Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Prevails Against 321 Studios' DVD X Copy
Quok writes "Yahoo has the scoop. The article is short on details, but it seems the MPAA have succeeded in getting an injunction issued against 321 Studios, the makers of the popular DVD X Copy software, which allows consumers to make backup copies of DVD movies. Strike one for fair use."
Can't we just take an image of a DVD like any other media format? Piracy will live on without overpriced software to facilitate it.
Effectively, this is the test case for the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause, and this injunction indicates that the court is presently leaning in favor of keeping it. The right to make a backup copy is not being questioned, but that'll be a useless right if there's no legal way to do so.
Not good... not good at all.
Is the Metropolitan Museum of Art going to win a case against Kodak, Fuji, Canon and others for making devices that allow people to make backup copies their vacation memories? This is getting insane.
I'm going to go hide under my bed. Will someone please come and get me when the world becomes a little more rational?
This court enjoins plaintiff 321 Studios from manufacturing, distributing, or otherwise trafficking" in the software
Now, IAMNAL, can retailers continue to destribute the software most likely? I know they wouldn't, but couldn't 3-2-1 say.... Open Source X-Copy and then we could all distribute it legally? Who would the MPAA have to sue then?
I think the whole stinking DMCA should be thrown out, but since the courts seem to want to keep it, I think that sort of plan is the only way to reconcile it with prior copyright law.
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.
How come courts can't recognize the simple fact that CSS _does not_ prevent bit-for-bit copies to be made? (In factories, it does prevent home burning since dvd recorders can't write the section where the key is stored).
CSS real purpose is to enforce region encoding.
it's in my head
Strike one for fair use.
Not really. I'm thinking stike two, or maybe strike fifty, or strike [insert big number here.] There's the DMCA, the Napster lawsuit, 2600's issues with the MPAA over DeCSS, UnTrusted Computing, and on, and on, and on. This most certainly isn't the first, and there's no way it'll be the last.
This statement is false.
THe company was called Ampex.
So, the media conglomerates managed to wedge a pinky into the dike. It's kind of like the cop pulling over one person for a ticket when everyone on the road is doing 85, it only pisses off the one person and has no effect on the other 999.
The media companies will not relinquish their monopoly on 19th-century distribution methods, despite the fact that you can download practically any music CD, software, movie or TV show with a little effort.
As long as they keep treating their customers as criminal while gouging them mercilessly for the products they sell, this will continue. This problem won't go away until buyers and sellers undergo a radical paradigm shift on the idea of intellectual property. I have no idea what this shift will be, but once it starts, everyone who ignores it will be put out of business.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Bit by bit copying isn't enough to make solid backups at this point. Many commercially purchased DVDs are over 8 or 9 GBs and available DVD+-R/RW media is maxed at 4.7 GBs. Though companies like Verbatim are promising to release dual-layer disks, they aren't on the market yet. The only way (that I know of) to split a single commercially available disk onto several smaller writable media and still have it be playable is to break the CSS.
What I'd like to see is someone taking the CSS code and writing a good open source DVDxCOPY type program.
How many roads must a man walk down? 42.
You can make backups of your CD and DVD collection. You cannot do the same for a car.
Your analogy fails.
From the article:
"Most Hollywood DVDs are protected with a technology called Content Scrambling System, or CSS, which encrypts the content on the discs so that they can only be read by devices with authorized "keys" to unlock the data. A studio-affiliated trade group licenses those keys to DVD player manufacturers."
Why doesn't 321 try to license the CSS from the trade group? If they are not allowed to license it then sue for unfair trade practices.
To me it appears that since 321 is not paying for the CSS license the MPAA has grounds. However, if the MPAA/trade group refuses to license (per copy - yes that means no "free" software) then there are grounds for unfair trade/monopoly suits.
With this court victory, how long before they go after even the free tools? I say very soon. Grab DVD Shrink while you can. BTW, I love DVD Shrink. The latest version will burn on its own if you have Nero installed, so you don't even have to switch apps. The drag-and-drop reauthoring lets you cut out DVD extras so you can often fit just the movie on a 4.7GB DVD*R without recompression (but it has adjustable recompression built in, too). However, I don't believe the author is adding any new features--just bugfixes. (Wait, aren't "features" and "bugs" interchangeable words? Maybe there's hope yet! ;-) )
But you do understand that to the judge this was a no-brainer? I mean the judge is supposed to uphold the law, and he did. Now, if the law is wrong then it should be changed or removed but this can only be argued in the Supreme Court in the USA, right? (I am not a USian.) So this will have to go all the way to that court and the judge in that court will have to agree that the law is unconstitutional.
