Slashdot Mirror
321 Studios Plays It Safe Against the DMCA
mblase writes: "CNet reports on a request by 321 Studios to have it legally declared that their DVD Copy Plus software doesn't violate the DCMA. DVD Copy Plus works on a Windows PC by copying DVD video to a recordable CD in VCD or similar format. If successful, this could be a major legal weapon against the DCMA in the future. 321 Studios' press release is here."
I thought it was the latter, as opposed to the former. So is this like asking your mom to write a note to your teacher verifying that you are indeed exempt from Gym Class? "Tommy can't run today, he is not feeling well" "Our product is legal, LOOK, I have a NOTE!"
What, me worry?
Unfortunately it is still in violation of the DMCA.
A company with a product to challenge the DMCA -- thank you, 321 Studios. And how long did we have to wait for some company with the guts to stand up and say "It should not be illegal for a consumer to make a copy of something they own." Will have to wait and see the outcome on this one.
...we are from the government - we are here to help...
It's not Digital Copyright Millennium Act (although it may feel like it).
It's Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
Now if it was the DMCA, they'd be in trouble.
...software does
Error: Success
Is it:
.sig are not valid in some states.
1) Digital Copyright Millenium Act?
2) Dude Can't Make Anything?
3) Do Clues Move Around?
4) The Digital Millenium Copyright Act misspelled?
If it was misspelled once, I can understand that. Twice means someone is having an ID 10T error. Three times means somenoe seriously needs to get laid.
---
The views in this
If only MS - or better still a European or Japanese competitor - would develop a killer app using copying technology then all this DCMA silliness would end - or at least move on.
If someone could sell something at a substantial profit in Europe but not sell it in the US I am sure that commercial interests in the US would do that thing they are always so good at - getting the law changed in their favour.
In a way, the success of this plea would endanger the fight against DMCA et al., by providing enough fair use to make the law as a whole acceptable to this company, other companies, and perhaps even many consumers. If this agreement is unilaterally struck down, then there is another entity out there who wills the end of the DMCA content control.
Indeed, winning this court case may be a tool to fight for fair use in a world of DMCA, but in the overall war we will sacrifice a valuable ally in the fight for a world without DMCA.
I would rather a post DMCA era, where freedom is presumed until proven a crime, rather than feel the need to prove my freedom for actions of thought and speech now considered criminal.
321 Studios Files Complaint against Nine Major Movie Production Companies Seeking Right To Sell DVD Copying Software
Groundbreaking Suit Attacks Constitutionality of Digital Millennium Copyright Act
BERKELEY, CA (April 23, 2002) - 321 Studios today filed a complaint in U.S. District Court against nine major motion picture production companies in an effort to thwart industry threats to stop the sale of the firm's DVD Copy Plus software for making backup copies of DVDs. The complaint, filed in the Northern District of California, challenges the constitutionality of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that was passed in 1998 to address the issue of copyright protection for digital content.
Citing 321 Studios' free speech rights under the First Amendment, the complaint asks the court to rule that the sale of DVD Copy Plus does not violate key provisions of the DMCA or unlawfully aid consumers in infringing copyright privileges associated with material stored in the DVD format. The suit seeks a declaratory judgment that will permit 321 Studios to continue to sell DVD Copy Plus. No damages are sought.
The complaint names MGM Studios, Tristar Pictures, Columbia Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Time Warner Entertainment, Disney Enterprises, Universal City Studios, The Saul Zaentz Company and Pixar Corporation as defendants. It alleges that the movie studios, acting in part under the auspices of the Motion Picture Association of America, have threatened to sue 321 Studios and claim that the sale of DVD Copy Plus is illegal under the DMCA.
"We see this as a groundbreaking case with implications that extend to all kinds of digital content," said Daralyn J. Durie, a partner with Keker & Van Nest, LLP, of San Francisco, which is representing 321 Studios in the case. "We believe that there are substantial constitutional problems with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, not the least of which is barring consumers from exercising their right to make backup copies of DVDs they own. This is one of the first cases asking the court to rule on the crucial question of how this law impacts those rights."
"DVDs are notoriously susceptible to scratches, heat damage, loss and other problems, and our DVD Copy Plus software enables legal owners of DVD movies to protect their DVD investments by making legitimate backup or duplicate copies for their own use. In our mind, this is no different than making an extra personal copy of a music CD, which is perfectly legal," said Robert Moore, President of 321 Studios. "We decided to
proactively file this lawsuit not only to receive the courts' assurance that we are in compliance with the law but also to raise the broader question of how Americans' First Amendment rights can be protected in this digital age."
