Slashdot Mirror
New Sony DVDs Not Working In Some Players
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that the most recent DVDs released by Sony — specifically Stranger Than Fiction, Casino Royale, and The Pursuit of Happyness — have some kind of 'feature' that makes them unplayable on many DVD players. This doesn't appear to be covered by the major media yet, but this link to a discussion over at Amazon gives a flavor of the problems people are experiencing. A blogger called Sony and was told the problem is with the new copy protection scheme, and they do not intend to fix it. Sony says it's up to the manufacturers to update their hardware."
I have a Pioneer DVD player, maybe second generation. The thing is huge, and probably something like 8 years old. Casino Royale works just fine in it. Granted, that sucker will play just about anything you throw in there, from DivX to DVD +/- RW. Best DVD player I ever bought, and one of the reasons why I still only buy Pioneer DVD players. Makes you wonder about what's in some of the other newer DVD players if my old one can play Casino Royale with no problems...?
If you're having trouble playing them on the legit side, why not just rip them? Besides the moral issues, you could burn and watch then destroy the copy.....
2 options: Ripit4me (in conjunction with dvddecrypter) or dvdfab decrypter....
*ahem*verified on Stranger Than Fiction*ahem*
Karnal
Quote from some web-page or another...
"No single company "owns" DVD. The official specification was developed by a consortium of ten companies: Hitachi, JVC, Matsushita, Mitsubishi, Philips, Pioneer, Sony, Thomson, Time Warner, and Toshiba. Representatives from many other companies also contributed in various working groups. In May 1997, the DVD Consortium was replaced by the DVD Forum , which is open to all companies, and as of February 2000 had over 220 members. Time Warner originally trademarked the DVD logo, and has since assigned it to the DVD Format/Logo Licensing Corporation (DVD FLLC)."
Looks like there isn't any kind of single company that can really rule on this and say, those aren't officially formatted DVDs... The fact that Sony was a main developer in the consortium would also probably make it that much harder to revoke any kind of "DVD" stamp from these disks...
These discs feature Sony's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARccOS_Protection ARCCOS, which doesn't work with some DVD players and cannot be ripped by any program under Linux.
Stranger Than Fiction, Casino Royale, and The Pursuit of Happyness
There you go, now stop buying those darn DVD's and complaining that someone will crack the copy protection anyway. We KNOW, before it's even in stores you can get full DVD rips (yes, you can even get the full 4,7G download's if you look hard enough). And if I buy a DVD that doesn't play in my machine, without going through stuff like MacTheRipper or so (Johnny English for example) I return it to wherever I bought it and say it won't play (I take my PowerBook with me) and demand a refund.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I wonder if the new DRM's been successful at keeping those movies off the torrent sites. Because if the article's to be believed, it's certainly been successful at pissing off paying customers, and what would be the point of doing that if the movies were still being pirated anyway?
—Tickletaint (forced to post logged-out due to modbombing)
I don't know how it works in the US and elsewhere in the world but in the UK we have consumer protection legislation which says if a product is not 'fit for purpose' then we have a legal right to a full refund.
Yeah, we used to have that in the U.S. We also used to have fair use rights.
Just thinking about it, if they're selling them using the DVD label identifying it as a dvd, doesn't it legally have to be playable in dvd compatible players?
This will depend very much on the local laws. In Australia a DVD that fails to play in a significant number of DVD players meets the statutory definition of unmerchantability, which requires goods to be suitable for every purpose for which they are normally bought (unlike other places where they have to be suitable for just one of the purposes for which they are normally bought). This will give the consumer the right to a refund, but won't lead to any penalty. There is also an argument that applying the label "DVD" to the product (or even selling it in a manner that makes it seem like it is a DVD) is misleading conduct for which anybody could apply to the Federal Court to get an injunction to prevent the product from being sold in that way.
For those who have missed the joke here, check out the Bush speech where he uses this saying
Maybe I'm wrong, but like some "CDs" in the past that incorporated some copy protection and couldn't carry the CD logo/seal any longer on the cover, wouldn't the same thing apply here? Can Sony legimitately still call this thing a DVD anymore without being sued for fraud?
Perhaps the DVD-Video logo, but it's still a DVD. You can get software on DVDs. You can't play them in your video player, but they are still DVDs.
Actually, it's the same thing with CDs. CDs with copy protection are still CDs; they just can't carry the CDDA (CD Digital Audio) logo.
And that's what they want you to think. And it's understandable if people don't know all the guidelines that go into those logos. However, the bottom line is that if you buy a DVD and it doesn't play in your player, you should return it and demand your money back. Let the stores deal with the manufacturers.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Perhaps the DVD-Video logo, but it's still a DVD. You can get software on DVDs. You can't play them in your video player, but they are still DVDs.
Actually, it's the same thing with CDs. CDs with copy protection are still CDs; they just can't carry the CDDA (CD Digital Audio) logo.
Not according to the Red Book standard.
There are a couple avenues of consumer remedy for buying one of these non-standard discs. First, warranties. When you purchase a CD or something purporting to be a CD, then its failure is a breach of general warranty for fitness. Second, if "CD" is a trademark, then selling a CD-like device as-if it were a CD can violate the trademark, and the trademark holder can pursue a remedy against the misrepresenter. Finally, there are statutory consumer protection acts which entitled consumers to remedies for violations of standards in product quality.
You're right to say that, colloquially, a CD with copy protection is still a CD. It serves the same purpose, looks the same, and often functions in the exact same way as a "true" CD. However, a CD-like disc with copy protection is legally distinct from a CD as "Compact Disc" in terms of the warranty for fitness, trademark holder rights, and consumer protection laws.
YMMV.
Might want to recheck the Digital Millenium Copyright Act if you're living in the States - deliberately breaching copyright protections such as exist on DVDs is indeed illegal.