew virtually nothing about either side's cases, but even she came away from it thinking Valenti was a schmuck.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  26. Even if... by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2

    You make it impossible to play on a computer, all you have to do is have a "legitimate" player convert the signal to analog for viewing, and put the analog output in to a computer input, and voila, any protection scheme has just been cracked. They just think we're too stupid to realize this...

    BlackGriffen

    1. Re:Even if... by budgenator · · Score: 2
      Hollings said
      The second problem is commonly referred to as the ``Analog hole.'' As
      protected digital programming, usually delivered over satellite or
      cable, but also available on the Internet, is decrypted for viewing by
      consumers, most frequently on television sets, the programming is
      temporarily ``in the clear.'' At this point, pirates may have the
      opportunity to take advantage of an ``Analog hole'' by copying the
      content into a digital format, i.e. re-digitizing it, and then
      illegally copying and/or retransmitting the content. The technology to
      solve this problem either exists today, or will be available shortly.
      Regardless, the solution is technologically feasible. As with the
      ``broadcast flag'' the solution to the ``Analog hole'' will require a
      government mandate to ensure its ubiquitous adoption across consumer
      devices.

      in short they know about it
      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    2. Re:Even if... by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2

      Nice, he knows enough to eliminate the amateurs. Still lots of ways around anything he cooks up, though: one, degrade quality. Any watermark that a human can't detect will be destroyed by only a marginal loss in quality. Two, don't let the computer know what your recording. All inputs are essentially fast voltage meters. All you need is a sufficiently fast input with enough range and sensitivity. Make sure the output goes in to a collection of raw binary files, and from there it is just coming with home brewed software solutions (taking away the ability to even write programs is far too totalitarian). Don't let the software know what it is manipulating either; it's just a large stream of numbers in a big arithmetic problem. Removing the water mark is just trial and error from there. Three: isolate the computer. It will report you over the internet if you try to disassemble it? Unplug it. It will "scream for help" via radio frequencies? Stick it in a room with walls lined with aluminum foil. Four: file already on your hard drive? Erase the file, then alloc the memory the file was in to a new file that begins before the old file did. You can now edit the binary to your heart's content. One and two are sufficient, three and four are icing on the cake. It may be possible to short out whatever hardware they put in the machine so that it always returns a, "go ahead and copy," signal. Ultimately they'll either have to eliminate the programmable computer entirely, leaving the public with media viewers, or fail. Considering the black market and the existing technology base, this is not realistically possible.

  27. competition by cgenman · · Score: 2
    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.

    Valenti then considered for a moment. "That's our job."

  28. Watermark detected. Recording denied. by yerricde · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You make it impossible to play on a computer, all you have to do is have a "legitimate" player convert the signal to analog for viewing, and put the analog output in to a computer input, and voila, any protection scheme has just been cracked.

    Fast forward three years into the future. CBDTPA-compliant hardware says: "Watermark detected. Recording denied." And your pre-CBDTPA hardware has worn out after years of use. Now what do you do?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Watermark detected. Recording denied. by wmansir · · Score: 2, Funny
      Fast forward three years into the future. CBDTPA-compliant hardware says: "Watermark detected. Recording denied." And your pre-CBDTPA hardware has worn out after years of use. Now what do you do?

      Take a trip to Canada, and pick up some Cuban cigars while I'm at it.

  29. Hope they don't shut down them all... by Dimensio · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...because if CBDTPA passes I will seek out DVD bootleggers to obtain my movies. I'm even willing to pay more on a bootleg than on a "legit" disc just on principle.

    Of course, I'm sure that the regulations imposed by the CBDTPA will insure that no more illegal DVD copying ever happens.

    1. Re:Hope they don't shut down them all... by mpe · · Score: 2

      Did people stop drinking during prohibition?

      IIRC people actually drunk more

      No. Will people stop burning DVDs and stealing software? No. It WILL still happen. The gov't will just force it underground like it did illegal bars and what have you.

      Prohibition is a better analogy for the "war on drugs" than it is for DVD "piracy".

      So in a sense, everyone does have a vote about what is right and what is wrong. The idea being that the people keep the gov't and laws from getting too out of control.

      If all potentially electable candidates feel the same way about an issue (which is a lot more likely with 2 than it is with 20) then electorial votes are somewhat meaningless. The only way to vote against is not to vote, which tends to be ignored, even when the majority do exactly that.

  30. Re:There is a way by Papa+Legba · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will never work and has been tried before with other illegal activities (drugs spring to mind).


    Here is were the problem lies. If you don't bust a good majority of the people on each iteration of the illegal activity then people are not scared. To be effective you need to get about 10% each time the crime is committed. Otherwise the chances of geting busted are to low for someone to worry about. it falls into the range of " Won't happen to me".


    This means that if you download a movie ten times the chances of getting busted should be aproaching certany. Anything less and you are wasting time with this method.


    This would not be hard to do if they were serious. You can grab casual users by the bushel basket all day long on Efnet or Dalnet. You could easily make a morpheus/Kazaa clone to track with. Lot's of trojan horse schemes to throw out there to grab users by the hundreds daily.


    Then you hit the real problem. With millions of people everyday participating in this activity you are suddenly faced with prosecuting hundreds of thousands of cases to the full extent of the law. We are talking billions of dollars in legal costs, most likely aproaching the trillons quickly.


    The hurdle comes from the fact that these are not poor intercity youth here who will get a public defender and plead guilty for the reduced charge. These are people of means, that is why they have an internet connection and a working computer, that is why they are sitting on a high speed connection at a university. If they themselves cannot afford a lawyer then you can damn bet their parents can. A lawyer who get's payed by the hour and is going to drag out this case for as long as they can. This means more work and more court time and more goverment costs. Meanwhile the citizens of the state/country are having a fit as their taxs rise and their infrastructure falls apart because all funds are being directed at internet piracy. Most people will agree that they would rather have a murder caught and prosecuted than have a pirate prosecuted. With such an overloaded court system the murders would be walking free because the prosecuters cannot handle the load.


    This is the idea of Civil Disobediance put into words by Henry David Thoreau and so well put into action by Gandhi and Martin Luther King. If you swamp the system with so many targets then the system will fail. You can arrest hundreds or thousands, but you cannot arrest tens of thousands and millions of people for performing a harmless action. It will bring your state to a grinding halt.


    Add to this the fact that every case is a potential reversal of the case law you find favorable. All it takes is one lucky or good lawyer to get this to an appels court, or the supreme court and all of a sudden your favoriable DMCA is being modified by the courts in ways that you cannot control with campaign contributions. Imagine an apeals court rulling that the DMCA means that the movie industry cannot decode disks to see if they are pirated once they are made and throwing all current cases out of court for lack of evidence. Stranger interpritations have been made and become law before. The politicians and the lobbiest would do a lot to keep this from happening, including making personal piracy legal.

    The only course of action is to capitulate and modify your behavior so that the disobedience stops.

    Piracy is consumer Disobedience on a grand scale. If your prices are gouging, your rates outragous then the consumer wil go elsewhere. This is the basis for Capitalism, just and unforseen side effect of that system. That if the alternative is Illegal the consumers wil become outlaws.

    --
    Papa Legba come and open the gate
  31. Let's see... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Police said they confiscated two computer towers, 15 DVD burners, 1,208 copies of pirate DVDs and about $5,200 in cash. Only one person was arrested" Yea...I'd say he's capable of producing at least 1 billion out of the 3 they claim to lose each year. The movie industry sure needs Congress and a Gestapo to protect themselves from this guy, don't they? Ironically, the 2001 Oscars are on tonight...and it's been the most profitable year in movie history...

    1. Re:Let's see... by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 2
      The movie industry sure needs Congress and a Gestapo to protect themselves from this guy, don't they? Ironically, the 2001 Oscars are on tonight...and it's been the most profitable year in movie history...
      And the most important: Who pays for it? The movie industry? No, the tax payers. The same thing as with fighting the software piracy: I'm a programmer. I write software. I don't want people who copy my programs to be imprisoned. I don't think copying bits should be a crime. Most of my own programs are free software. Still, part of my taxes is used to protect the richest man on Earth.
      --

      ~shiny
      WILL HACK FOR $$$

  32. Lucky bastard by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 3, Funny

    The New York raid caught a relatively small fish in its net. Police said they confiscated two computer towers, 15 DVD burners, 1,208 copies of pirate DVDs and about $5,200 in cash. Only one person was arrested.

