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."

Comments

This is bullshit

[grioghar]

What am I supposed to do when I irrepairably scratch my favorite DVD? Go buy another one? That's crap. The primary function of this software is what? JUST to circumvent the antipiracy scheme, or is it to give someone the ability to backup that which they've already paid for.

The fucks at the MPAA going to give me a new copy of Hackers on DVD if I accidently damage my old one? They obviously don't want me copying it for my safe keeping.

Assholes.

Re:This is bullshit

[Monkelectric]

I've got a better one then that -- my "American Beauty" DVD died of DVD Ro. Think Warner Brothers is going to replace it? :) I refuse to buy new one out of principle.

Fair use?

[roman_mir]

I was also trying to submit the same article.... I did some research, so a federal judge decided for the MPAA and against the 321 Studios DVD Copying software. MPAA argued that DMCA prohibits anyone to go around an encryption scheme (effective or not) the CSS. It looks like the 321 Studios is selling software that can copy DVDs onto other DVDs and also onto your harddrives in some file format. However, the software is also capable of selecting which features, languages etc. will be copied so it looks like the software actually does CSS decryption in order to go this extra steps. Maybe in this case DMCA does apply. If this is the truth, the software will have to be changed to only allow bit by bit copying in order to allow fair use and at the same time to comply with the DMCA.

BTW. on the 321studios.com Flash is required for navigation, I personally see it as the grounds for shutting that company down, not only prohibitting their software

Is this different than CD's?

[Lordofohio]

I thought one of the main concessions that the RIAA "allows" is that people can make copies of CD's that they have legally bought, both for backup purposes and to have a copy in the car, home, office, etc.

Is this different? Does the MPAA have a different view on copying than the RIAA, and if so under which corporate empire's rule do we live? We are obviously not under the rule of the people anymore.

The Real Danger?

[Tamor]

I doubt the injunction will stop the inevitable availability of this software on just about any file-sharing service you care to name. What it might stop though is legitimate companies developing software like this so that you, I and anyone else can exercise our right to make working backups of the software, movies or anything else that we've purchased.

After all why would anyone want to spend time, effort and money developing software that allows people to do sensible, legal things with their property if the MPAA, RIAA or anyone else with a big enough cheque book is going to shut them down before they get going? Chalk up another victory for big corporations in their seemingly unstoppable war against the rights of the law abiding majority in their pursuit of the lawless minority.

Re:The right to make a backup hangs in the balance

[lavaface]

I think the industry's response to this will be some sort of mail-in program if your DVD is scratched. Some studios actually already do this. Of course, if your movie is stolen, you may be SOL. Unless you have a receipt and/or register your DVD. It seems reasonable enough to me, I think a judge might accept it.

That being said, the cat is out of the bag and the movie industry will have to wait until the next generation of copy protection when DVI connectors become more common.

Then they had better replace ruined discs

[Anonymous Coward]

If I can legally make a backup copy but I can't legally obtain the means to do so, well that's just the same as it not being legal for me to make a backup copy, isn't it?

The point has been made before-- if we're only buying a license to view/hear the content on a disc as the RIAA/MPAA maintain, then we should definitely be owed replacements (if not free, then for the cost of the media only) when something bad happens to a disc we possess and renders it unusable.

That is a class-action lawsuit I'd like to see... where a bunch of people with ruined CDs/DVDs sue to force the producers to provide minimal-cost replacement media-- and not just for the members of the class, but for everyone, in perpetuity.

Appeal?

[and by]

They really should appeal. Sure it will cost a goodly sum in lawyers' fees, but the 9th Circuit (if you get the right judges) is quite liberal in terms of personal rights.

Mencoder rocks

[October_30th]

Mencoder rocks.

I have ripped my entire library of about 70 DVDs into DivX with it. With a script you can just insert the DVD and walk away.

It all began as an effort to be able to watch entire seasons of Simpsons, Futurama or Black Adder in one go without having to change discs and/or deal with cumbersome menus and copyright announcements that you can't fast-forward (FOX is particularly bad in this aspect).

Now I've got a fanless VIA EPIA mini-ITX box connected to my TV with the media on a 250 GB portable hard drive. Interestingly, a cordless trackball mouse is actually a better remote than your ordinary remote control when you get used to it.

Repeat after me...

[teetam]

You, the individual, do not own this country. You can sing "land of the free" all you want, but it remains in name only.

