Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MGM Concedes Some Fair-Use Rights Exist

Posted by timothy on from the how-very-gracious-of-them dept.

jambarama writes "MGM seems to have given a little in the Grokster case. After getting nailed on the possible implications of banning P2P software, they've now admitted it is perfectly legal to rip one's own CD and store it. Is this a return to the stripped down 'fair use' rights or a temporary court concession?"

3 of 417 comments (clear)

  1. Hopefully... by quark101 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the first step in P2P being declared legal. Although it may seem like an obvious decision to the people here, remember that not everyone understands the issues so well- i.e. Politicians who make these decisions.

  2. Re:What about DeCSS? by kraada · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, I think this is big news, and here's why:

    If they say that it's ok for fair use to be able to rip media for personal use, then it follows that they must admit users can do the same for DVDs.

    If they are saying it is only allowed in cases where compact discs are involved, then the question becomes: "What makes music special in this way?"

    I for one cannot think of why it would be ok to rip cds but not rip dvds. If it is fair use to rip a medium (cd) for use on another device (like an iPod), it should be just as legal to rip a medium (dvd) for use on another device (like xine).

    They better think hard and long as to why one is okay and not the other, because the courts will draw the analogy I just made and agree that if some ripping is ok, then all should be (so long as you have the media in question legally, of course).

  3. DVD Packaging Warnings by lxt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This seems like a good time to ask a question that's been bugging me since I bought a new release DVD a few days ago - as well as some copy propaganda video that came up, I also got a FACT (the UK copy protection "federation") warning which in very bold letters told me "It is illegal to copy this DVD".

    It didn't say anything about distribution - merely "It is illegal to copy this DVD". But I thought under UK (and US) law I was allowed to copy physical media for my own personal use, or if not that for my use as a backup copy.

    If I'm right, does that mean someone could actually have some sort of legal case against FACT, seeing as they are wrongly informing consumers of their legal rights?

    I'm obviously not a lawyer, and I only ask this out of curiousity...