Until then, MPAA will have no problem stopping this kind of software from being legal.
You can't handle the truth.
Yes, well, if you live in the EU you're in for more of the same, only worse. See the previous Slashdot post on that topic. "DMCA on steroids" I believe it was called.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Honestly, I was too young to vote or even cared when the DMCA was being passed through Congress. I'm just tired of having to circumvent one law to do what is arguably protected in another. I used to pirate music, because there wasn't the option of picking out a single song. As I type this, my newly purchased The Darkness album is playing, courtesy of iTunes. I have no desire to pirate movies and music in the long term. I will, however, in spite. I have an option to pick and choose my music, and I want the option to FAIRLY backup my CDs and DVDs, and newly released by 321 Studios, my video games. I've bought it, it's mine. What I do with it after that is MY perogative. Sorry, just saw the article this afternoon, and I flipped out. I love DVDXCOPY, and suggest it everywhere. To lose a good product that does it's intended purpose well is a travesty. I hope they win in court.
Can you ping me now? Gooood! | Manhappenin.Net - Things to do
"The case had tested the limits of 1998's Digital Millenium Copyright Act"
no limits, it seems.
Ahh yes, DVD shrink + CopyToDVD is the ticket. This way the kids can have their own copy that they can destroy without me having to go out an buy another. (They can kill a DVD pretty quickly).
Trouble is that both these programs are in that shareware/minimal support camp. You never know if they will just disappear someday. Keep the original install handy.
M
Making one's own backups doesn't become useless, it becomes something to fight for. The question is how much are people who understand the technology and the social issues at hand willing to fight so that the public can legally make backup copies of information they have legally acquired? Will knowledgable people just talk on Slashdot and never organize others to help take the issue to the public?
Digital Citizen
Here in Dallas, Mark Cuban (owner of the Mavericks) is trying to shift the paradigm just a little with a new concept. He owns the Landmark chain of theaters here along with a production company. He's hoping to create some good original films in the future, and sell you a copy of that movie in DVD form as you exit the theater.
Imagine if you went and saw any movie and you could buy a pristine DVD copy the same day! The theater would be raking in the dough, popcorn and soda prices would fall, and everyone would be happy. The current dumbass Hollywood model of distribution just seeks to milk every single film for all it's worth, while ignoring the rising likelihood of piracy in the interim between the film's theatric debut and the dvd sale.
Currently Hollywood does this: make film. Release film in theaters in the US. Release film in other countries (staggered, not synchronized). Sell lots of film related crap through Taco Bell and other friendly corporate entities. Hype some more. Right about the time nobody cares, release the DVD.
Mark Cuban's way: make film. Release film in all theaters (granted it's only a local domestic chain but the model is the same). Release DVD the same day, in the theater where you just watched the movie. Watch profits roll in.
He's also considering broadcasting the movie via ppv hdtv since he owns an HDTV network here. He figures if you'll pay to see it at home, what's the difference between that and the theater. And if you really want a dvd copy of it, come get it. No waiting.
I think it's a brilliant, all-encompassing concept. If Hollywood would quit rehashing crappy old movies and milking properties for every damn nickle, piracy wouldn't be the problem it's perceived to be today.
But whining about it won't do any good.
Face it fellas, they have guts. They don't mind going after and pissing off their own customers. They even call it good business!
We consumer wimps don't even have the wherewithall to put our wallets back in our pockets and move along.
They get paid well while we whine. I don't think its their fault at all... they are protecting their interests and business models - its US that are letting them get away with it by not fighting back! They are free to fight us with lawyers and buying law. Our tools are only our wallet, but its one helluva powerful tool. Without the Fruit of the Wallet, even the most powerful business soon finds itself like a powerful military weapon, with no gas in the tank. All the muscle of business, including all the lawyers and lobbyists, depend on the Fruit of the Wallet for their sustenance.
The Capitalist System still depends on cash flow just as your computer depends on a steady stream of current from its power supply. And you control whether or not you open your wallet.
They don't have sole control. Two can play this game.
While they put up all their advertising, featuring products that won't allow you to use in the way you wish to use it, feel free to flit back and forth in front of the Main Business Power Supply ( The Cash Register ) and fail to tender your dollars.
Shut up and put those wallets back in those pockets, folks, until they produce something you think worthy of purchase!