    Boy... some people just have it all, don't they.

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  33. Making assumptions by Cruciform · · Score: 5, Informative

    The blurb linking to the article makes a reference to DeCSS and how it didn't have to be cracked to copy the movies... says who?
    There's nothing in the article about HOW the movies were ripped. If you visit a site like vcdHelp you can get all the information and software you need to blow past DeCSS and make VCDs, SVCDS, and DVDs at all kinds of quality levels. As long as you have the media to burn to, you can rip and convert those movies easily (but you're still breaking through DeCSS).

    In fact by reading the article and seeing reference to movies that are stil in theatres or haven't been released, if we knew the source then it would be easier to divine the method of duplication.

    If it leaks from the studio pre-copy-protection, I guess copying would be a cinch. If they taped it at a theatre, then you go back to vcdhelp, and with Vdub, TMPGEnc, and other tools you could custom create the dvd easily. Same with if it was post-copy-protection.
    So unless they got it before protection was implemented, I think it would be safe to assume DeCSS bypass tools were used. But then again, assumption got us this story :) hehe.

    1. Re:Making assumptions by nagora · · Score: 2
      DeCSS is a specific algorithm for breaking CSS (which is the encryption system).

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    2. Re:Making assumptions by wmansir · · Score: 2, Informative
      If it was tape->dvd (from camcorder or screener tape) then there would be no need for DeCSS, because CSS encrypting would never be applied.

      If the source was a CSS encrypted DVD there is still a chance that it was under the 4.7GB limit of DVD-Rs and therefor a bit-to-bit duplicate could be made, with out decrypting the files. Your DVD player would unlock the files just as with the original DVD.

      The only case that needs DeCSS is for CSS encrypted DVDs that are larger than 4.7GB (ie. double layer). To place these on a DVD-R you need to re-encode the video to a lower bitrate so it fits under the 4.7GB limit. This requires the video to be decrypted, hence the need for DeCSS.

    3. Re:Making assumptions by Cruciform · · Score: 2

      Ooo, good point :)
      Thanks for adding to that.

      And I was jumbling up my CSS and DeCSS terms too :)

  34. but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by elmegil · · Score: 2
    Some of the most common piracy involves asia, where VCDs are popular. You can't dup a DVD onto a VCD. You have to decrypt the video stream first. Which DeCSS does very well.

    Is that a reason to ban DeCSS? Of course not. As we all keep saying, just 'cos you can kill someone with a baseball bat doesn't mean it should be banned.

    --
    7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    1. Re:but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Bull pucky. You can PLAY the DVD, record the analog signal, and encode that for VCD, and the quality will still be perfectly good, for VCD.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Macrovision? Please. DVD Players with macrovision disabled, or easily disable-able, are cheap and easily available.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    3. Re:but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by elmegil · · Score: 2
      So you let the DVD player decrypt instead of DeCSS, and you have a slightly lower quality image. But in a world where DeCSS exists, which is easier? Rip from your DVD ROM drive and DeCSS it, or play analog signal and re-encode? Oh wait, I need another stage to defeat Macrovision too....

      I didn't say DeCSS was the only way, moron, but it damn sure is the easiest right now.

      And once again, since you obviously missed it the first time, that doesn't mean that I think DeCSS should be illegal.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    4. Re:but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Of course it shouldn't be illegal. It shouldn't even exist. Digital CD Audio has survivied for 20 years; digital video would too. What I'm saying is that for the purposes of creating VCDs, or even DVDs for the vast majority who aren't Home Theater enthusiasts, and are watching on a 21 inch television anyway, DeCSS needn't even enter into it.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    5. Re:but DeCSS Can be used for piracy by mark_lybarger · · Score: 2

      As we all keep saying, just 'cos you can kill someone with a baseball bat doesn't mean it should be banned.

      i think this action is banned (as long as it's not in self defense). its just not specifically banned, and doesn't need to be. when specific actions such as this (and cell phone use while driving, and viewing kiddie porn over the internet (see recent PA law)) are outlawed it's more of a feel good move on the part of congress. of course they may have no idea what they're doing because they're heavily lobied by people who may or may not understand the full consequenses of such legislation. these laws serve no real purpose other than to say publically "yes, we know what you are doing out there, and we're really, REALLY not going to stand for it."

  35. Newspeak by winnetou · · Score: 2, Funny
    Merriam-Webster gives the following meaning for pirate:
    Entry Word: pirate
    Function: noun
    Text: a robber on the high seas <little boys dreaming of sailing as pirates>
    Synonyms buccaneer, corsair, freebooter, picaroon, rover, sea dog, sea robber, sea rover, sea wolf
    Related Word viking; privateer; looter, marauder, pillager, plunderer, raider

    A rather strong word to describe people who copy copyrighted works.
    1. Re:Newspeak by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 3, Interesting
      If you are not a native speaker of English please ignore this comment. But if you are, I strongly urge you to stop quoting an English dictionary and think that by doing so, you are making an argument of some sort. Obviously, Websters hasn't yet caught up with modern usage of the word "pirate." Big deal. So you have an outdated/inaccurate dictionary.

      Please, young people, stop trying to treat dictionaries as manuals that legislate the rules of a language, when what they in fact do is describe (and sometimes misdescribe) common usage.

    2. Re:Newspeak by Krow10 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Merriam-Webster also gives the following definition for piracy:
      Main Entry: piracy
      Function: noun
      1 : an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
      2 : robbery on the high seas
      3 : the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright
      See definition 3. It's been used that way for a while now. Usually it's pretty easy to use context to determine which definition is intended by the author. English has many words which mean different things in different contexts. And piracy is plain easier to say that "copyright infringement." Keep tipping at windmills, though.

      -Craig
      --
      Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
    3. Re:Newspeak by (void*) · · Score: 2
      Everything you said is true and I wholeheartedly agree. But the point must be made: when it comes down to moral arguments, it is a very usual technique to use words to attempt to confuse the argument.


      No doubt, people use the word piracy to refer to copyright violations, and that is simply a linguistic use of one word by the other. But the EMOTIONAL effect of this usage is to make unsubtle and unobjective minds equate copyright violations with robbery in the high seas. To those to know how to think clearly, YOUR ARGUMENT is irrelevant. It is a political ploy used to cause confusion.

    4. Re:Newspeak by gilroy · · Score: 2
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Keep tipping at windmills, though.

      How much does one tip a windmill, anyway? Is it the standard 15% or do you give more for superior service?


      More seriously, assuming you meant tilting at windmills(*), well, you have sort of half a point. On the one hand, the usage is common and we're never really going to get people to stop using it. On the other hand, the usage is stupid and was invented solely to create evil connotations for the crime of copyright infringement, since that by itself is, well, boring. The word was adopted wholy for its emotional baggage, which makes no actual sense in the way it's used.


      So I rather hope we all keep "tilting at windmills" and pointing out how cynical and manipulative the choice of "piracy" was. And no, "piracy" is not significantly easier to say or use than "infringement"; it's just sexier.


      (*) Yes, it's "tilting". When two jousters combat on the tourney list, it's called "tilting". From Merrian Webster:


      tilt (v)

      to charge against "tilt an adversary"

      to engage in a combat with lances : JOUST

      The total phrase, of course, is a reference to Don Quixote.
    5. Re:Newspeak by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 2
      Please, young people, stop trying to treat dictionaries as manuals that legislate the rules of a language, when what they in fact do is describe (and sometimes misdescribe) common usage.
      Winnetou in his comment didn't say that piracy doesn't mean copying without permission. He just showed the original meaning and said that pirate is "A rather strong word to describe people who copy copyrighted works", which is 100% correct. Remember that the words pirate, piracy, theft of intellectual property, etc. are used only for one reason, to make the act of duplicating information sound like a crime. A guy copying Swan Lake for his girlfriend to show her the beauty of Tchaikovsky's music doesn't sound dangerous for most of intelligent people, but a pirate stealing the intellectual property is evil criminal with no doubt and should be thrown into jail.
      --

      ~shiny
      WILL HACK FOR $$$

    6. Re:Newspeak by mpe · · Score: 2

      But if you are, I strongly urge you to stop quoting an English dictionary and think that by doing so, you are making an argument of some sort. Obviously, Websters hasn't yet caught up with modern usage of the word "pirate." Big deal. So you have an outdated/inaccurate dictionary.

