Slashdot Mirror


Lawsuits Force 321 Studios Out Of Business

elegie writes "321 Studios has gone out of business. Earlier, they came under fire for producing DVD disc-copying software. Specifically, it was argued by movie studios that the DVD-X Copy software and the DVD Copy Plus software violated the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) anticircumvention rules. 321 Studios argued that copying a DVD disc for personal use counted as "fair use" in terms of copyright law. The EFF has said that the closing was not surprising because of all the legal injunctions against 321 Studios."

47 of 465 comments (clear)

  1. Open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about opening the source for their software?

    1. Re:Open source? by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

      There really is no need to.

      there is a far superior product that is already open source. It's called DVDshrink.

      anyways, Xcopy is based on all open source tools with a delphi frontend wrapped on it to hold the call-home/DRM protection they put in it.

      ignore the crud from 321, download dvdshrink instead.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Open source? by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
      How about opening the source for their software?

      Dunno, but sounds like something that would get you in loads of trouble and cast shadows on the good work of Open Sourcers. In sympathize, but pick your battles wisely, as 321's demise should underscore. Even EFF doesn't likely have the deep pockets to fight all villains in MPAA/RIAA, etc.

      Probably 321 would also suffer immense litgation if their code slipped into the wild anyway.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Open source? by Karzz1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, DVDShrink is not open source, it is a free binary. It also utilizes the burning libraries from Nero which are definitely not free (although it does use the ones included in trial versions of Nero).

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    4. Re:Open source? by mrbass · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nero is optional. DVDShrink 3.2 released about a week ago or so can now split out an .iso into 1GB chucnks on a FAT32 partition and automatically burn with DVD Decrypter (freeware). Prior to this it could transcode to an 4.37GB .iso and burn with DVD Decrypter if you had an NTFS partition.

      Bottomline is that you don't need any payware (yes it can burn with Nero or CopyToDVD) but why? DVDShrink 3.2 and the lastest DVD Decrypter are awesome especially with the new AEC algorithms that rivals if not beats Instant Copy 8.

    5. Re:Open source? by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Since when is the general public, which houses the majority of public opinion, capable of critically evaluating anything more complicated than a diluted press release?

      There is a reason that news is written on such a sophomoric level and the major "news stations" attempt to cram all of their "information" into short, sixty second blurbs between their bickering guests and stunningly imbecilic hosts. People these days have no critical thinking skills at all. They have to be told what to do in the simplest possible terms. If they actually had to make their own daily decisions on any level above that which should be expected of a three year old, most of them would probably die.

      Given all of this, how do you figure that the public will be smart enough to say "wait, these open shorts people are just protecting my rights to do with my DVDs as I please! This MBA A group is just an evil congolomerate attempting to stifle my use of my own personal property!" The MPAA will simply come out and brand anyone distributing the tools as dirty, filthy pirates, blame them for rate hikes, and continue rolling in the dough while the mentally retarded herd that is most of the developed world goes about its job of being obliviously fleeced by every major corporation and government on the planet.

      That doesn't even take into consideration that these idiots have probably never even heard of 'open source', the 'MPAA', 'CSS', or, most important, their own fair use rights in anything more than the most superficial manner.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  2. Lesson. by Threni · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's an important lesson to be learnt here.

    Wasn't the point of the legal system once to protect the weak from the poor. Somewhere along the line something happened to that ideal.

    www.fishkeeping.co.uk

    1. Re:Lesson. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      There is no "legal" system.
      There is no "system".
      Life is unreal and absurd.

    2. Re:Lesson. by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wasn't the point of the legal system once to protect the weak from the poor. Somewhere along the line something happened to that ideal.


      Yeah, those darn poor are always taking advantage of the weak.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Lesson. by Threni · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oops! It's sort of a combination of `the weak AND the poor` and `the weak from the strong`. It's hot in England right now - give me a break!

    4. Re:Lesson. by brainburger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't want to sound cynical, but as the legal system is created and maintained by the rich, I always felt it existed to protect the rich from the poor, (at least as far as property law is concerned anyway). I suppose some might have more generous interpretations...

    5. Re:Lesson. by FlutterVertigo(gmail · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's called a "plutocracy" (did you sleep in class that day?) Why describe in sentences when a word will do? Perhaps you write code the same way?