To force your pet peeves and petty issues on everyone else, you constantly lobby to pass new laws that will arrest those whom you don't like. Consequently, the government has become bigger and bigger and no longer looks out for you.

There was a time when the individual was bigger than the state, now he is just a slave.

People, wake up and realize that the two points of opinion are not the left and the right. The struggle is between individual rights and the statists (which includes Democrats/liberal and republican/conservatives). And the statists have won in a big way.

The greatness of a nation hinges on the freedom of its people. Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Great American Experiment!

Re:Repeat after me...

[fermion]

I don't see this as the beginning of the end. I see this as just another step in the process of the country, and really the world. At a top level we have seen the greed, the redistribution of wealth, the insensitivity of the decadent elite to those who have nothing, many time before.

The individual has power, but it can only be express as a group effort, and will only be expressed if there are brave people. We pay for the privilege to watch movie, but also much watch commercials. We give away the public airspace, yet can ask for little in return. We feel that is it such a privilege to shop at some stores that we allow ourselves to be humiliated by a search on exiting the store. We pay our farmers billions out of the public coffers to grow food, and then pay for the food again at the market, but cannot ask the processors the food to keep the shit out of it. In some ways these are the same as paying for the privilege to sit in the back of the bus or for the privilege to eat the salt the we could produce for nothing.

All we are seeing now is a state of affairs in which the people are cowardly. The cowardice is generated by the government, who has systematically redefined bravery as the number of people a person can kill or intimidate, rather than what the person can produce through a revolution of thought or status. For example, our founding fathers were brave because they, as mere colonials hicks, challenged the British elite and claimed equal status, and equal stuff. Today, revisionist historians want us to honor them merely as great warriors.

The choice is the same as always. We can take the stuff they give us, in the form they want to give it to us, or we can refrain and say our self respect is worth more than 3 beans. Most of us are not slaves. A slave has a choice to work or to die. Most of us, for the time being, have other choices. Certainly in the realm of entertainment, there is always the choice to refrain, or, if one is desperate enough, to take.

Having their cake...

[Teppy]

When you buy a *thing* you can do with it what you want. For instance, if I buy a painting, I can publicly exhibit it all I want, I can draw a moustache on it, I can lend it to a friend.

When you buy a license, you get a set of rights. So, if I buy a gym membership, I'm allowed to work out during gym hours, use a locker, swim in the pool. I'm not allowed to loan my membership card to a friend to use. If I misplace my membership card, that doesn't cancel my membership.

It seems the MPAA wants it both ways: They want to be allowed to make all sorts of restrictions as if they were selling licenses, but want to pretend it's just a physical object they're selling when it comes to media damage, theft, and format changes.

I say they play by the same rules as everyone else. Make it one or the other.

Constitution... schmonstitution

[superwiz]

Soviet Union had a Constituion that looked like a document fair to all the citizens of the country. But the Soviet Government constantly used lied (usually poorly disguised lies) to do whatever it felt was neccessary to stay in power. It still used its well-oiled propaganda machine to try to convince the dumbest 80% of the population that it was the most fair society in the wolrd.

Sure US has a freedom of speech. Unless you want to discuss something that is not politically correct, or you happen to be a computer programmer communicating in a way that you find most expressive, or you happen to be a mathematician discussing mathematics (think cryptography), or a chemist discussing high-energy reactions (think explosives).

It used to be that it was OK to tremple everyone rights legally as long as it was done to bring about safety. More and more it is done to bring about practical short-term solutions (read profit).

But at least there is no slippery slope.

Who cares?

[real_smiff]

I use only freeware (mostly open source software) to make dvd backups - i suggest you all head on over to Doom9 and learn how to do the same. I don't make money from my backups either.

Right on the front page (after updates to two similar products are mentioned btw!) they have the following interesting comment:

Last but not least, 321 Studios have lost in court in the first instance. A San Francisco judge granted the MPAA an injunction against 321 Studios, barring them from selling their DVDXCopy products. While I have not been a fan of 321 ever since they started selling freeware software and a guide as DVD backup solution (note that the DVDXCopy products have actually been developed by 321), this is definitely not a good development. Judge Illston went on record saying that people were free to make copies in other, nondigital ways that would give them access to the same content, even if not in the same, pristine form. Miss Illston, if you have a minute I invite you to come over and I'll show you how your statement is completely false and shows a lack of understanding for what the movie industry is actually doing. I also invite you to have a look at Macrovision's offering in analogue copy protection. Under the DMCA which you're defending, analogue copying is also prohibited because it is illegal to manufacture a device that does not react to the Macrovision signal corruption (that's right.. Macrovision Quality Protection my lower rear end!).

