Slashdot Mirror
Germany Says Copying of DVDs, CDs Is Verboten
Billosaur writes "In what can only be seen as the opening salvo in an attempt to control what users can do with content, the German parliament has approved a controversial copyright law which will make it illegal to make copies of CDs and DVDs, even for personal use. The Bundesrat, the upper part of the German parliament, approved the legislation over the objections of consumer protection groups. The law is set to take effect in 2008, and covers CDs, DVDs, recordings from IPTV, and TV recordings." A few folks have noted that this story is incorrect. The original link seems to be down now anyway. Sorry.
i see noooothing, i hear nooothing !!
That gives you three months to make all the copies you're going to need.
I stole this sig from a more creative user.
The author does not report the facts. The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies like Macrovision et al., something that has been illegal in the US for a decade. The law specifically allows users to make backups of DVD and CD movies, software and music and other digital content for their own archives and to use/play on alternate devices (i.e., ripping movies to your hard drive to watch on a DVR or other device, ripping music to play on an ipod or other device, etc.). These specifically-named consumer rights are actually broader than those granted by law to American consumers. I am not sure what the author relied upon for his translation of the law, but I can assure you that it does nothing like what he suggests.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
with a CD/DVD purchase? It seems to me - a license to play the content, privately, for the lifetime of the physical medium.
The Raven
I remember the good ol' days when copying of DVDs and CDs was just farhfegnugen in Germany. Now it's verboten? Next thing you know it will be gesundheit!
Clearly German legislators are less expensive than those of many other nations! I'll keep that in mind when I need to buy a new law! :)
"I am not sure what the author relied upon for his translation of the law, but I can assure you that it does nothing like what he suggests."
It's called, pushing the hot buttons. And since few RTFA or anything deeper than that. It slips by easier and easier. Kind of the slashdot version of slipping an item into a bill just before voting and hoping no one will notice. And much like that the consequences are hard to get rid of.
Critical bit from that article:
To be sure, copying for private use is still permitted - which is, after all, the reason for the flat-rate levy payable on certain devices. However, if special anti-copying technology has been employed to protect the medium, e.g. a music CD, such protection may not be circumvented by any means. The Ministry of Justice has given clear expression to this prohibition: "There is no 'right of private copying' at the expense of rights holders". This also means that consumers who download a file from the Internet must first check whether the offer is legal. How users are supposed to do so remains unclear, says the National Federation of Consumer Organisations.
If you think deeply enough, you will have no single direction for your outrage.
Do we own the physical CD/DVD, but not what's on it?
If we own the right to use the media for personal use, then we should get additional copies of the physical media at no (or very little) charge if it becomes damaged.
But if we own that CD/DVD, then we should be able to make our own backups, at the least.
The content producers want it both ways. They say that we don't really "own" the content, just the right to access it, but what if you can't access that content? For example, no more working record players or tape decks in the world. Then we should get the updated version for free right? If we bought the right to access that content. If not, then they should just fuck off and let us acquire or reacquire content we already paid for.
This could be an absolutely retarded thing I'm saying, but, couldn't we turn the public on to them?
Say something like, for example, that this will enable paedophiles to hide their files. Independent groups won't be able to verify their contents and police will need court orders (or whatever kind of official permission there is there to enable police to conduct searches) and that it will radically slow down any important investigations...
I don't know how, but I feel it's time to use their own manipulative weapons against them. Remember, it doesn't have to be logical or completely sane, just "emotional" enough to convince the impulsive masses.
Would something like this be possible?
``To be sure, copying for private use is still permitted - which is, after all, the reason for the flat-rate levy payable on certain devices. However, if special anti-copying technology has been employed to protect the medium, e.g. a music CD, such protection may not be circumvented by any means. The Ministry of Justice has given clear expression to this prohibition: "There is no 'right of private copying' at the expense of rights holders". This also means that consumers who download a file from the Internet must first check whether the offer is legal. How users are supposed to do so remains unclear, says the National Federation of Consumer Organisations.''
Comparing this to the Dutch (from the Netherlands, a small country that borders Germany in the west) equivalent of copyright law, I get the following.
1. Copying for personal use is permitted by basic copyright law, which, in the Netherlands, has been in place for a pretty long time. I imagine the same to be true in Germany.
2. Not allowing the circumvention of "technical measures" is from the EUCD, the EU equivalent of the DMCA. Both Germany and the Netherlands have this.
3. In the Netherlands at least, downloading a file from the Internet constitutes making a copy for personal use, which is expressly permitted as per 1. (That is, for anything that is on media, except software. Books don't apply as thy aren't on media, music does, and software doesn't, because it is explicitly mentioned as an exception.)
I would be mildly surprised if 3 were different in Germany, i.e. you were not allowed to download music files under all circumstances. What is illegal, in the Netherlands, is circumventing the DRM. Anything that involves that (making a copy of th contents of the DVD, playing the DVD) therefore cannot be done legally. Downloading a file from the Internet does not involve curcimventing DRM, so isn't made ilelgal by tha.t
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Yep, absolutely crazy and.... completely made up.
>> representatives of the state do indeed walk into people's houses to check on things
>> like this.
This may have been true in the Communistic East German republic some 20 years ago, but in modern day Germany such things dont happen unless its a regular, court ordered house searching. (and such court orders do not get issued for not paying state TV fees.)
>> They told me he was looking for unlicensed TV's and did this once a year or so.
There actually are people looking for unlicenced TVs, but those are employees of a company collecting the fees for the state funded TV. They are neither functionarys, nor wearing uniforms nor are they representatives of the state. They are private individuals just collecting the fees, and, although at times a bit pushy (mercyless euphemism) if you have a TV but are not paying the fees, they neither can enter your apartment if you dont let them in valuntarily, nor do you even have to talk to them if you dont want. The GP if full of BS.