      Two simple phrases to remember:

      1. Life is like a shit sandwich. The more bread you have, the less shit you have to eat.
      2. The Golden Rule - he who has the gold makes the rules.

    6. Re:Lesson. by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Informative

      IANAL. I am an amateur linguist and historian, and am a large fan of the works of Georges Dumezil, Edgar Polome, and Calvert Watkins. Personally, I think you are both wrong. I don't think the purpose of the legal system has ever been to protect one group or another, but is a bit more abstract than that, at least among Indo-Europeans. Elsewhere, YMMV.

      When we talk about the "legal system" it seems we are talking about the framework of laws which set the ground rules for society, and the Indo-Europeans evidently had a complex structure of thought regarding the purpose of law.

      If we accept the work of Georges Dumezil as strong evidence at least for an iconographic and liturgical formula which is essentially a set of three merisms (two-fold formulas relating to a higher concept), then we are left with the argument that the Indo-Europeans probably elevated the concepts of king and priest above those of war, and those of war above those of production and wealth. We see a fallen form of this in the Indian caste system today, where the Brahmans (priests) are above the Kashatrias (warriors including the king) and the Kashatrias are above the wealthy businessmen and merchants (who often have more wealth than either the king or the brahmans).

      The concept of the kings and priests in traditional IE society seems to have been one of custodianship of sacred and social order. It should be noted that in many traditions, particularly the Celtic, the king was considered to be directly responsible for the production of the land, and a drought was considered to be a result of injustice or other failure on the part of the king. One wonders whether similar ideas were brought to China by the Tocharians, as they show up later in the writings of Meng Tzu.

      If we extrapolate on these concepts a bit, we end up exactly where, I think, Plato was with "The Republic" where justice is defined not so much in moral terms but rather as a state dependent on the structure and function of society. In this view, laws are not there to protect any group against any other group, except as a part of their more basic function-- the development of a set of social rules which facilitate the general working together of society towards common ends. Protection of human rights is an important aspect to this, no doubt, but it to think that the protective aspect of law is its driving force in IE traditions is, I think, to put the cart before the horse.

      Were these ideas in the minds of the founding fathers? I think there is a good chance that they were. These ideas regarding the nature of Justice have been well articulated by Plato, Aristotle, and others, and I am sure that the Founding Fathers were generally aware of their work, especially given the level of influence that the writings of Plato had on various schools of esoteric thought, such as the Freemasons, and it is relatively undisputed that a great many of the Founding Fathers were Freemasons (as were a great many of the Red-coats too).

      Even if they were not Freemasons, most of the Founding Fathers were quite learned people, and I would be very surprised of they had *not* studied the works of Plato and Aristotle on this topic.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  3. the REAL truth by theMerovingian · · Score: 5, Funny


    The REAL reason they went out of business is that everyone was burning and distributing illegal copies of their software.

    [/joke]

    --
    "If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
  4. no surprise by rhpot1991 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Noone should be using DVD-X copy anyways, dvdshrink is where it is at. Better quality and better price(free).

    1. Re:no surprise by DaHat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No matter how superior dvdshrink maybe over DVD-X, I have never seen a boxed copy at a local retailer.

      If you are a less than computer savvy user at your local Best Buy wandering around the software section, you are far more likely to stumble upon DVD-X and use it then you are to find dvdshrink on your own.

  5. So how about releasing the code? by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Any chance they're going to release the code to their products? Would that increase their legal liability at this point?

    --

    Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
    1. Re:So how about releasing the code? by jrockway · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The source code doesn't rip any DVDs. It's just a text file with neat words like "void" and "int32" in it. LAME uses the same principle: Lame Ain't an MP3 Encoder. It's the source code for one. If you'd like to violate the patent yourself, go ahead and compile it. If you want to violate the DMCA go ahead and compile the ripper. Otherwise it's speech just like this post or that song you got off of Kazaa^H^H^H^H^H iTMS :-D

      If someone tells you otherwise it's time to a) write your Congresscritter a nice note or b) burn down a building or two. You didn't hear b) from me though :-)

      --
      My other car is first.
    2. Re:So how about releasing the code? by Nakito · · Score: 4, Informative

      What are they going to do to a non-existent business? Sue them?