      IIRC Webster's is actually an American dictionary. One possible derivation for pirate being related to copyright infringment would be the pirate radio stations of the 1960's operated from ships in the North Sea.

    7. Re:Newspeak by gilroy · · Score: 2
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Pirates, like the mafia, have a mixed image in the English speaking world

      But the connotation is entirely negative in a courtroom, which is where it matters. Especially because most of these issues are not settled by jury but by judge -- someone considerably less likely to be swayed by the swashbuckling romantic image. I don't think judges decided based solely on the term; but I do belive the term was picked to create a certain state of mind.


      I can't swear to the origin of "piracy" in the copyright corporations but I strongly suspect it did arise there. The earliest use I have seen referred to "pirate radio" stations, and I will concede that the term might have arisen because often such stations are broadcast from ships just outside the legal boundaries of the nation. But I think it is definitely used by the content cartel for its illegal connotations as well as to build mindshare for the idea that copyrights are truly "property" that can be "stolen", and not what they truly are, which is monopoly rights that can be infringed.

  36. They don't cost pennies to make!!! by jcsehak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a little hard to pay $35 (in an extreme case, RoboCop Director's cut was about that much...) for a DVD when you know they cost pennies to make.

    Okay, CDs and DVDs are not cheap to produce. Everyone seems to think that the only money studios spend on discs is the actual manufacturing costs. Think about all the extra things that go into a DVD. And the insane amount of money it costs to have a top-quality video and sound studio. Also, the packaging, printing and advertising costs. And the retail markup, which usually doubles the cost (it does with CDs, anyway). Then think about how the people who would watch Robocop is a niche, and the people who would buy the director's cut on DVD is a niche of that niche; and you'll have some idea of where the $35 comes from. I'm not saying they're not making a lot of profit, or they wouldn't make more if they halved their prices, but movie and music studios aren't price-gouging as much as everyone thinks (I do think they're price gouging, for the record, but not as much as everyone thinks.)

    --

    c-hack.com |
  37. economies of scale of pirating DVDs. by jonbrewer · · Score: 5, Informative

    (not that I recommend going in to this business...)

    In traditional Slashdot fashion, I will now pull some prices out of my ass (sorry, that would be the Internet) and will "do the math."

    The entry cost is not high. Less than $7k to profit.

    Here's a DVD dupe machine with a 100-disc hopper: http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=3 26050 for $4k. Buy one.

    Here's a spindle of 100 DVDs http://shop.store.yahoo.com/spectraimpex1/100pacdv 47gb.html for $250. Buy ten of them.

    Now load your dupe machine once a day for ten days.

    Pick up the DVDs when finished and sell them to your dealers for $700/spindle. (they will then be resold at $10-$15/each, a very healthy profit for a street vendor.)

    You have just paid for the DVD dupe machine and have made $500. You probably invested twenty hours in buying the hardware, setting it up, testing, and smoking pot with your dealers.

    From now on, for every 5 hours you invest in buying and burning another 100 copies, you'll make $450. Not bad, eh?

    The getting busted and going to jail part might suck, but you can get around this by doing the duping in a friendly environment. Of course friendly environments sometimes take a little away from the bottom line, but booze is cheaper in those places anyway.

    Cheers,

    JB

    1. Re:economies of scale of pirating DVDs. by brianvan · · Score: 2

      Does this financial plan work if you only sell copies of the dancing heaves of Elaine Benes?

      (sorry, this whole story reminds me of that Seinfeld episode)

    2. Re:economies of scale of pirating DVDs. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      Two things may be of interest. First, the DVD-Rs you discovered (spindle of 100 @ $2.50 ea) are only capable of storing 4.7 GB. Most commercial DVDs are a bit longer (6.5--8.5 GB). So, the DVD-Rs are only really useful for producing two disc sets, direct copies of early DVDs or self mastered movies. Now, none of these are terribly difficult hurdles-- but it's somewhat more difficult than pushing a few buttons and watching the money fly in.

      Additionally, the DVD recorder might have problems duplicating some media--SCRIBE includes MediaFORM's exclusive SmartDRIVE, providing intellectual property safeguards coupled with professional audio features. Beats me what the intellectual property safeguards mean.

      Additionally, criminal organizations might not be able to achieve economies of scale. It tends o raise their profile and attract attention from law enforcement. Yes, yes, drug cartels might work with bulk quantities-- but "economy of scale" might not be the best analysis of an industry that works with 10,000-30,000 percent markups, and has legendary problems with bulk money laundering.

    3. Re:economies of scale of pirating DVDs. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      A 30,000 % markup simply means that the markup is 300 times the original price. A 6 billion (6e9) dollar market would (assuming the 30,000 % figure) would imply 20 million (2e7) dollars in costs.

  38. Once again, facts are wrong by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2

    And of course, the article fails to mention that the LOTR and Ali bootlegs were videotaped in the theater, and that is why they were available before the movies were released on video or DVD.

    I've seen a LOTR bootleg DVD (probably not the produced by the guys busted in this article), and it wasn't from a camcorder in a theatre. See this post for the details.

  39. Not only does it sound like they made a bootleg by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2

    copy of the movies, but I bet they never paid the DVD licensing fees either. Oh dear, what about the children...

  40. This will not do... by TygerFish · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Oh, this will not do...
    They're doing exactly what they should be doing. They are defending their copyrights by going after the individual lawbreakers. It may be as futile as the drug war in the US, but at least they're trying.

    I think that's two bad arguments rolled into one. They are going after individual lawbreakers, which is futile as long as there is a profit in it. They are using the government to rubber-stamp legislation to shackle technology and innovation without understanding it. And, in your own words, like the drug war, it's all for nothing.


    You've got to admire the logic you are espousing,


    I mean, imagine it: someone hears one day that you can cure a mild cold by shooting yourself in the foot. He figures, 'what the hell,' goes out and buys a gun, blows a couple of toes off and the bullet misses the neighbors head by inches.


    The cold persists through it's normal course and eventually the bandages come off. Despite the lack of favorable results (and the hole in the neighbor's cieling), the next time he gets the sniffles, he reaches for his revolver...


    Something about this is wrong.

    --
    To mail me, remove the 'mailno' from my email addy.
    "Yeah. It smells, too..."
  41. wholly inferior by Cedric+C.+Girouard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.


    Wholly inferior in what way ? No spam insert ? No nice picture on the cover ?

    Someone please correct me, but isnt the whole point of copying a DVD not to lose quality in the process ? What ? Are counterfeit burners going to drop a few 1 ans 0's in the process ?

    I think the only thing inferior here is the money going into Valenti's pocket.

    --

    Marriage is considered capital punishment for the theft of a goat in some third world countries...

  42. Re:Correction by operagost · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It doesn't matter to the MPAA and RIAA. They think you should have to go out and buy another copy if yours goes belly-up. Yet, they insist that a consumer only owns a license to view the content, not the content itself. So why can't I simply pay for replacement media, since I own the license? This is the question you're never going to hear the answer to, because the industry is so greedy they want to get you coming and going. This won't change as long as politicians are in the pockets of the corporations.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  43. Re:There is a way by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2
    You can arrest hundreds or thousands, but you cannot arrest tens of thousands and millions of people for performing a harmless action. It will bring your state to a grinding halt.

    Actually, if you look at history, this is not always true. For example, Stalin handled the problem by streamlining the punishment process: He simply eliminated all of the steps between "Arrest" and "Execution". In this way, he was able to efficiently do away with millions of ordinary citizens for their "crimes".

  44. DeCSS? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    The artical didn't mention DeCSS at all, but it did mention computers. How do you know they wern't using it?

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  45. DVD piracy is a reality now by Nailer · · Score: 2

    Here in Victoria, Australia we have regular `computer swapmeets' on Sunday at various town halls. Most of the hardware and software sold is legit, including most of the DVDs, but some are obviously pirated through Asia - the case and disc art looks a little different, they typically have chinese / bahasa indonesia subtitles, and they might occasionally be missing a couple of extra features. Sometimes its done quite well, sometimes, they haven't be able to get good cover art for the movie so they've made their own, with often hilarious results. They also occasionally try and reencode films to fit on lower capacity disks, which is pretty nasty.