Information on DVD Copy Plus, a copy of the legal complaint, and a petition enabling consumers to voice their support for 321 Studios' position on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act can be found at http://www.321studios.com. 321 Studios is based in St. Louis, Missouri, with offices in Berkeley, California, and Wilmington, Delaware.
Taking someone's work and calling it your own is "plagiarism." Benefitting commercially from a copyrighted work is called "copyright infringement." They are two entirely different things.
How much does she make again? There seems to be a basic disconnect with the simplest elements of intellectual property laws here, and this isn't the first example.
sigh... 90% of debates seem to be teaching the ABCs of logic, argument and the definitions of words.
DMCA. Those not knowing this should get their shit together before submitting stories.
20721
I appreciate companies taking a stance like this. However, I get a lot of spam for such programs, and not only due to their spamming practices, I think the programs themselves are sleazy because you can do the exact same thing with freeware, see http://www.doom9.net/ for the details and all you need.
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
if these people lose to the DMCA then perhaps we will stop seeing popups for this shit all over the place...
VIVA LA DMCA! In all sereousness, i believe the software shoud be legal, but the marketing practices are quite deceptive. only after you have paid these people do you find out what the software really is. it is not even software. you get a list of programs you must download, and instructions on how to put it all together to rip a dvd and save it in VCD format. they even imply (without explicitly stating) that you can copy the whole dvd including special features and menus, but i have yet to see a way to do this.
Just because they made it, what makes us so sure that they wont be the last also?
Maybe they wont be,
but i am sure that their laywers are already making new bullshit to stop the next attempt @ freedom,
eventually taking it all away
Conscience is the inner voice that warns us somebody is looking - H.L. Mencken
I think the difference between copying a DVD and an audio CD is there is nothing on a CD which was INTENDED to prevent it's copying, except for those new crippled ones.
They have to be circumventing that, therefore they are violating the DMCA. Not terribly hard to understand. (Well, the fact that they are violating a law which is on some levels hard to understand isn't.)
IANAL
Breaking DVD encryption is already a DMCA violation in the 2600 case if I recall. And if the product breaks the DVD encryption, it violates the DMCA by a set precadent. Keep in mind, I have no problem backing up DVDs for personal use that is allowed under Fair Use(and I hate warez kiddies), but 321 has it's work cut out for them :-(
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
a. It's from the 321 Studios site, bub
How can one declare creating a backup copy of media that you hold a license to (note: you don't own the material, just the media that it came on), to be an enhancement of 'fair-use' laws? The two are exclusive from each other. I have seen time and again people using the term 'fair-use' when in reality they meant 'use however I want to' For a definition of 'fair-use' look here Copyright Office Document FL102 Notice that it does *NOT* say anything about copying a CD / Music / DVD or anything for any purpose other than for "...criticism, comment, news reporting, education, scholarship or research..." And don't try to use the line of "I have to crack this DVD encryption in order to further my research" sure you do *wink*.
It posted as AC, you silly git.
is that this "legal copy software" will probably be one of the most illegally copied software titles (via Kazaa, etc) in the near future... if it isn't already.
Just listen to the rhythm of the bandwidth rain...
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
It's fun to violate... D M C A It's fun to violate... D M C A
I wonder if the studios will use the defence that the software "changes" and degrades the original movie on the DVD and therefore is not a backup or copy of the original, but something that degrades the value of their trademark/copyright by creating a less than pristine copy of the movie and deceives the consumer into thinking they're making an exact backup?
I've seen some pretty crappy VCDs and some pretty good ones, but none of them look like DVDs to me.
I would expect the studios to explore all angles.
So, 321 Studios is against the DMCA. Hooray, right? Except, they're most likely the exact same companies filling up our inboxes with unsolicited useless spam every day, costing us bandwidth and time.
So, do we like them or hate them?
I guess I'll wait for the next slashback to tell me.
I have a lot of DVDs. I have a good A/V system. After seeing the quality of VCD, I'd never make a copy of a DVD onto that format.
