MPAA Committed To Fair Use and DRM

Doctor Jay writes "At a LexisNexis Conference on DRM this week, MPAA's Dan Glickman announced that the MPAA was fine with consumers ripping DVDs for portable video players and home media servers. 'In his speech to industry insiders at the posh Beverly Hills Four Seasons hotel, Glickman repeatedly stressed that DRM must be made to work without constricting consumers. The goal, he said, was "to make things simpler for the consumer," and he added that the movie studios were open to "a technology summit" featuring academics, IT companies, and content producers to work on the issues involved.'"

Comments

If the MPAA sold fruit

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't be allowed to make a banana split, and you'd only be able to eat a slice banana with Kelloggs brand cereals.

We'll believe it when we see it.

[faedle]

It's a shame that Sony's use of copy protection (that breaks even playback on standard licensed DVD players) means that at least one significant MPAA member disagrees... .. not to mention the recent actions against YouTube.

So, Mr. Glickman ...

[Kadin2048]

So, this means that he supports a removal of the onerous, no-Fair-Use, anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA?

What's that, Mr Glickman? That's not what you meant at all?

Oh, okay -- you support Fair Use, sort of, but only in some theoretical sense, because it's illegal to actually do, because of the laws you've purchased from those politicians who are perennially deep-throating the entertainment industry's collective cock?

Talk is cheap; I'm not buying.

Oh Really?

[rudy_wayne]

"MPAA's Dan Glickman announced that the MPAA was fine with consumers ripping DVDs for portable video players and home media servers."

Really? In order to rip DVDs you must use software that by-passes the DVD copy protection. That is a violation of the DMCA -- a law that was pushed thru by the MPAA -- and anyone who has attempted to sell this sort of software (DVD Xcopy, etc) has been sued into oblivion by the MPAA.

What they don't understand is that

[Daishiman]

DRM and Fair Use are mutually incompatible terms.

DRM & Consumers

[Paulrothrock]

The problem with DRM is that you're trying to limit access to the very same people who are trying to buy access to the media. DRM will not work if the methods for acquiring or viewing this media are not easy. Right now, it's easier for me to fly BT Airways to watch unedited, newly released episodes of Dr. Who or Torchwood in a timely manner than it is for me to obtain them through legal means. I would buy the content if I could, but I can't, so I'm a criminal for being a fan of a show. And I'm sure Australian fans of Battlestar Galactica or Heroes feel the same way. The only reason we're unable to watch legitimate versions of our favorite shows is because of outdated licensing agreements.

So make the content easy to get no matter where in the world the viewer happens to be, and make it easy to view on any device, and you won't need DRM. People want things to be convenient, and they'll only pay for it if it's convenient. People will always steal content, with or without DRM. So the best way to ensure you get paying customers isn't to make DRM easier, but to eliminate it and make paying for the content easier. Most people don't want to be crooks.

Fair Use Protected

[eboot]

Basically they have invented a sort of physical key and lock device that will be sold with all future content. Each DVD will come with a Dual Immutable Content Kernal that you will have to place inside a peripheral that attaches to your DVD/Blu Ray/ HD DVD player. The peripheral is call the Asynchronous Security System and is a revolutionary device. Trust me, this is the future of DRM, where everytime you watch a movie you will have to put their D.I.C.K inside your A.S.S.