    But if the movie industry won't help me by allowing alll the real DVDs I've brought to be played on my home and work computer (which happen to run Linux), I won't help them by doing their detective work for them.

  46. The Slashdot Collective's idea of Fair Use by AndyChrist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "You analogy is flawed. Instead of attacking it I'll just just point out that if fair use applied to digital media (which it should), you could make as many copies as you please and distribute them for free, legally. "

    Where do you get this idea? Fair use has only ever meant either redistributing small portions, for review, commentary, or criticism (I think use in new artistic works might be debated, although most people doing so don't attempt it), or archival copies for your own personal use.

    These uses are under heavy attack, and need to be defended.

    What you are talking about is NOT fair use, and it has been illegal as long as we've had copyright.

    Seriously...Slashdot needs to have an explaination of what Fair Use is right on the front page, above the banner ads.

    1. Re:The Slashdot Collective's idea of Fair Use by AndyChrist · · Score: 2

      Here's one source.

      That link has some info I DIDN'T know...I did not know that classroom use was EXPLICITLY allowed.

  47. I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am glad that they caught these guys. Pirating is stealing whether it's videos on DVDs or videos sent over the internet or music traded on-line.

    All of the excuses I've heard for doing so is bullshit. Is the entertainment industry gouging the consumer with high DVD prices? Yep. Does that justify stealing their intelecual property? Nope.

    Everytime we violate a copyright by illegal traiding we make the MPAA and RIAA arguments for built-in hardware copy protection more justifiable. It's going to be a hard enough fight without giving the corporations additonal ammunition.

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    1. Re:I'm Glad! by eap · · Score: 2

      Good point. If you don't like the practices of this industry, then don't support the other areas of their business.

      Don't go to the movies or watch TV anymore. Cancel your cable subscription.

      Trust me, your life will still be enjoyable and you'll have an extra $500/yr. to spend on beer.

    2. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      You are stealing intellectual property. Something that someone else has labored to produce and deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor.

      It's not that hard of a concept to grasp.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    3. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stealing movies, music and other forms of intellectual property has nothing to do with "freedom of thought."

      I highly doubt that you would sit down and "accidently" write war and peace.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    4. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2



      The definition of "Theft of intellectual property" has already been established by the courts. You may not like it but there it is. It is NOT the theft of copyright, patent or trademark. It does, however, include coping the intellectual property in question without the owner's permission. And by doing that you ARE denying him/her the right to distribute it AS HE/SHE PLEASES.

      "Should I not be allowed to make a copy of something provided I do not try to make money off it?"

      If you are talking about fair use then absolutely yes. If you are talking about ripping a copy of a borrowed DVD or music CD then absolutely no! One is fair use the other theft. Even if you don't make money from it.

      "You wouldn't, or at any rate shouldn't, find anything wrong with a guy recording the Superbowl and playing it back later for his friends, nor even of giving the tape to someone who didn't see it."

      Recording the Superbowl for your own use is "fair use" but strictly speaking giving the tape to another is probably a violation.

      I'm going to decline to comment on the futuristic fantasy of "copying food."

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    5. Re:I'm Glad! by mpe · · Score: 2

      You are stealing intellectual property. Something that someone else has labored to produce and deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor.

      In the US this certainly isn't the case. Since copyright is intended to encourage further production. Whilst Hollywood might moan about lots of things they are still making movies.
      Copyright laws are already completly out of step with their supposed intent. e.g. both copyright as an inherent right of the author and that described in the US constitution cannot logically create something which outlives the author.
      Copyright was taken away from publishers 2-300 years ago for some very good reasons. Since then they have been trying to get it back...

    6. Re:I'm Glad! by Rupert · · Score: 2

      Beer should be free (as in beer)!

      --

      --
      E_NOSIG
    7. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      >>You are stealing intellectual property. Something that someone else has labored to produce and deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor.

      "In the US this certainly isn't the case."

      What part don't you agree with? That copying intellectual property without permission isn't stealing? That someone else labored to produce the intellectual property? That the person who creates the intellectual property deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor?

      "Since copyright is intended to encourage further production."

      Yes it is, by preventing people from reducing or eliminating the copyright holder's monetary compensation. If the creators of intellectual property can expect that instead of being compensated people will instead just steal (copy) their work there is little incentive to labor to product the intellectual property.

      "Whilst Hollywood might moan about lots of things they are still making movies."

      This is irrelevant to the argument.

      "Copyright laws are already completly out of step with their supposed intent. e.g. both copyright as an inherent right of the author and that described in the US constitution cannot logically create something which outlives the author."

      You may disagree with the law but that does not give you the right to ignore it. If you don't like the law then work to change it.

      "Copyright was taken away from publishers 2-300 years ago for some very good reasons. Since then they have been trying to get it back..."

      Huh?? No... The copyright laws are still on the books.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    8. Re:I'm Glad! by HiThere · · Score: 2

      You are, in you statements, correct. The gouging of prices for an entertainment doesn't justify the illicit copying of proprietary materials.

      What would justify it is the wholesale bribery and corruption of the legal process that these people have been (reportedly) engaged in. If they so pervert the laws of the people and ignore the constitutional mandates, then they have undermined the foundations of their claim to property rights. Legally mandated property rights can only exist as accepted rights where the justice of the laws is acknowledged. As it is, what we have is not people accepting this as right, but people acknowleding that force will be brought against them if they are caught. This is quite a different matter, and, in and of itself, sufficient evidence that a democratic law would not acknowledge that they have the right that they are asserting.

      Nearly everyone would accept that an author/artist/sculptor/etc. has the right to control whether or not any particular work is ever released. (The exceptions that I am aware of are certain self-centered art "collectors". And they are clearly morally bankrupt already.) And clearly a limited copyright is desireable, to enable costs of production to be recouped. But a key word there is limited. That doesn't well describe the current law. Five years seems about right. If the copyright is owned and controlled by the artist, then a good argument could be made for the life of the artist, but note that I said both owned and controlled. If either of these rights has been contracted away (should this be legal?) then the period of the copyright should revert to 5 years.

      But the movie industry, and lately the recording industry in general, has been grossly immoral. There are no legal sanctions possible against them, because they have bought the laws. So I cannot feel that it is immoral for someone else to act against them in contravention of the laws. There would need to be other arguments made for why it was immoral (which it might be!). E.g., it would probably be immoral to use physical force against them. I say probably because since they have used the laws which they have purchased to apply physical force against others, so an argument could be made that they were the initiators of the use of force. It would be a bit tricky, but it might be plausible.

      When the laws cease to be justifiable under the constitution, then what claim to a moral force do they possess? I'm not claiming that the constitution is perfect, merely that it is a codification that reasonably well represented the consensus of the views of the people of the US averaged over time, and thus has an intrinsic moral force. (And that part about "averaged over time" is quite important! Short term fluctuations are need to be dampened.)

      I am uneasy about the entire body of US law that considers corporations to be persons. This seems to be to be clearly illogical. And corporations don't evince much, if any, moral sense. Sometimes the laws are so written as to make it illegal for a corporation to act morally. (E.g., the financial well being of the stockholders appears to be legally required to be more valuable than the lives of the customers, and certainly of those who aren't customers.) If it is decided that corporations are persons, then they must also be made to adhere to the laws against, e.g., assault, murder, fraud, etc. with penalties that actually affect not only the corporations themselves, but also those who make the decisions for the corporations. And these laws must be enforced. But this doesn't seem practical. How does one throw a corporation in jail for 10 years? Much better and cleaner would be to recognize that corporations were not people, and that the decisions that are made are made and carried out by individual persons. And to pass a law that if a corporation didn't keep sufficient records to trace back the prepetrator of a crime that was comitted by the corporation, then it would be dissolved, and the penalty would be imposed in a graded manner upon the entire management layer. (I rather expect that this wold lead to the records being kept.)
      .

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      I understand what you are saying and to some degree agree with it. We have basically two facets to the question of intellectual property.

      1. The law.
      2. The Moral obligations of both the corporations and the average citizens.

      Under the law only the law matters. There is no justification under the law for civil disobedience with regard to breaking laws governing intellectual property. If you do the crime be prepared to do the time.