I would like to be able to copy the DVDs I own just to have a backup, and personally I think there is nothing wrong/illegal about it. If I spend $30 on a new fancy DVD, and I accidently break it (which has happened.. some of those cases are really poorly designed), I have no recourse. I paid for the content on that DVD.
Of course, this has been said on this and other websites thousands of times. But the part that gets me is, here we have a technology that allows people to make really poor copies of something they OWN. VHS has been around for years doing the same thing (making poor/lesser quality copies). My VCR can make a better copy of a movie (as long as there is'nt any of that annoying copy-protection built in) then a VCD. With the VCR, it's legal, but with the software for something worse, it's illegal?
I really hope this company wins its case. And I hope lawmakers start to sit down and really examine what these laws are saying and doing.
The Internet is generally stupid
If Felton couldn't get a declaratory judgement on the DMCA with that "smoking gun" letter, from the DVD-CCA, these guys certainly aren't going to succeed in getting one either. Case dismissed for lack of 'case or controversy'. They must know this.
If you have a DVD drive in your computer you might have software or a hardware card that carries a licensed decoder. Actually you probably do unless you built your system yourself. Their software could rely on that.
On the other hand a direct copy could work - without ever decrypting the info on the DVD.
There is no such thing as the DCMA. If you are referring to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, the acronym is DMCA. While I realize that CmdrTaco likes these errors, they make the poster, the site, and its readers appear ignorant.
rooooar
These people have no respect for copyrights at all. To allow their customers to test the VCD capability of their home DVD players, 321 put the Sixth Sense trailer on every disc they sell.
I'm sure Buena Vista would be happy to hear about that.
They are also a major major source of spam. If you've gotten a "COPY DVDS!!!!" spam, it's probably from them or one of their aliases.
Interesting and actually probably a very good approach - get the legal clearance before the reactions of the current top players are based soley on the 'here and now' stakes.
.. if the recording industry (obviously) didn't predict the popularity of file sharing, would they have 'ignored' Napster had Napster approached them (hell, maybe they did) before they started allowing downloads, with the Sonys, et al. dismissing Napster as an insignificant piece of software and essentially binding them to said assumption? I wonder if it would be more useful to fight these laws before the money begins flowing in, for two reasons:
It would have been interesting
a) Those who subsequently have a problem with it will likely garner much less sympathy from the average person if it was common knowledge that they didn't do anything about the problem when they had the chance and the $$ behind the problem was unknown.
b) The company seeking to sell the potentially illegal software cannot be criticised for taking advantage of the lack of legislation in new areas of technology, which lends credibility to the struggle; ie, they arn't interested in challenging the status quo because they are clockin' 100$ an hour in sales, but rather because they believe that they should have the right to sell said software. It's a subtle distinction, but an important one - they are not interested in changing laws to continue making money, but rather to allow them to try and make money on a claimed innovation. I think Napster always had an uphill PR battle with the 'cynical traditional devout capitalist' crowd, because their interestests were so clearly vested at the time, due to the astonding success of the software by the time their shit was hitting the courts. With the company mentioned in the article, they are not a surefire money maker, which shows that part of the reason they wish to knock down laws is because they believe they _should_ be able to sell the software, not because the employees don't want to take a step down in terms of living standards in the middle of a 'killer app' epidemic.
"Old man yells at systemd"
This is hardly what I would consider a victory/blow to the DMCA. It seems to me that in the land of the free, obtaining legal permission to create specific kinds of software is a problem. Software should not be restricted based on it's content, and this is just another way the DMCA is restricting development. Is it really OK that you need to gain fair use rights through legal expenses? Particularily when the need for those expenses is to avoid larger ones in the future? It still sounds like more signs of bad news to me.
this "news" site has no journalistic pride, nor integrity...
the editors can not spell, and their concept of "grammatically correct" is surprisingly pathetic.
I just grabbed a copy of DVD Copy Plus off Usenet. Damn fine product!
The only difference I see between this and current ongoing cases with DeCSS is that they are trying to get permission from the court system before they get sued. There is allot of history available on this topic. For those that are just hearing about this, check out 2600's DVD lawsuit history page and more at the Electronic Frontier Foundation website.
Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
Not being a US citizen, I can sit back and enjoy the spectacle without having to take it too seriously [yet].
...
It seems to me that, if you have a law which makes copying illegal then using technology to prevent copying implies that the law isn't enough. You don't think that people will obey the law so you devise some technical mechanism to prevent them doing what they're not allowed to do.