      Worse than that. Violation of an injunction is contempt of court, and willful violation could be deemed criminal contempt of court. Remember, corporations act through people, and people can be arrested, indicted, convicted, and punished. Bankruptcy and corporate status will not shield you from criminal liability.

  6. 321 might of been right ... by rf0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... but you can't fight people with deeper pockets as has been shown over and over again

    Rus

  7. I can't stand it by MrRuslan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    when all these companys take rights away from legitimate users like that...if people really wanna break the law they will but what if someone needs to do something legitimate with it...what are they supposed to do...this company is just one exaple of of this whole bullshit with copying stuff...no protection scheme has stoped pirate from copying stuff iligally...

    1. Re:I can't stand it by maximilln · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You buy something based on the terms of the seller. You agree to the terms when you buy it.

      Stalking is illegal. The seller has no right to monitor your use after you leave their shop. The grocery store does not have terms of use on knives. The drugstore does not have terms of use on aspirin. The hardware store does not have terms of use on power-nailers. The sporting goods store does not have terms of use on baseball bats.

      A sale with "terms of use" is a rental, not a sale. Auto agencies of "terms of use" on car rentals. Contractor stores have "terms of use" on equipment. Landlords have "terms of use" for property. It may be a rental with an unspecified time limit, but it is still a rental. Violation of a rental agreement is a civil matter which requires the renter to retain legal counsel and compile a case.

      What is the difference between "licensing" and "renting", other than a legal manipulation by which the renter has passed the financial burden of legal counsel and making the case onto the taxpaying public?

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  8. Now how else will I back up my movies by baywulf · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now how else will I back up my DVD movies that I plan to eventually buy?

  9. This is probably a good thing. by Exmet+Paff+Daxx · · Score: 5, Informative

    People need to confront the DMCA, really see it for what it is. Right now, the law says "thou shalt only play the movies in the way Hollywood prescribes", but it hasn't really internalized because so many people can use unlicensed software to do things like copy DVDs, play them without commercials, etc. I think the FBI needs to really crack down on anyone who violates the DMCA, by imprisoning everyone who copies a DVD for home use, especially rich and politically connected people. We could call it the "War on Pirates", and appoint a "Piracy czar", or something similarly crazy. The public needs to be rendered totally unable to copy or play DVDs in a way of their choosing, as the law prescribes, before they will wake up and actually understand what the law prescribes. Right now there's no reason to fight the DMCA because no one knows what it really means. It's a ban on any speech which could be used to play DVDs or other media the way we want. And that's a pretty amazing thing.

    To tie in to this article, I will award a Gmail invite for anyone who can prove to me that it's legal under the DMCA to stand on a street corner and recite DeCSS. It is of course illegal, which means that Free Speech is dead in America, but if you manage to prove me wrong and include an address, the invite will be on its way. Good luck!

    --
    If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
    1. Re:This is probably a good thing. by rewt66 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I think you misunderstand. Daxx's point is that people won't care as long as the issue is abstract. When it starts to hit them personally, there will be action.

      An idealist would say that people should care anyway, even if they aren't personally affected. A pessimist (the parent) would say that people will never care, no matter what. A realist says people are motivated most strongly by self-interest. Me, I agree with the idealist about what should be, and with the realist about what is ;-)

      A cynical realist says that the masses care only when it limits their bread and circuses. But inability to copy DVDs actually does cut into that...

    2. Re:This is probably a good thing. by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you misunderstand. Daxx's point is that people won't care as long as the issue is abstract. When it starts to hit them personally, there will be action.

      I think it's you that misunderstands. People aren't going to understand that they have a leg to stand on especially with more and more money being pumped into lawmaking to enable the MPAA/RIAA to do what they want.

      People aren't motivated by much these days. We have always had factions that went against the norm. Everyone else conforms. Sad reality but a true one.

    3. Re:This is probably a good thing. by Unnngh! · · Score: 4, Interesting
      These are all small steps in a longer process of trying to control something that is very difficult to control: The internet. The RIAA has now set a precedent of successful subpoenas on user records of people appearing to violate copyright law. Other regulations like the DMCA don't apply so directly, but in an indirect fashion result in free speech on the net being truncated. Currently there's a lot of stuff going on legally around these issues and it's all very confusing. As is intended.