      So what we are left with is the moral aspect, which laws do not address. Specifically does the alleged actions of the entertainment industry justify civil disobedience in the form of refusal to compensate the copyright holders for the intellectual property that they control?

      As with all moral questions, each individual must answer it for himself. I would caution anyone contemplating stealing intellectual property as a form of civil disobedience that, in my opinion, it is a poor form that will not attain a desirable outcome.

      Most people who trade intellectual property are not doing it as a result of the backroom deals that corporations have made with our politicians. The vast majority of people do it because they want to possess the intellectual property but they don't want to pay for it and the chance of getting caught is very low. So much for the moral high ground.

      Your concerns about our corrupt political system are valid. The corruption is wide and deep and very serious. It is also a separate problem that does desperately need to be addressed. However, I don't think that the theft of intellectual property is the correct way to address it.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    10. Re:I'm Glad! by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Sorry, I should have been clearer. I'm certainly not advocating the copying of work against the wishes of the rightful owners. And most of that stuff I wouldn't recommend copying no matter what!

      In fact, for most of it about the only justification that I could find for listening to or watching would be "to engage in civil disobedience", and I'm not that political.

      My point was that I find it very hard to work up any righteous indignation against the copiers. And I find very little reason to try. (Admittedly, I elaborated a bit excessively on that point ...)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    11. Re:I'm Glad! by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2
      The definition of "Theft of intellectual property" has already been established by the courts.

      Yes, and the courts are totally infallable. The courts decided that 2600 was in the wrong. The courts decided that Napster should die. The courts have repeatedly decided that AOL/TW, MPAA, RIAA, Vivendi, you name it, are beyond reproach. Face it, sometimes their definitions and conclusions are total bullshit and not something we should accept as correct.

      Recording the Superbowl for your own use is "fair use" but strictly speaking giving the tape to another is probably a violation.

      Oh? So my giving away the only copy I have of something away is illegal? Gee, I guess that puts used book stores and yard sales on par with the chop shop in NYC. No doubt they're next on Valenti's hitlist.

      You see the problem here? Once you start saying, "Well these are acceptable means of transferring information and these are not", you will have problems because there will always be totally reasonable actions which will fall into the 'naughty' category. And the courts are notorious for following the letter and not the spirit of the law.

      I'm going to decline to comment on the futuristic fantasy of "copying food."

      Don't be a jackass. It was an analogy. I never said it was going to happen or had even any chance of doing so. It was an example of this exact same problem applied to something that has inherently been un-mass-copyable, much like information a few centuries ago. The position taken by the status quo side looked stupid, and rightly so. A resource suddenly becomes infinitely available at almost no expense, limited only in the uniqueness of new variations. And what do you propose in response? Let's ignore it and maintain an artificial scarcity! Let's ignore all the positive consequences of this ability and arrest anyone trying to use them!

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    12. Re:I'm Glad! by mpe · · Score: 2

      >>You are stealing intellectual property. Something that someone else has labored to produce and deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor. "In the US this certainly isn't the case." What part don't you agree with? That copying intellectual property without permission isn't stealing? That someone else labored to produce the intellectual property? That the person who creates the intellectual property deserves to be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor?

      The idea that someone has the "right to enjoy the fruits of his/her works"/"the right to return on investment"/"the right to make a profit" are some commonly held ideas which have no basis what so ever in the US Consitution" How exactly do you interpret "to futher progress of science and the useful arts" to "enjoy fruits of labor"?

      "Whilst Hollywood might moan about lots of things they are still making movies." This is irrelevant to the argument.

      Since encouraging future works is the reason behind copyright in the US (and AFAIK California is lawfully part of the US, proving otherwise wouldn't "help" unless you could prove that California was an occupied nation state with an applicable copyright law on it's books anyway.) little else can be more relevent.

      "Copyright laws are already completly out of step with their supposed intent. e.g. both copyright as an inherent right of the author and that described in the US constitution cannot logically create something which outlives the author." You may disagree with the law but that does not give you the right to ignore it. If you don't like the law then work to change it.

      IN at least one place the US Constitution does explicitally say that unconstitutional laws should be ignored. It's not impossible that everything ever producted in the US is actually "public domain". Being in the public domain is the default, for things to be otherwise a valid copyright law is needed. If so major copyright holders would want this kept very quiet (and to lobby hard it there was even a chance of the US Supreme court looking at the current statutes) Even if the US Congress were to immediatly pass a copyright law in accordance with the US constitution this cannot affect any preexisting material.

    13. Re:I'm Glad! by Medievalist · · Score: 2

      mpe writes: " IN at least one place the US Constitution does explicitally say that unconstitutional laws should be ignored."

      I can't find this in my copy of the Constitution. Care to post a reference?

      --Charlie

    14. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      You talk a lot but you don't say much...

      People do have a right to enjoy the fruits of their labor, it isn't relevent that the movie industries continue to make movies in the face of piracy and no where in the constitution does it say that you should "ingnore unconstitutional laws."

      You are WAY off base in all of your comments.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    15. Re:I'm Glad! by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      "Yes, and the courts are totally infallable. The courts decided that 2600 was in the wrong. The courts decided that Napster should die. The courts have repeatedly decided that AOL/TW, MPAA, RIAA, Vivendi, you name it, are beyond reproach. Face it, sometimes their definitions and conclusions are total bullshit and not something we should accept as correct"

      The fact that you don't agree with the law is irrelevant. You still don't have a right to ignore it. Work to change it.

      >> Recording the Superbowl for your own use is "fair use" but strictly speaking giving the tape to another is probably a violation.
      "Oh? So my giving away the only copy I have of something away is illegal? Gee, I guess that puts used book stores and yard sales on par with the chop shop in NYC. No doubt they're next on Valenti's hitlist."

      Read my post dude. It is a fact that if you record something from television for your own use it is legal. If you give that take to someone else it is breaking the law. (Strictly speaking.) It has nothing to do with book stores are yard sales.

      "Don't be a jackass. It was an analogy. I never said it was going to happen or had even any chance of doing so. It was an example of this exact same problem applied to something that has inherently been un-mass-copyable, much like information a few centuries ago. The position taken by the status quo side looked stupid, and rightly so. A resource suddenly becomes infinitely available at almost no expense, limited only in the uniqueness of new variations. And what do you propose in response? Let's ignore it and maintain an artificial scarcity! Let's ignore all the positive consequences of this ability and arrest anyone trying to use them!"

      I was not the one being a "jackass." The fantasy that you put forth was not worth commenting on. But if you insist...

      We at this time do NOT have a way to "copy food." We must BUY food. The people who create intellectual property must BUY food. If everyone steals their property without compensating them they will not be able to BUY food. So until we can "copy food" don't steal their property. Get it? Good!

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  48. Anonymous For Obvios Reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    well i logged out for this one because well... anyway i DO have a bootleg copy of one of the movies listed at the bottom of the article and i will say that it ISN'T a camcorder copy. they DO have an internal problem. I understand that this IS indeed illegal but i wanted to say that there are far larger operations using NON "wholly inferior products".

    So if they want to samp out the REAL problem they need to work it out themselves. There will be no police to the rescue here.

    This just proves that they arent interested in stamping out copies they are interest in getting some excuse for the SSSCA or whatever it is now.

    -Coward, Anonymous

  49. Re:There is a way by cyberformer · · Score: 2
    They don't have to arrest hundreds of thousands of people (though I'm sure the prison industry, a major campaign contributor to both parties, will push for this). They can just introduce laws like the DMCA and the CBDTPA which make it more difficult for consumers to actually make copies, by restricting the manufacture of copying devices. We won't see widespread civil disobediance from the PC makers who the latter affects.


    Technically-inclined people will still make copies, and many of us will get away (just like most drug users are not actually arrested), but the mere threat of imprisonment combined with the difficulty of copying will persuade many people to comply with whatever the MPAA demands.

  50. Wanna bet? by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Everyone seems to think that the only money studios spend on discs is the actual manufacturing costs."

    Um, no, I was including that. Check out this site: http://www.moviefxmag.com/ I bought one of their 'mags', it's really a DVD. They charge $10 per disc and it includes 60-90 mins (lost track of time) of behind the scenes footage of a few movies. I find it hard to believe these guys could be in business if it cost more than $1 per DVD to make.