The DMCA adds a whole new dimension. Now you have a law designed to protect authors from their own incompetence. Hey! we're not really good at making anti-copy devices and some people will make copies in spite of them. Please change the law to make it illegal to try.
Presumably the next step will be to produce a technical device to catch the new breed of lawbreakers, then
Am I the only one to detect the beginning of a vicious circle here?
"There is something wrong with telling the American public that they can't make a backup copy of something they own."
Where do I send my money.
-THIS SPACE FOR RENT!
This product does not allow you to make an archival copy of the dvd's you own, as is your legal right. You can only make a crappy vcd copy with poor image quality. If your first disc is ruined, you will NOT be happy using this as a backup. It isn't a copy of the data on the disc, it is a compressed copy of the images output to your monitor. I'm surprised the movie/music industry would have any problem with this. This is basically the same as (like I used to do back in the day) making an audio tape of something by putting a crappy tape recorder up against a speaker and hitting record. In fact you could record the sound from your dvd's just like that, and dig out your parents' home movie camera to film your tv as the dvd plays. There you go! Great quality backup to have around in case your clumsy roommate steps on the dvd and breaks it. No need to worry about the DMCA now.
While this has nothing to do with this software company, I found this on a google search for 321 Studios and found it amusing, and possibly prophetic "Adam went to London, Munich and Paris in March for a 3 week press tour. When he returned to New York, Jack Douglas had only mixed three songs before starting the Aerosmith project. The 321 studios had went bankrupt and all the studio equipment had been repossessed by their creditors. The building rent was never paid. The studio turned out to be a front for some investment scam. The master tapes were also missing and one of the studio owners had been thrown in jail."
And how long before a product that will primarily be used for piracy (Ha ha, backups, funny stuff there) will itself be pirated?
You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
My question is simple ... what happens to the company, if it doesn't get approved?
They are currently sell only one product ... the DVD Copier, and giving away DVD Photo Pro ... is that enough to sell and have the company not go away?
If it's ruled that the DVD Copier software is not legal ... could that fact actually influence it to be legal, since the DMCA would then effectively put (a) company(ies) out of business?
According to their own Press Release they are going on the offensive ...
Best wishes ... and good luck.
Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
Is this a really clever troll? Or am I getting paranoid and seeing trolls everywhere?
What if I marketed a device that would make and exact copy of a DVD? You know, don't bother to decript the data, but make a copy of the DVD that reads exactly the same as the original. It would be marketed as a device to make legitimate backup copies and it wouldn't be decripting the copy protection on the DVD. Would it then be legal? Would anyone be able to successfully sue me?
main(){char*c="main(){char*c=%c%s%c;printf(c,34,c
It only allows you to make low quality vcd rips.
They're doing an absolutely BRILLIANT marketing campaign. Remember those researchers who found out that children can't distinguish between advertising and content? Looks like that applies to Slashdot readers too...
You suck.
Well, if I can give up my fair-use rights in the Windows EULA, and my right to free speech in the FrontPage EULA, certainly it's not too far fetched for another company to say that they aren't to be held responsible for the laws of the land either.
:) I participated this long because I thought it would be fun to shake the system a bit, but it's obvious that no shakeage is happening. It was fun for a few hours, but a week would just be boring. :)
I like that. I'll do the same thing.
"By reading this agreement, you hereby agree that SJ Zero shall not be held responsible for any crimes committed by him or involving him. Breaking this agreement will give Sj Zero the right to poke you with a pointed stick until(but not before) you apologize, crying like a baby."
So much for the great blackout. I decided to forget about that after I realized that there were more posts in the first 24 hours of the blackout than in the week before.
It's been a long time.
"We see this as a groundbreaking case with implications that extend to all kinds of digital content," said Daralyn J. Durie, a partner with
Keker & Van Nest, LLP, of San Francisco,
which is representing 321 Studios in the case. "We believe that there are substantial
constitutional problems with the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act, not the least of
which
is barring consumers from
exercising their right to make backup copies
of DVDs they own. This is one of the first cases asking the court to rule on the crucial question of how this law impacts those rights."