My bold, and that pretty much sums up how i feel about this aswell. I trust the views of Doom9 (he's a person and a site) as someone who knows a lot more about all this than me and has proved right on the money in the past. The sentence after the bold... well, that just pisses me off - i don't know what to say. I can make cr*p quality backups?! Is that a joke? (rhetorical).

Re:Your analogy is crap.

[red floyd]

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.

Really. Funny, I don't see ads that say: '[LATEST DISNEY MOVIE]: License it today!!!!"

They say "[LATEST DISNEY MOVIE]: Buy it today!!!!" (emphasis mine).

Now, IANAL, but this seems like false advertising to me.

Re:What does it matter

[pla]

Yes, but your DVD-R drive has no hope of creating a double-layered DVD like the kind Hollywood makes

Not true. Pioneer has already shown a live demo where a mere A06 with hacked firmware can write dual-layer. Whether or not they will release such firmware for older drives seems another matter entirely, but the as the more important issue, dual-layer writeables do exist.


Additionally, although most discs do use dual layer, the movie itself often comes to under 4.7GiB. So, removing the useless French and Spanish audio, and making a movie-only copy, you can frequently get a 100% main-movie copy.

Now, if you care about extras (I do not, personally, nor do I care about "director's commentary" audio where you have mindless chatter for fifteen minutes which tapers off to "Uh, yeah, I remember this scene" once every five minutes or so until the end), such a "copy" might not satisfy you. Myself, I buy DVDs the main feature, not for trailers, ads, idiotic babbling, or anything of that nature.

Was DVD X Copy a good value?

[shark72]

I think it's plainly obvious by reading the comments that the vast majority of Slashdotters would only ever use DVD X Copy for backing up a DVD that they already own. They would not use it for, say, renting a DVD from Netflix and making a copy for themselves, as many of my friends do regularly. Then again, almost everybody I know who uses Kazaa uses it to download and share copyrighted material without the holder's permission, so perhaps I'm hanging with the wrong crowd.

Making backups of your media is a good idea, in case they're damaged or stolen. But not even factoring in the cost of the DVD burner or the blank media, the basic version of DVD X Copy retails for $69.99. That's the cost of three DVDs.

I must own over a hundred DVDs, and not once have I had a DVD go bad or otherwise become unusable. I would have to have had three instances of this happening in order for a purchase of DVD X Copy to have been worth the investment.

If I regularly loaned DVDs to friends and three ended up not coming back, the software would have been a good investment, but it would have been more efficient to be more careful in whom I loan my DVDs to.

It seems to me that the most logical way to get your value's worth out of DVD X Copy is to use it for piracy. Just as most people use Kazaa illegally and most people who buy equipment for getting free cable or satelite signals also do so to avoid paying, rather than for "test purposes" or "for educational use only" as the ads proclaim, my bet is that most people who use DVD X Copy do so illegally.

Does anybody dispute this?

Re:What does it matter

[rsmith-mac]

Never, and that's the point; the MPAA doesn't want you to be able to burn CSS, and has 1million + 1 failsafes in place to keep it that way(member patents, trade secrets, etc). The only semi-consumer drives that can burn CSS are those that follow the DVD-A standard(DVD-Authoring), and those aren't even in a price-range where we can begin talking about reasonable.

Re:Biased language in post

[KFury]

"If the majority of people don't obey a law, should that law even exist?"

If people could revoke a law by majority violation, would we pay taxes? Have copyright? The American Disabilities Act?

"I would also like to point out that there are two sides to this honor system, and if one side isn't playing fair, why should we."

The 'other side' offers a product, and they can choose what form and under what license to offer that product. If you don't like it, don't buy that product. By your comment I gather that you think it's okay to make copies of DVDs for your friends, or do you mean something else by 'not playing fair'?

"The people who make money infringe on copyrights are houses that produce DVDs by the thousands."

Yeah, but the people who lose money are the people who would otherwise sell their product.

I'm no fan of major labels, the RIAA, or the MPAA, but if and when smaller labels make their comeback through online distribution, they'll be the ones who are hurt by flagrant copying, and no matter how piusly we can say 'we won't copy the little label's music or movies, just the big-label basters who rape their artists' I don't believe that the day we remove copyright law is the day we stop needing it.