    The simple fact of the matter is that the cost of making one DVD disperses across millions of copies being out there. It's a case of the DVD's costing pennies to make is a bigger issue than the cost of producing the content for the DVD.

    The MPAA would have little problem selling DVD's for $10 each. If that would prove inprofitable (yeah right), then they'd need to tighten their belts a bit. It is not that hard to make quality content. The reason that a DVD costs say $25 on average over the $17 VHS format (I'm pulling numbers out of my head, I bet I'm not that far off) is that the DVD has higher resolution than the VHS counterpart. Therefore, it's worth more money. They make no mention of the discs being far cheaper to make. Yet VHS stuff has gone down in price as of late.

    Trust me, the MPAA seriously inflated the price of their content.

    BTW, if you are interested in movie making at all, go to Barnes and Noble or Borders and get this mag, it's called MovieFX I think. Here is the URL, you can find out more there:

    http://www.moviefxmag.com/

    I was totally shocked when i got one of these guys, gonna subscribe to them.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:Wanna bet? by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "I think they basically try to figure out the proper expense-to-total-profit ratio and go with that, which seems to be around $20 for a DVD."

      I would normally agree, except I think the real thought in their minds is "if we drop the prices, we'll never be able to raise them again." You are right that if people don't buy them that the prices will go down. I can't ask people to say 'don't buy DVD's cos I want to pay less for them!'. I think, though, that they won't be able to maintain that revenue if they 'restrict' the DVD's.

      One thing that really irks me about the RIAA releasing restricted CD's is that they don't lower the price. They claim that piracy costs them billions, but when they fight it they don't pass savings on to people.

      Anyway, I think I drifted off topic a bit hehe. :)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:Wanna bet? by mpe · · Score: 2

      They charge $10 per disc and it includes 60-90 mins (lost track of time) of behind the scenes footage of a few movies. I find it hard to believe these guys could be in business if it cost more than $1 per DVD to make.

      Wonder how much work is really involved in making these "behind the scenes" type of things anyway. The only obvious special footage is interviews with actors, directors, makeup artist, etc. Assuming this wasn't taken as promotional material at some point or other.

      The MPAA would have little problem selling DVD's for $10 each. If that would prove inprofitable (yeah right), then they'd need to tighten their belts a bit. It is not that hard to make quality content. The reason that a DVD costs say $25 on average over the $17 VHS format (I'm pulling numbers out of my head, I bet I'm not that far off) is that the DVD has higher resolution than the VHS counterpart. Therefore, it's worth more money. They make no mention of the discs being far cheaper to make. Yet VHS stuff has gone down in price as of late.

      Not only are DVD's cheaper to make compared with VHS tapes they are also cheaper to ship (e.g. more units per container.) The price appears to be more based around what the market will accept (hence region codes to partition up the market) than anything to do with actual production costs.

      rust me, the MPAA seriously inflated the price of their content.

      Odds on the extra profit dosn't go to the prople who actually created the movie either.

  51. Provisions for 'fair use' aren't really suportive by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    I agree, the fair use definition is a bit misunderstood here. But we have to stay focused in that they are trying to take it all away forcefully. For example, today I have the right to rip a DVD to my PC and re-edit the movie. I want to do this in order to pick up valuable editing skills. Imagine if I could make Lost in Space into a good movie! I can show it to my friends here at my place, but I can't distribute it. But that's okay! I get my education that way.

    They want to forcefully prevent me from pursuing this education. This seems a bit unconstitutional to me. First off, taking my rights away is similar to putting me in jail. Therefore, I'm being punished criminal before commiting any crime. This is not what 'innocent until proven guilty' means.

    Secondly, it intrudes on my ability to make a parody. I can't take a scene from a movie, or a sound bite, and use it in a parody of any sorts.

    Third, it totally destroy's fair use. It's not fair use anymore. It's their rules. Scary, isn't it?

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  52. Bullshit(tm) by t_allardyce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People keep saying "hey, it costs lots of money to produce a dvd." But look, no-one asked for all the Bullshit(tm) extras you get.

    Lets start with the menus. These menus are mostly made by idiots, and are possibly some of the most irritating user interfaces in the world. Ok, so they sometimes look cool, the first time. But after going backwards and forwards and seeing the same stupid transport 20 times, it can get kinda f*cking annoying. I click on something, i make a mistake, no, i don't want to see that menu, so don't start loading it. Just give me a list of the stuff on the DVD, in a plain text form. if i really want pretty colours, i will by a player that renders the text in fun and annoying ways. This way, i can actually look through a list and choose what i want in seconds, and save the producer months of work. Most DVDs have the same format - film, trailers, out-takes, music, documentaries. You don't need to re-invent the wheel with every single disk.

    The next thing is the restrictions: the whole DVD format is a bloated mess of stupid protocols that serve no purpose - CSS has been cracked, why continue to encode it and pay royalties to the dicks who invented it? same goes for macrovision - I have a legitimate reason for plugging my player into my VCR: My TV is so old it doesn't have scart/composite sockets, i need to send it modulated. But can i do this? no, i just get a messy picture, so i have to plug it into my TV card instead. Why restrict people from fast forwarding? what are you trying to prove? The player decides if its gonna process these restrictions (no-fast-forward flag) anyone can design a player that ignores them. But of course, no-one can design a player that ignores them - thats not allowed. DVD is a closed format. Why did the people choose such a restrictive system? because it's the only decent digital system around, and its the only one that the studios want you to use. They invented it, they control it, they put their content on it. Its a monopoly, simple as that.

    Now don't tell me that putting some out-takes and behind the scenes bits costs allot of money. If you want to interview people, make documentaries or expensive music videos, fine, just make a cheap 'lite' version of the disk with out these bits.

    What gets me more than anything, is that the average person loves DVD, they have no clue about the crapness of this format. Its not like they did anything special, AFAIK they didn't even design the compression codec or the disk, and making a menu system is hardly a nobel prize.

    I'm just a loony shouting in the street. I can see all you people reading this "ok... just walk away, hes obviously slightly mad.. keep going" I'm just gonna get ignored or modded down. Just like when I threatened the president and got my comment removed from /. .. ok, um just ignore that bit.

    Ahh, screw you guys, i'm going home to watch my dvd

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  53. Re:There is a way by renehollan · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Civil Disobedience is just one half of the picture.

    I can't help but think of the difference between Martin Luther King and Malcom X: one an advocate of civil disobedience and peaceful protest (now an act of terrorism in some places, like Utah), and the other far more radical (the thought of 50 black men armed with automatic weapons providing protection for a peaceful assembly in a bigoted white town boggles the mind - the whole purpose of the Second Amendment, IMHO).

    Imagine the police being ordered to arrest someone for the "terrorist act" of using DeCSS... to view DVDs he's payed for... on his computer... under Linux. Imagine the accused fighing back. Think automatic weapon's fire, with kevlar-peircing hollow-point rounds: a dozen cops dead in the first skirmish. As they retreat to regroup, the N2 UV lasers are deployed on the roof, powered by a couple of twin-Diesels in the garage: instant sunburn, while 20 KV fry the remaining cops one by one. A bunch of wireless MAN feeds as well as DSL and cable modem offer live, uncut video of the whole scene.

    It's likely that someone mounting such a defence will eventually die in the process (proudly, on their feet). Maybe the message will get out: "I killed the 200 cops who wanted to arrest me for watching a movie I paid for." Maybe other cops would think twice when asked to enforce that kind of ludicruous law. But, if nothing is done, things will get worse.

    Some of us object by wringing our hands, some by writing letters, some by peaceful (and perhaps not so peaceful) demonstrations, and some with violent retaliatory force. One can't ask anyone to endanger themselves in a manner they're not comfortable with in fighting this war, and I'm certainly not advocating enacting out the scenario above, but it is a war, and it will be fought -- human nature makes me certain of that.

    --
    You could've hired me.
  54. Ah, that explains it... by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 2

    Fortunately, it isn't possible to yet copy hard work.

    So, if hard work is legislated to be IP, and the DMCA places prohibition on copying IP, then no one will be allowed to work hard...

    Ah, now I get it! So those RI/MPAA are pretty slick after all.