Office / Staff Telephone Fax COURTS - SUPERIOR \\ EXECUTIVE OFFICER \\
Arthur Sims \\ 272-6070 271-5130
ASST. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Barbara J. Fox, Chief Assistant Executive Officer 272-6070 271-5130
Joanne Lederman, Assistant Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 272-6070 271-5130
Theresa Beltran, Assistant Executive Officer, Information Technology 268-7841 208-1223
Other Offices / Staff
Renè C. Davidson / Alameda County Courthouse
Administrative Divisions
Human Resources 271-5153 272-0796
Job Recruitment and Testing 208-3980 272-0796
Job Information Hot Line 208-3906 272-0796
Judicial Facilities and Administrative Service Bureau 272-5035 Fiscal Services 272-6762 272-0796 Information Technology 268-7841 Operations Jury Information - Oakland 272-6020 271-5130 Interpreter Coordinators, Post Office, Rm. 211A 271-5166 208-4874 Civil Division, Rm. 109 272-6002 Filing of Complaints, Petitions, etc. 272-6002 File Room - Records 272-6763 Forms and Copywork 272-6799 Judgments 272-6799 Appeals and Appellate 272-6780 Mental Health 272-6749 272-0796 Family Law, Rm. 240 208-4900 208-4938 Criminal Division, Rm 107 272-6767 Criminal Calendar, Indexes & Registers 272-6767 File Room 272-6777 272-0796 Law & Motion Calendar Office 208-3949 Tentative Rulings: Dept. 20 272-6397 Tentative Rulings: Dept. 22 271-5106 Tentative Rulings: Dept. 31 208-3939
If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
Why does everyone in the entire world think everything should be free? If this type of attitude is allowed to be acted on then there will be nothing left for these losers to pirate because all of the victimized companies will have gone out of business because They are making no money!
Can't people get a life and spend some fucking money for once? That is why this economy is hitting the bricks, everyone wants free bootleg stuff like it is their god given right. The Capitalistic (not a commie) society that we live in thrives on people buying products not blatantly stealing them.
People who do stuff like this are no different than a common thief who rips off a 7-11 for a pack of condoms, they are just a bit more educated and can make up some kind of legal "out".
Get a life.
Who got confused reading this one, thinking that this company was 989 Studios, developer of playstation sports games?
:^)
Ryan Fenton
Damn them to hell for spamming me every day.
That's all I have to say about that.
i can already see the picture:
Lawyers sitting together in one of their houses debating the DMCA and in the background u can see a flashing '12:00' on all their appliences
what i'm tryin' to get at is that these people have no clue what their actually deciding over
--tzan
The complaint is available in PDF form. Also interesting is that Michael Page (who is representing Grokster in MGM v. Grokster) is representing 321 Studios.
What we need is for some ballsy company with a few bucks to spare, to actually build a DVD player using the free DeCSS code. A single-disc player that acts exactly like a licensed player -- plays discs to the screen, no copying functions, it could even respect the region encoding.
What will the DVD Cartel say then? In that case they wouldn't be able to claim that anyone was trying to steal content, or destroy intellectual property -- the box would be very clearly designed to play legitimately obtained DVD's. Now that would be very interesting.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Aren't these 321 Studios guys just the guys who stole the code from the freeware DVDx program and are now selling it in DVD Copy Plus?
Nothing revolutionary there, DVDx may have stood up against the DMCA, 321 Studios are just bootlegging the code. Why are we praising them?
Weren't they complaining Perfect Copying is bad.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
I'd better hurry up and file a lawsuit because I think that my next door neighbour may be writing software that clones babies that write CD copying software. I expect complete US court compliance and an FBI investigation.....oh wait...that's right...I don't own the US government...silly me, I forgot that I wasn't a huge corporation or an orginization that represents a bunch of them...
This company is obviously "making waves" to legitimize their re-packaged appropriated freeware. This lawsuit is going to get them more free press than they could ever imagine and sell tons of copies of "their" software that they can't sell by SPAMMING. You must not have email, if you haven't gotten a box full of their "COPY ANY DVD" spam-mail.
I thought Slashdot was supposed to filter out the garbage...
Before Napster, there was MP3.com. Since the RIAA jumped down their throat with both feet before Napster came along, your reasoning does not apply.
On the other hand since Napster's business plan was based on allowing widespread copyright infringement (go look at the evidence from the court case - pesky e-mails), Napster would have been shut down immediately and saved everyone involved vast sums of money.
You either believe in rational thought or you don't
You can sue for anything you like, but if you sue me for not liking my name, I can counter sue for damages under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The rule says that you won't bring a frivilous lawsuit against me or I get money or sanctions against you. Quite handy, really.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
Finally someone with big balls..!