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
When you buy a CD or DVD, you're not buying the music, you're buying a plastic circle and a license to view/hear the contents of that circle. If your plastic circle eats it and becomes unusable for some reason, you still possess a license to the content
eh, that's not how the industry execs see it. you are not buying a plastic circle, or a license, but only what they are willing to sell you: namely the *specific* plastic item in your hand that you forked cash over for. When you buy a book you are not buying paper, or a license to read it, but a single instance combination of both. If your book gets eaten by your cat, or simply rots of its own accord, you cannot go back to the store and get a new free copy.*
If the book later becomes available as a searchable PDF you have no automatic rights to that either: it's a separate product entirely. You also don't get free rights to the movie version of the book. Just like buying a ticket to a film doesn't grant you a "license" to come back tomorrow and see it again; you got what you came for, now get out.
*(You could try and claim a "manufacturing defect" angle for backups, but then you are dealing with a different case entirely. if the content providers decide to replace obviously defective merchandise you will have problems pursuing legal self-backup mechanisms).
I agree with your arguments but you have to take their points of view more seriously in order to make an impact.
If we can rack up enough judgements, they'll either have to admit it's a sale or implement proper programs to replace failing media. Either way the consumer wins.
a court does not have the authority to change laws
But the court does have the authority to rule a law unconstitutional and proclaim it invalid.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
CNN is owned by AOL-Time-Warner - needless to say they are going to care more about the studio's interest than the public's interest.
A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
OK, why is this modded "Funny"?
Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Photocopiers are legal.
[TMB]
If that were the case, the studios wouldn't be able to put restrictions on how you use your one copy of that plastic circle. But right smack dab in the beginning there's a warning that you're not allowed to use it for public performances. That's a license, not a single copy purchase.
What the studios want is to have their cake and eat it too. They want to restrict your use of the info on the plastic disk as if it were a license, but if the physical media fails they want you to have to buy a new one at full price.
If the book later becomes available as a searchable PDF you have no automatic rights to that either: it's a separate product entirely. You also don't get free rights to the movie version of the book. Just like buying a ticket to a film doesn't grant you a "license" to come back tomorrow and see it again; you got what you came for, now get out.
If a book becomes available as a searchable PDF, that's a product that provides capability and value over the original book (it's searchable), and thus requires a new purchase. Same reason you weren't entitled to automatic upgrades for your music collection from cassettes to CDs - the digital format provided additional value over the old analog format.
When you go to a theatre, you're purchasing rights to a one-time viewing. When you buy a DVD, you're purchasing rights to infinite viewings. If something happens to inpede your right to infinite viewings, it's the studio's responsibility to restore that right - that's what you paid them for. This is why they've been trying to market products that give you rights to limited viewings (Divx, those DVDs that turn black after a few days). They're trying to shirk the responsibility to keep up their end of the bargain.
No, my rights end where they injure others. My rights to watch a DVD on a Linux box do not injure the movie industry, therefore those rights are inalienable. Those who say otherwise are the greatest threat to the freedom of our country and our world. We must stand firm.
As Ray Bradbury put it in Fahrenheit 451:
120 character sigs suck. Make it 250.
Exposure and advertising are all relative. You can have exposure by watching a movie at your friend's house, which happens to still be in theaters. I know many of you already do this yet it's hardly legal. Still, it's what the public wants, otherwise Kazaa and it's brethren entities wouldn't be so hot with movie traders.
Granted, there will always be that minority that will pirate regardless, and will not venture into the theater to see a movie that potentially sucks (like 90% of what comes out of Hollywood these days), but for the majority, Mark Cuban's concept is a good vision. It's a double-edged sword to create new distribution channels as well as keep piracy down.
Over the past year I've seen many independent films in local theaters (fortunately I live in Dallas, and there are plenty of independent theaters), and with no word of mouth or advertising budget, I've been exposed to some great films. I later went on to buy said films when they were released on DVD, and was able to buy them much sooner just because they were indie films. I didn't have to wait for the end-of-theater-life cycle, the end-of-marketing-dollars cycle, or any other crap. I just waited until a little after it made it's runs and then it was on DVD.
Just in case you want to watch some good movies, I recommend City of Ghosts and Identity.
And, she said, the fact that DVD decryption keys were widely available online in programs like DeCSS did not make Hollywood's attempts to block copying useless.
"This is equivalent to a claim that, since it is easy to find skeleton keys on the black market, a dead bolt is not an effective lock to a door," she wrote.
She doesn't want to get it. She completely fails to address the underlying issue of being able to have a good backup of something that you purchased. In her mind, DeCSS is a skeleton key, and CSS is a deadbolt, and yet a skeleton key can unlock a deadbolt? Bad analogy judge, bad.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
That would mean that the studios would have to be willing to continually do this for all DVDs that they released. Do you Actually think that if your 3 year old destoryed the Barney DVD the 15th time this month that they would still be willing to replace it?