    I do believe, however, that they are preaching to the choir, IMO.

    .

    --
    Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
  55. Experience as a deCSS defendant by Cally · · Score: 2

    My mirror's been here since I read the original story on Jon Johansen's bust here on Slashdot, in late 1999. Along with tens of other people I posted the mirror URL to the story, as you do. I also subscribed to a deCSS list at (IIRC) the EFF. I set up some clumsy rules to filter stuff into a separate folder, and took my three weeks Y2K holiday. When I got back (as the world had failed to end), it took me a while to go through the mai backlog, and it was IIRC two or three months later that I found what appeared to be a writ, served on me by mail, announcing I was "John Doe #13" in the DVD/CCA case (the Californian case, not the 2600 NYC case.)

    Well after I stopped laughing, and found my humble vanity URL listed in the official legal docs on the web, I wondered for a while whether I should pull it. Eventually I bought a couple of Copyleft T shirts (hey! where did they go - the site's gone!) ... with the source on, and haven't heard anything more about it. As I'm a UK citizen, and my mirror physcially resides in the UK, I don't reckon I ned worry until they start throwing Brits into jail... so far, so good. But as they must have trawled my URL from the Slashdot story (the only place I posted it), perhaps they'll read this and order a 6am raid.

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  56. They probably did use DeCSS, unfortunately. by MOSSey0T0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that the pirates in question (and most of them) had a DVD burner or array of them, whereas overseas pirates have actual DVD manufacturing capabilities. Therefore, they must have used DeCSS or a modern equivalent.

    1:1 copying of course is what allows us to copy CD-ROMs whether they are encrypted or not because they simply copy all the data blindly. Right now it is impossible to copy a modern DVD using a 1:1 copy because most of them use a DVD-9, which has two layers and a maximum capacity of 8.5 Gb. If you do any DVD ripping at all you know that a typical 2 hour movie uses 6 Gb.

    How do you 1:1 copy a 6Gb movie on 4.7Gb CDR? You don't.

    So, you use one of Smartripper or one of the new DVD rippers (all of which are evolutions of DeCSS and break the DVD encryption) and copy the VOB's to your hard drive. You then transcode the DVD using Cinemacraft Encoder or a like industrial MPEG-2 encoding software to a smaller size. The picture quality hardly suffers at all because you use smart bitrate encoding.

    Voila, a 6gb movie on a 4.7gb DVD-R. But impossible if you didnt transcode the DVD in order to recompress the video. And how do you rip the encrypted video in order to transcode it? DeCSS.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but THIS IS ILLEGAL. Not to say we shouldn't be doing it: we are being ripped off by the MPAA and RIAA. And those of us who do own the media should be entitled to replacement media. On the other hand, those companies do have a right to make a profit and the artists deserve to earn royalties for their work.

    The logic on both sides of the issue is equally irrational. My real point is the DeCSS is an integral part of a DVD burner based pirating system. Unless you possess actual DVD pressing/manufacturing capability, you have to break the DVD encryption to either recompress or split the video in order to fit the smaller capacity of a DVD-R.

  57. Re:Pocket Pool by wytcld · · Score: 3, Informative
    "This won't change as long as politicians are in the pockets of the corporations."

    Okay. So how do you propose we set up a serious fund that gets the politicians into our pockets? Consider:

    Anne Bingaman, former antitrust chief in Clinton's Justice Department and wife of the New Mexico senator Jeff Bingaman, went to work for Global Crossing to lobby the Federal Communications Commission. She reportedly earned an astonishing $2.5 million in less than a year. Tom Daschle's wife, Linda, who lobbies for airlines and aircraft manufacturers, helped design the $16 billion bailout rushed through for the airlines after 9/11--the legislation in which majority leader Daschle stiffed labor's plea for aid to laid-off workers. Ruth Harkin, wife of Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, heads the Washington office of United Technologies and sits on the board of the National Association of Manufacturers.

    - "Enron Democrats"

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  58. Two Words: Black Market. by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2

    Barring a black market (assuming the CBDTPA has somehow been passed and effectively enforced world wide), it will come down to analog signal processing and trial and error. Simply filter selected frequencies until I've hacked the watermark beyond recognition without effecting the music. Barring that, I'll do one of the following: move to another country that will let me keep my freedoms, run for office, and/or say, "Screw you guys, I'm reading a good old fashioned book."

  59. Re:pirate DVDs by budgenator · · Score: 2

    MPAA could easily get a T3 line and hammer these guys into the ground if it was really about piracy. What host or net admin would put up with his network getting hosed by the MPAA?

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  60. Re:Pocket Pool by gilroy · · Score: 3, Funny

    • Anne Bingaman ... wife of the New Mexico senator Jeff Bingaman
    • Tom Daschle's wife, Linda...
    • Ruth Harkin, wife of Iowa Senator Tom Harkin ...


    Ugh. Does that mean we have to marry our representatives? They say politics makes strange bedfellows, but...


    :)

  61. OT: GPL by psamuels · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Somewhat OT...

    If fair use also applied to the software industry, I could take a GPL'd piece of software, and use it any way I wish. But it doesn't...

    <suspicious look> Is this a troll, or just an honest (mis)understanding? As far as I know, fair use does apply to the software industry. And yes you can take a GPL'd piece of software and use it any way you wish. This is probably the most misunderstood / overlooked clause in the GPL:

    Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does. [Emphasis mine.]

    Does that settle the matter? Copyright law treats use (or fair use) much differently from duplication, aka redistribution.

    Don't be fooled by commercial EULAs, or "click-thru" licenses. They do not fall under copyright law at all - they fall under contract law, and as such, it is unknown if they are actually valid or enforceable, since you never actually signed them. Of course the software industry will say they are legal, but think about it - that's what they would say.

    Actually, the GPL is also a contract, but note that in that case it doesn't matter if you sign it or not, since it adds to the rights you already have (fair use) by giving you certain rights of redistribution. If you disagree with it, you haven't lost anything - you just don't get those additional rights. By contrast most EULAs take away rights you should have - the right to use the software in any way you see fit, on as many computers (that you own) as you wish. So the question of whether you enter the contract or not is important in that case.

    (Go ahead, mod me offtopic, you know you want to. (: )

    --
    "How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
    1. Re:OT: GPL by mpe · · Score: 2

      Don't be fooled by commercial EULAs, or "click-thru" licenses. They do not fall under copyright law at all - they fall under contract law, and as such, it is unknown if they are actually valid or enforceable, since you never actually signed them. Of course the software industry will say they are legal, but think about it - that's what they would say.

      There is also the obvious question of of if they are valid under current contract laws why are they so eager to get statutes such as UCITA passed?

      Actually, the GPL is also a contract, but note that in that case it doesn't matter if you sign it or not, since it adds to the rights you already have (fair use) by giving you certain rights of redistribution. If you disagree with it, you haven't lost anything - you just don't get those additional rights. By contrast most EULAs take away rights you should have - the right to use the software in any way you see fit, on as many computers (that you own) as you wish. So the question of whether you enter the contract or not is important in that case.

      You don't have to sign a contract for it to be valid. Copyright law is relevent to the GPL because copyright law creates the consideration you need to actually have a contract.

  62. Re:Correction by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 2
    It doesn't matter to the MPAA and RIAA. They think you should have to go out and buy another copy if yours goes belly-up.
    When I first read about the DVDs I thought: "What?! Haven't they learned anything with scratched CDs?! Why the hell doesn't they have shields like 3.5" floppies?!" The answer is that it's a great thing to have a media which is very easy to scratch. The CDs or DVDs are unbreakable when used with caution. The laser light won't scratch the surface even after 10 years of continuous playing. Every damage is caused by improper handling. But why is it so easy to handle improperly? People learned from 5.25" floppies that it's easy to damage them, so the 3.5" ones was made with a protection. Why not DVDs? Was it so important for DVD players to play CDs? I don't think so. If it was, there could be very simple adapters and it wouldn't be any problem to play CDs in DVD player. So yes, they want us to buy a new expensive copy every time we destroy the media. And they made media which is very easy to destroy.
    --

    ~shiny
    WILL HACK FOR $$$

  63. But copying isn't that easy... by rjw57 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Funny, isn't it, how the pirates don't need to crack any encryption to make copies of DVDs

    No but they do need to find writable DVD blanks which can be used. All commercially available DVD blanks must have a 'dead-area' on them which cannot be written to (much like the vendor ID area on CD-Rs). Unfortunately this area corresponds directly to the location of the encrypted disk-keys on a DVD so even if you did a bit-for-bit copy, you would have an encrypted disk but no encrypted keys.