I have not gotten spam from them or known anyone who got spam from them. I do, however, know someone who works for people who are part owners of 321 Studios (in the same building they used to be located in).
And I quote from him, "I know for a fact they do."
Does anyone know where to get a warez version of this software. I didn't look very hard, but I couldn't find it. I would like to try it out.
Looks pretty cool if it does what is claims.
321 Studio puts the Sixth Sense trailer on every disc for testing purposes.
Is that a copyright violation? Would Buena Vista care?
I know this is just a joke, but seriously the hell it is ! This damned "product" is a frickin retarded application which autoinstalls SmartRipper, DVDx, and VCDEasy, and then gives you stupid little pictures that tell you how to configure them. I figured I'd get a nice all in one solution, and instead I got this horseshit. I could write the same thing in VB in 30 seconds. Or better yet, a batch file that runs the 3 installers, and then launches IE/Netscape to read a .htm file. This is a TOTAL rip off. Do NOT support these morons repackaging free software and then trying to play on everyone's good side by fighting the DMCA.
Mod this post up, because I got ripped off and I am admitting it so that other people don't make the same mistake.
The DVDCCA would point out that the unlicensed player almost certainly violates a long list of patents
...and trade secrets. IIRC, they're claiming that even though the cat's out of the bag (qprff tshirt et al.), it was a misappropriated trade secret, so cannot be used, presumably even for legit decoding.
A Linux "home theater PC" would be really neat because it would give you total control of playback, processing and UI. The Windows-based HTPCs have 2 serious problems:
#1 the UI is Windows. Arguably fine if you want a Quake-playing, web surfing, mp3 jukebox, DVD playing machine connected to your video projector, but if you just want to pop in a DVD & go you have problems. You can replace the shell (Windows Explorer) with something like Talisman but you're still faced with unintegrated apps: at least the DVD player and PowerStrip for tweaking video card timing, maybe also YXY for aspect ratio control and the video card's control panel for RG&B gamma curves.
With Linux, you can build a UI as simple as a standalone player's OSD. The problem isn't so much that HTPC's UI is Windows- the problem is that they aren't open source.
#2 you don't have control of the whole signal processing chain. The whole point is to use dead-stupid data projectors that might have crappy scalers and simple color correction settings. Having control from bits off the DVD all the way to the VGA output would be the ultimate realization of what HTPCs are about.
The key thing would be to finally get progressive scan working correctly. DVD player software on Windows uses flags to do reverse 3-2 pulldown. Badly encoded discs (frequent!) can look like crap. Video sourced disks either comb (weave) or look soft (bob). The new Radeon's have hardware motion-adaptive deinterlacing which solves the video sourced problem, but not the wrong flags one.
You'd need a lot of processing power to do good deinterlacing and 3-2-3-2 cadence detection in software, but I bet a Pentium 4 @ 2GHz could do an OK job (P4 Northwood for easier/quieter cooling than Athlon). If the software is doing the deinterlacing, you can go back to a cheap video card.
dScaler does (motion adaptive IIRC) software deinterlacing, but from analog capture cards. Being able to integrate dScaler and the flag reading from LiViD plus a would be cool (you get the best results if you consider the flags but are willing to throw them out if they're nonsense. If they are mostly right (maybe broken by video-domain edits of telecined film), they'll give you faster recovery than cadence reading only.
Oh #3: hard disk noise. With Linux, you can build your own teeny version that fits on a (small/cheap 64MB) Compact Flash card & boot off that.
I don't think this will fly. The DoJ applied for 'permission' from Kollar-Kotelly to publish the Tunney act comments only on the web site, rather than in the Federal Register, and she refused to consider the request on the grounds that it would exceed her constitutional authority as part of the judicial rather than legislative branch. (she basically said, feel free to try is, and we'll see if you're sued). This sounds like the same kind of thing.
IANAL, etc
Consider: 321 Studios goes to court. And to court again. And finally to court once more. The supreme gavel is brought down, the DMCA is unconstitutional. There's dancing on the streets, RedHat gets ready to include DeCSS on RedHat 21.2 (you don't think this is going to be resolved quickly do you? ;-), etc, etc.
And 321 Studios finally put their ripper on the market. They sell one copy, to a Mr Valenti in California. *slap* A lawsuit from the DVDCCA.