Anything that does not allow you to make backup copys of videos and software that you have purchased is wrong. And any law that makes normal people making backups into criminals needs to be abolished.
A few years ago, my house caught fire and burned down taking everything with it. Fortunately, I had off site backups of my software or I would be spending several thousand dollars replacing all of it. Then it was legal to do such a thing but today I'm a criminal for making backups.
How would your mail-in replacement work for me in that situation? Am I supposed to send them in the melted plastic and say "send me a replacement"? Or how about I'll send them some ash and say "see, this is my receipt. My house burned down, send me replacements."
Windows is as solid as quicksand.
Yes, I dispute your claim. Your math may be correct, but you're discounting many other valid reasons why someone might want to invest $70 or so to copy their DVD collection.
Primarily, some folks like to take their movies with them - increasing the chances of scratching/damaging the discs. If you have a portable DVD player in your car/van, or even a notebook computer that can play DVDs, you'd probably not really want to tote around your originals and risk them getting lost/stolen/damaged every time.
What am I supposed to do when I irrepairably scratch my favorite DVD? Go buy another one? That's crap
When I spoke with the spokesperson for the NZ equivalent of the RIAA, he told me that making "backups" of disks was illegal and the industry would not allow it.
His rationale was that if you buy a Porsche and you wreck or lose it, you simply have to go out and by another -- so why should a CD be any different?
Amazing isn't it? These people don't seem (or choose not to) grasp the difference between the intellectual property and the medium on which it is delivered.
He told me that when you buy a CD you're not buying a license to listen to the IP, you're buying a disc.
When I suggested therefore that if I bought another disc (CDR) and then copied the music from the CD I'd bought and paid for, there should be no problem then -- since I've done nothing to that original music disc at all.
Obviously he then changed his tack and exclaimed that you were buying more than a disc when you purchased a CD.
These guys are slipery as snake oil and completely disingenuous.
If they could charge you an additional fee every time you played your CD or DVD they would.
We're not pigs.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Thank you for the link to Stevenson's page. It's obviously been too many years, and too many brain cells, since I last read it. I've gone so far as to copy it, just in case, but you didn't hear me say that, just in case.
In my defense all I can say is that encryption of the data sectors is optional.
As for throwing money at it, what can be made can be copied. I can still buy devices to create and and copy Edison cylinders off the shelf, or simply make my own.
Some people forget that people can make things on their own if they are sufficiently motivated. All sorts of things. It doesn't even necessarily cost very much money.
Simply copying files, as you have demonstrated, is trivial. Copying them in their decrypted form is hardly more trivial given the same equipment, and of course there is DeCSS, XCopy (run to the store now, you have a week) or just plain brute forcing it.
KFG
I have a kid, he fucks up DVD's and CD's regularly, I make sure he never gets his grubby fingers on an original. $1 dvd-r vs $19.99 original, not a hard call for me to make. He's 3, I don't even expect him to take great care of a CD yet, however for a 3 year old he's damn good at not ruining them. Even if he were 16 and had his own car I'd have him put burns in his car, because little bastards where he'd work or go to school would and probably will steal cd's out of his car (when that time comes) and I'd much rather have a $1 blank stolen as opposed to 10 or 12 purchased CD's.
I own over 300 dvds of various sorts, and hell I don't even know how many CD's 500-1000 I guess. I ripped all my CD's to mp3 LONG ago and I burn cd's to use in my car and stereo, and most of my CD's have been played exactly once, when they were ripped. Same for my DVD's, I buy 'em, rip 'em, and put 'em up, if my kid scratches one, drops one, whatever, I just load the image off my harddrive and burn a new one.
I also built a computer just to hold the images of all the DVD's I've ripped (I haven't ripped ALL my dvd's yet, just the popular ones). It has 4x160 harddrives in a raid stripe, and a 4x DVD-/+RW. Every cd I own and a good bit of the DVD's are on there and ready to reburn when necessary. I can also play the images straight from the computer in my home theatre.
DO I think DVD-X copy is mainly used for piracy? Sure probably is. Does that mean EVERYONE uses it for such? Fuck no. However I personally don't use DVDXCopy, I use DVD Shrink + CopyToDVD but that's just preference in software, still does the same thing.
So yes I do DISPUTE your claim. And this has nothing to do with cost, it has to do with convenience, and keeping what I bought safe so I can use it for years to come.
--- www.f-theocean.com