    --
    Rich
  64. Re:There is a way by mpe · · Score: 2

    Then you hit the real problem. With millions of people everyday participating in this activity you are suddenly faced with prosecuting hundreds of thousands of cases to the full extent of the law. We are talking billions of dollars in legal costs, most likely aproaching the trillons quickly.

    Remember that a proportion of these people will be citizens of other countries. Whilst the MPAA/RIAA might have deep pockets they are unlikely to be deep enough to take on most of the world... Within a week any extradition request originating from the US would probably be ignored.

  65. Re:Greed by mpe · · Score: 2

    That's all this MPAA and RIAA crying is about plain and simple. Greed.

    Remember that greedy US corporations do not care what they might have to do to satisfy their greed. They are literally amoral which makes them very dangerous.

    They want more money your hard earned money, for you just to find out after buying the original DVD its a crappy movie. Especially when they charge $25 for a movie that's from the 1980's and can be bought on tape for about $5. That's why they wanted DVD's to become popular just to make idiots go out and buy their movie collection over again on DVD.

    Wonder if they already have something planned to replace DVD in about 15 years time...

  66. Spin-Counterspin by medcalf · · Score: 2
    "Pirates seek to profit off the enormous popularity of DVDs by using the latest in technology to illegally manufacture DVD copies of Hollywood films, and again dupe consumers into purchasing a wholly inferior product," MPAA Chief Executive Jack Valenti said in a statement.

    I thought that the argument was that digital copies were of the same quality as the original, rather than "wholly inferior." I guess I haven't been keeping up with the MPAA spin machine very well.

    --
    -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
  67. Re:There is a way by renehollan · · Score: 2
    There's an old Basque saying:

    "Kill one man, and you are a murderer.

    Kill ten men, and you are crazy.

    Kill a thousand men, and you are a hero."

    I don't deny that retaliatory force, when it fails, will certainly be spun into a terrorist act by the media... except if the battle is won and not lost.

    You either need large numbers of people willing to suffer arrest and incarcertation for their civil disobedience, to draw attention (by their numbers) to how bankrupt the laws have become, or small groups winning "the war." I am not convinced that either approach alone is enough: hence the MLK/Malcom X. reference. I am convinced that using retaliatory force against enforcement of unconstitutional laws is legitimate, though obviously the decision to do that is a very personal one, and not undertaken lightly.

    For my part, I (a) do not violate traditional copyright, (b) do use DeCSS and derivative code to watch the occasional DVD I've bought under GNU/Linux, (c) voice the opinion that forceful retaliation against constitutional laws is just even though I would not likely take that approach muself.

    --
    You could've hired me.
  68. So you are arguing that... by HiThere · · Score: 2

    So you are arguing that:
    There's a fundamental difference between product and copy. Businesses have an incentive to produce good products which customers are willing to pay for.

    Which would seem to imply that MS makes the best software. However, this result is not born out by experimental testing. They make software that is "adequately better" in certain areas, while ignoring other features almost totally. And I suppose that the same, or at least something similar, could be said for GPL software. It's just that different features get chosen for perfection or languishing in obscurity. Thus there is no GPL word processor that is as easy to use (or at least to start using) as MS Word. And it's also one of the least secure OS's on the face of the earth.

    An interesting side note here: MS no longer makes as good a word processor as it used to make. The best word processor I have ever encountered was MS Word 5.1a for the Macintosh. Nothing else has been as good. The current MSWord has many more features, but they don't add any value. And they make it more difficult to use, even when you know what you want to do. (Details available on request :) ).

    But products sell, partially, on features. So MS added features. And more features. Many of these appear to be solely marketing gimics, and of no use to anyone. (This doesn't mean that no one uses the features. Just that they'd produce better documents more quickly if they didn't (and didn't have to spend time learning this).

    On a side note: Free oranges? If you live in the correct area of the country, have enough land with good lighting, good drainage, and good soil. And if you don't count the cost of watering them. Then yes, you can have "free" oranges. (The "free" is because you must also sacrifice other potential uses of the land that the orange tree is growing on. At least until the tree is tall enough to have it's lower branches high enough to walk under. And many orange trees grow more like bushes than trees (which has it's conveniences).

    But you don't grow them for orange juice (or my mother doesn't). She grows them for decoration + oranges. And it sure isn't because the oranges don't make better juice. (We've done that for experiment). It's because it's a bit of work, and it's easier to buy a grossly inferior product. (It's not because it's cheaper, as she already has the orange tree) If she really wanted good orange juice, she'd squeeze it herself. But the orange juicer is gathering dust on the back of an upper shelf.

    Money is not a prime motivator. Money is a way of getting something else. Since different people want different things, money is a convenient way to socially exchange values. And even with all of the various con-artists and thieves (I'm particularlly thinking of the legally approved ones here) it's still more convenient than barter, in most cases. But there are always limits to something like this, and sometimes things step over the bounds. I feel that the MPAA has been grossly transgressing those bounds. And I wouldn't usually even watch a movie for free. Usually you would need to pay me substantially more than the ticket price to get me to be willing to watch it. (My wife can manage it, when she feels like it. But it takes enough effort that she usually doesn't bother.)

    People are only motivated by money when they want something, and they believe that someone else can and would provide it to them in exchange for money. And even then, for most people, there is the practical consideration of amounts. At one point I wanted to found a colony on the moon. This did not motivate me to acquire money, as I did not believe that there was any practical chance that I could accumulate enough of it to buy all of the required cooperation. Instead it motivated me to join certain political groups, e.g. the L5 Society.

    If what you are instead arguing is that there will be someone motivated to provide the service that you desire in exchange for money, I will reply that this will get you something that is sufficiently close to what you require that you can't tell until after you have paid for it, but if it's money rather than craft's pride, or some such, that is the primary motivator of the supplier, then he will make sure that you need to apply to him for additional features, which he can sell you at an additional cost. And that this will be an unending cycle, until you run out of cash or patience. Not until you get what you need. It has even been known for the new "improvements" to be accompanied by the disabling of some previously working needed feature. This generates the necessity for the purchase of another version. etc. I've been on that treadmill, thank you, and would prefer to have nothing further to do with it.

    This is not to argue that craft pride is sufficient. Merely that it needs to be a very large component. But it is definitely also true that the craftsman must support himself and his family. So there is a tension here. People who satisfy it best are those such as (to pick an extreme example) Linus. He is a paid professional, but also has great pride in professional competence. This is only possible because he is able to display his competence to peers who appreciate it. That is a requirement for sustaining professional pride. Which is one of the reasons that many closed source programs do not evince any pride in craftsmanship, but merely slick marketing glitz. And why some quite valuable features have been known to get worse between iterations.
    .

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    1. Re:So you are arguing that... by The+Cat · · Score: 2

      Which would seem to imply that MS makes the best software.

      Well, the effect is greatly reduced in the case of MS because they have no competition, therefore there is no real incentive to do a better job since their product will sell anyway.

      he will make sure that you need to apply to him for additional features, which he can sell you at an additional cost.

      Agreed this has become the practice of many businesses. It used to be "repeat customers," but now it's either "never quite sell them the whole product, but do it in pieces" or "get them on a monthly payment plan for as long as possible."

      For some reason it's just never quite enough to sell your product to more customers. They either have to buy again and again, or buy every month, or pay an exorbitant price. I think this has left a lot of customers with a feeling they are being taken advantage of.

      Which is one of the reasons that many closed source programs do not evince any pride in craftsmanship, but merely slick marketing glitz.

      That's partly a function of incompetence among management. There is a 10 to 1 ratio of "people making money off of product" to "people designing and building product" in almost every business. The torrential flood of marketing is there because those other people need something to do, I guess. :)

  69. Interesting! by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2

    Of course! I feel silly for having forgotten about Pirate Radio. This gives me more reason to think that Websters really dropped the ball by not including a second definition of the word "pirate", in addition to the "naval highwayman" thing.