Can You Be Sued For Helping Clients Rip DVDs?

DRMer writes "CE Pro has a series of stories that tries to untangle the legalities of DVD ripping in light of the recent RealDVD announcement from RealNetworks. In one of the stories, EFF Attorney Fred von Lohmann discusses the potential liability of those who resell or install DVD-ripping machines (the courts have yet to rule). Another article provides a rather amusing look at how manufacturers justify the legality of their products. Here's one example: 'We are just like Microsoft Vista that does not have a CSS [Content Scramble System] license.'"

Comments

You can be sued for anything

[JohnHegarty]

You can be sued for anything, the question is can you be successfully sued

In other news

[causality]

Maybe we should sue Craftsman for making hammers and chainsaws, since those might be used as murder weapons. Or perhaps Raid for making bug spray, since it could conceivably be used to poison someone. Or architects for designing tall buildings since a suicidal person might jump off of them. How about manufacturers of ropes or chains, since those might be used to hang somebody?

Why do we collectively accept this madness when it's copyright that we don't accept otherwise? There are legitimate reasons to rip a DVD, and there are also uses of a DVD ripper that violate copyright. A hammer can help to build a house to shelter a family, or it can be used by a criminal to bludgeon someone to death. In principle, I see no fundamental difference here.

Re:Of course

[compro01]

With the current US system, you lose practically automatically as you're out a reasonably large amount of money in legal fees. Sure, you can counter-sue for your costs, but that could very well be several years down the road.

This is why the RIAA's sue-them-all-and-sort-it-out-later campaign has enjoyed such success. the cost of the settlement is significantly less than the cost of fighting it in court, regardless of the validity of their claims.

Re:Yes

[gstoddart]

It's called aiding and abetting and it's a crime.

Absent a court ruling to back that up, it isn't anything. It's a hypothetical because there is no case law to establish anything.

Note that copyright infringement is a civil matter. So, aiding and abetting doesn't apply.

Maybe if you did it on a commercial scale, for profit, you could make that point. Helping people to install software to perform what is considered to be fair use ... that has yet to be determined.

Would I want to make a business out of selling this kind of stuff without legal precedent? Nope. But, neither does your summary decision that it's a aiding and abetting a crime have anything to support it.

Cheers

Re:Why risk it.

[jason.sweet]

You should tape the cd under the seat of a park bench and tell the client to find it there.

That way you cover yourself, and get a repeat customer. That Tom Clancy shit is fun - who wouldn't come back?

Re:Yes

[lysergic.acid]

how is it illegal to take something you purchased, and rightfully own, and convert it to a format that better suits your purposes. if i want to rip all my DVDs and CDs onto my hard drive, that is my prerogative. as long as i'm not distributing them illegally, it falls completely within fair use.

just like, if i have a child who is blind, and i want to take all the books i've bought her and record myself reading them aloud so that she may listen to the books when i'm not around, that is not a crime--not yet, at least.

Re:right vs wrong and legal vs illegal

[mcgrew]

I would say that in this case, #1 is subjective, #2 is not. The law is written down, if a judge has ruled that the law is legal then it's legal. For instance, the SCOTUS has said that when it comes to copyright, "limited" means whatever congress says it means, despite all logic and reason.

A movie studio would disagree with me on whether there is harm; I would say "no", he would say "yes" (althogh the MPAA said through its spokesthing that "the VCR is to the movies industry as Jack the Ripper was to women"; obviously Mr. Valenti was a shortsighted fool for saying that).

Legal != "right" and illegal != "wrong". Adultery causes great harm; nothing in my life ever came close to hurting me as much as my ex-wife's adultery. You will never convince me it isn't wrong. Yet adultery is perfectly legal, and the only bearing it has on a divorce is it is grounds for divorce. yet if I have a joint in my pocket it harms no one, yet having a joint in my pocket is illegal.

Re:Yes

[Rude Turnip]

There is no such law that allows for one backup. I can make 100 copies of CDs that I bought and go skeet shooting. I am only breaking the law when I distribute those copies to others.

Re:Yes

[Mashiki]

No?

Unfair laws make criminals of everyone.

Re:Yes

[deander2]

that is still illegal. skeet shooting is like bittorrent - distributing little chunks of files over a broad area, but never the whole file at once! =P