"You can't sue us!" 321 Studios cry. "This is battarey! The DMCA has already been ruled unconstitutional!"
The DVDCCA lawyer raises an eyebrow and smiles. "Who said anything about the DMCA? You're in violation of the following patents; you're in a whole heap of trouble. Or do you think the Supreme Court is going to override 250 years of patent laws?"
"Oh bugger" says 321 Studios.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
If these are the same people that were filling my mailbox with spam trying to flog "backup DVDs to CDs" software then I'm happy to admit that I forwarded all such spam directly to the MPAA with a strong recommendation that they sue the snot out of them.
I've got nothing against such software being available (in fact I'd encourage it) -- but when someone fills my mailbox with spam trying to flog the stuff then I get mad.
is talking about? I mean come on I have yet to see any "Fair Use People". All I see are "The End Is Coming" people. Damn bible belt.
... after all, three hundred and twenty one (321) Studios can't be wrong!
People, the 1st Amendment says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
I don't see nothin in there about backing up SCRATCHY DVDs.
I think they're gonna get THE BIG BUZZER when the judge hears this one!
Do these people think the Village People song is called Y-C-M-A?
The DMCA states that any manufacture, sale, or distribution of any device whose primary use is that of copyright violation. This implies that the manufacturing company may be held responsible for the commercial appeal of its product. In other words, a company can be punished if the public perceives its product to be useful in copyright violation.
A computer is exactly that. I would say that a majority of people perceive computers as primarily useful in piracy, especially computers using CD recording devices and exceptionally large hard disk drives. These devices are clearly, therefore, illegal, and immediate charges should be brought against Toshiba, Mitsumi, Creative, IBM, and a number of other companies to stop the manufacture and sale of such products. If not computers, then the aforementioned peripherals. Hundred plus gigabyte hard drives currently have "limited commercial appeal" other than copyright violation. Their primary legit commercial appeal is industrial.
Law and common sense. I wish the two could get along.
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
Why does the like/dislike decision have to be binary? Why can't we support this case and not support spam?
People have told me, they include GPL'ed software (gnu vcdimager & cdrdao) without providing the source code, as would be required by GPL. I couldn't verify this myself, but maybe some of the /. readers can...
Ug, your ripped off, inimaginative, name is enough to want me to mod you down!
Supreme Commander, Lord High Wizard
Want a free copy of this software? Download:
h tm l)p dates_8610367.html)
1. SmartRipper
(http://www.riphelp.com/downloads/smart-ripper.
2. DVDx (http://www.chip.de/downloads_updates/downloads_u
3. VCD Easy (http://www.vcdhelp.com/vcdeasy.htm)
When you buy this software, that's all you get. Not the features these three programs contain, but these freely available programs themselves. That and a worthless guide to using them. Worthless in every meaning of the word. There are thousands of better guides found freely online.
If successful, this could be a major legal weapon against the DCMA in the future.
Like the Felton suit? Just because a court rules that one entity is not violating the DMCA doesn't do anything to overturn the law.
Yes i'm sure you're right. My point was only that you don't get the data, you only get a compressed video stream. Missing completely will be special features, alternate audio tracks (I think), menus, subtitling, alternate angles, easter eggs, etc - which are ALL a part of the dvd content, and which you should be able to back up as well. Maybe spanish is your native language and the dvd has a spanish track? What good is this vcd copy going to do you? None of that content makes its way onto the vcd at all so it doesn't seem to me like you can call it a copy. A 'copy' of slashdot that had only the text, with all html formatting removed, including the separation of front page from article pages, wouldn't seem to be much like a copy to me.
Except the Rams play in St. Louis now.
"inimaginative" ?
Give me a break. My handle has no bearing on the content of my post.
Besides, how many BasharTegs do you know? So what my name is pulled from a book? At least I'm not RAZOR1 or DRDOOM18. Far worse are those who copy their handles from other people, thus creating a massive deluge of tards with the same name making it impossible to have any kind of unique online identity.
I've seen several posts saying how lame VCD's look - try a typical **SVCD** on a cheap but capable DVD player and I think you will be impressed.
This product is an unlicensed compilation of freeware that is available at no charge on the Internet. This product smells of a publicity stunt to get more buyers.
See www.dvdhelp.com discussion forums about this product, and how it is really a compilation of freeware.