      The PATRIOT act put into law many things for which the legal system had already set precedent in one form or another; there was just no codification of these items into law until a moment of panic ensued and *whoosh* along come laws that certain members of law enforcement have been trying to get through for years. Along comes a limitation on freedom in exchange for the perception of heightened safety.

      I see internet-related regulation going in much the same fasion. The obvious answer with this one, however, lies with all of us: don't do illegal shit and no one will have to pass these laws. Stop using P2P to share copyrighted works. We have already gotten ourselves in enough trouble with the DMCA, don't let it go any further.

  10. From their FAQ by Gentoo+Fan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is not illegal for you to own or use the software. The injunction only applies to 321 Studios.

    How long until 321 will be required to hand over their customer list (at least the ones that registered)? If they can force this company out of business, it seems to me the next step is to go after the users. You know, the ones doing the acutal "law breaking".

  11. Dangerous precedant by Jonny_eh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I may be just stating the obvious but: This is awful because now the MPAA and RIAA are gonna sue as many of their perceived enemies as possible, hoping to shut them down too. On the bright side, maybe people will use the superior DVD Shrink instead.

  12. Use DVD-Decrypter or DVD-Shrink. by garcia · · Score: 4, Informative

    DVDDecrypter or DVD Shrink. Rip and burn to ISO or another disc. I use DVD-shrink for dual layered discs and then burn the ISO with DVD Decrypter. If you have a single layer you can just use DVD Decrypter to burn the entire disc without edits.

    See here for more information on DVD Shrink.

    They are both free and work well.

  13. I don't understand by netwiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The DMCA expressly forbids systems that bypass copy protection systems, like cracking the CSS encryption codes. Wouldn't software that performs a bitwise direct copy of the encrypted data therefore be legal, as it's not attempting to play the DVD on unauthorized hardware, nor is it decrypting the MPEG-2 stream in any way?

    1. Re:I don't understand by funaho · · Score: 5, Informative

      It would still be illegal copying, just without the added offense of circumventing the copy protection.

      Anyway consumer DVD burners are incapable of writing to the portion of the disc holding the CSS keys, so there is no way for an average user to burn a bit-for-bit copy of a DVD without decrypting the data first. Commercial DVD authoring systems can do it, but they're not exactly cheap, and neither is the blank media.

    2. Re:I don't understand by endeitzslash · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can't bit copy the "key" part of a pressed DVD, because it exists in a part of the DVD that is inaccessible to burners.

      Put in another way, you can't burn a CSS-encrypted DVD yourself.

      Ed.

  14. Theoretical right to fair use by anandpur · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Under the DMCA, you have a theoretical right to fair use. But this ruling shows that if you provide a tool for fair use you can't use it."

    From NewScientist

  15. Backups not legal? by SiliconEntity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I understand it, there is no legal right to make backups of movies, in the U.S. There is a right to make backups of computer software, but that provision is explicit and does not apply to other forms of content.

    Some have argued that fair use would allow making backups of general content, but since such usage is not educational or for research purposes, and would have commercial impact, it seems like a weak argument to me. In any case, it has never been confirmed in the courts.

  16. DVD X-Copy is free(as in speech)? by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 5, Funny

    Interesting. Now that 321 is out of business. DVD X-Copy is now considered fair use under the "software created by company no longer in existance" revision they added.

  17. They went out of business in the "US" only by chrisw24 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I heard from a friend that knows someone that knows someone else, that they are moving the business offshore. Not sure if the business will move out of the US, or if the employees will be recieving a paycheck from a company overseas, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

  18. Re:The MPAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thats simple to avoid. It gets on a p2p network like emule and it doesn't go away.

  19. Man.. by bdigit · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's alot of studios that went out of business

  20. Other solutions by Zaranne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't understand why the solution that worked for the music world wasn't used here. Back when blank recording cassettes were created and mass marketed, the music industry nearly blew a gasket. The compromise is that TDK/Maxell/Fuji and the rest pay a small portion of their sales to the record companies. Kind of a tithe. While it's still illegal for me to copy my CD's onto cassettes and SELL them to people, I can do it for personal use. Everybody's happy.

    --
    So when is the Hawkeye movie coming out?
  21. 321 Studios has a bastard brand: 123 Copy DVD by Seoulstriker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you go to the website for the Bastard company, http://www.123copydvd.com/, you will notice that the "company" is offering the exact same program. What 321 Studios has effectively done is known as "asset protection", where they branch off a company into a separate Corporation or Limited-liability corporation (LLC) that is untouchable if the prior company is sued and run out of business. 321 studios is still alive, just in another form. I have purchased their 123 copy DVD software, and it is almost identical to the 321 Studios DVD X Copy software.

    If you wish to see how damn clever they are, they do not actually include de-cryption software in the product. They do however link directly to a "3rd Party Plugin" site which features a downloadable plug-in which works exclusively with 123 copy DVD.

    Talk about legal maneuvering!

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
  22. Re:Grrr, but ok by maximilln · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they ARE right, legally speaking

    Legally speaking King George was right and we founded an entire nation by challenging that. I can never see why people have such great respect for laws which can be so easily manipulated when history has shown that we have a moral obligation to challenge laws which are in violation of natural truths. In the case of the DMCA, the natural truth is: "If you sell something to me it's mine and I can do with it as I please."

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  23. Re:How EXACTLY did DVD X-Copy violate the DMCA?? by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Informative

    Encrypted Original ---DVD X-Copy---> Unencrypted Working Copy Produced.

    The original encrypted copy was decrypted for the purpose of making a copy. 321 sold this software. The former is not expressly forbidden by the DMCA, the latter is.

    DVD X-Copy is not illegal, nor is using it for fair use, but distributing it in any way IS illegal.

    (At least, that's how I understand it).

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  24. Blank dont Blank blank blank do by cyberlotnet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    CD Burners don't break laws, people do
    Guns don't kill people, people do
    Cars don't kill people, people do
    Software don't break laws, people do
    Knives don't kill people, people do

    Sorry but hello law makers please take reeval your prioritys.. If you want to do something good make laws that keep guns out of killers hands, that keep cars out of the hands of drunk drivers and things like that..

    Spend more time protecting the PEOPLE not the greedy big business.

  25. With INDUCE Act this will become a common story by BrianWCarver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This shows the DMCA can be used by the MPAA/RIAA to put legitimate technology companies out of business. But they're hoping for another tool to do even more of this, and it's called the INDUCE act.

    Go to EFF's Action Center and savetheipod.com to take action! Let your Senators know that they should be supporting Rep. Boucher's DMCRA rather than INDUCE.

    We can turn the tide here if we take action!

    --
    Like Digital Freedoms? Then donate to EFF before they're gone.
  26. Talk about a slippery slope by kaladorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm unaware of an authoritative or canonical list of these so-called natural truths. It occurs to me that one person's natural truth is likely to clash directly with another's. No one of us can legitemately claim to have a particular access to any particular objective truth. We've each got our own 'personal truth' and that is natural.

    I don't disagree with your claim that people must exercise personal discretion and conscience and challenge laws they percieve as unust. But in doing so, they must be aware it is only their own point of view they represent, their own perception, not any particular idealized or absolute definition of what is true and right. That kind of thinking (that one is in possession of or has access some absolute moral or social truth) doesn't lead in very good directions - I think history speaks to that point.

    --
    -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
  27. Re:Terrabyte storage and playback by RicoX9 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Terabyte storage shouldn't be that hard to arrange nowadays. From newegg.com:

    5 x WD 250 GB SATA 7200 rpm ($170 ea)
    5 x Kingwin KF-72 drive tray ($13 ea)
    Adaptec 2810SA 8 channel SATA RAID card ($499 ouch)
    Lian-Ling Case w/6 external 5.25" bays (CDR+drives) ($111)
    400W CoolMax CX-400B power supply (zillion choices here, just picked one) ($38)

    $1565, add the motherboard/processor combo of your choice, add RAM and a small boot drive (setup the 5 big drives as a big RAID), and whatever incidentals you need to finish it out (I'm lazy and didn't want to spend the time).

    You could probably finish out this storage server for something like $2K or so using AMD proc/mb (don't need top of the line to share a big array). 5 drives gets you a useable 1 TB. 8 channel controller gives you the ability to enlarge the array at a later date if you wish (of course you had better be willing to re-encode or backup your data to do this).

    Point is, it's doable for what I consider to be a reasonable price, if I was doing DVD archival. Should be fast as hell too...