In Response To Restraining Order, Real Networks Pulls RealDVD
eldavojohn writes "RealNetworks' product that allows one to copy a DVD containing a movie has been pulled. You may recall us discussing RealDVD and its legal implications." According to the linked BBC report, "RealNetworks — the firm behind the software — has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software [sic]. Six major movie studios jointly sued the company on 30 September — the day the software was launched."
Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?
If there isn't, can I write one and get sued ? At least I'd get my name in the papers...
See? The big companies CAN work together when they want to. I'm honestly surprised that 6 major movie companies could work together without backstabbing each other. On a related note: When it comes to DVD ripping... just use "Handbrake" (google it. open-source ripping software)
I mean, have you ever *used* a Real(TM) product? Maybe the film studios only want to protect us...
I can count several other program doing exactly the same job and there are some which are not freeware but can be bought. Probably only because they got too much attention?
just use an old copy if DVD decrypter floating around and Nero
to copy DVDs to other DVS's or mp4 files
Handbrake is a front end over xvid and x264 encoders so you get either an MPEG-2 ASP (DiVX) or H264 AVC file from the process. Depending on your target device you might want to choose one or the other or fiddle with the other settings but the defaults are pretty sane if you don't know what you are doing.
Sure the process might skip supplementals and there may be edge cases with alternate tracks or subtitles that require more effort but x264 is an excellent encoder and the quality is very good. I really don't see why anybody would want to use RealDVD when it DRMs the resulting movie in the process.
This is Sauron versus Palpatine. Is there a good guy? Don't think so.
Huh? You mean ignore a restraining order? That would be totally suicidal. Coming out with the product in the first place is pretty ballsy, and I think Real should be congratulated for that move.
I'll stick with DVD Decrypter and DVD2One, then.
I'd be more than happy to have a DRM-locked archive on my external hard disk, still with the content protection intact, but oh no, I have to reach behind me, search through the 200 or so properly licensed DVD's stacked in the bookcase behind me for the one I want, open the case, find that I put it back in the wrong box / brother borrowed it and it's not there, go hunting around the house for it, find it under a stack of papers on my desk, and finally get to watch the damn thing 45 minutes after I wanted to, when I more than likely no longer have time.
Sometimes, I think they just do it out of spite. They do it because they can.
I don't think i'll buy any more DVD's. It's too much hassle.
1. (DVD) -> DVD Decrypter -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.
2. (BD) -> DVDFAB -> TsMuxeR -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.
3. (CD) -> Exact Audio Copy -> FLAC -8 -> Done.
Next question.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Because someone thought
is grammatically incorrect and wanted to say "The BBC screwed up, we're just directly quoting them".
Whether it's correct or not, it doesn't sound quite right to me.
I'm guessing it's because it's the audio home recording act and this is video.
Having owned a home audio CD recorder for many years, I can tell you that the AHRA was an interesting compromise. Home audio CD recorders do not accept standard CD-R media, but require special "audio" or "music" CD-R media that contains some encoded information that tells the recorder that it's an "audio CD-R."
The system also incorporated a technical mechanism that allowed for only first-generation bit-for-bit digital copying--you could make a bit-for-bit copy of a commercial original, but you couldn't copy the copy. (The machines, however, make a really excellent analog copy of a digital copy).
It was, I thought, really acceptable. It made casual copying convenient, you paid a quite reasonable amount for doing it, you were paying for the copy and not "pirating."
Manufacturers of audio CD-R media are required to pay a small amount of money to an agency that divvies it up between artists and music publishers.
One of the things that pushed me over the edge into a raging anti-RIAA crank was that when they started fooling around with "copy-protected" CDs, they made them uncopiable in audio home CD recorders.
In other words, here I was, an honest user, paying for every copy and keeping my end of the deal, and there they were, reneging on the deal.
I'm now utterly opposed to DRM because I'm convinced that the publishers cannot be trusted to limit themselves to enforcing rights that they actually possess. When allowed to use technical means to enforce their rights, they always overreach. They do not possess a six-year-old's sense of basic fair play.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
"Oops, someone broke into our network and stole the source code to RealDVD. Guess it's out of our hands now!"
Who in the UK doesn't have a region-ignoring player? You need better educated friends, perhaps.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I blame your legal system if you live somewhere you actually need to add "The foregoing is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer" to a forum post to safeguard yourself against litigation.
Perhaps there is an ulterior motive? Is this some collaborative ploy to get DVD fair-use copying to be officially declared illegal?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, every time you use a licensed player to play a DVD, you (legally) circumvent or bypass the encryption (otherwise, you could not view the DVD you paid for)
It comes down to the term "circumvent", which is defined in the DMCA as:
"...to `circumvent a technological measure' means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner..."
I call your attention to the phrase "descramble a scrambled work...without the authority of the copyright owner" in the above quote.
Does viewing a DVD under Linux, for example, using a non-approved decrypter, constitute circumvention, or, have you, by virtue of your purchase of the DVD, received an implicit license from the copyright owner to view the content? Did you receive a license to view the content *only* on licensed playback devices? If so, where is that restriction listed on the media you purchased?
Going to a gun fight with a knife is pretty ballsy too, but I'm not sure "congratulations" are the first thought that would be offered to such an act.
Inside or outside 21 feet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I love the phrases "Congress banned..." and "Congress did not prohibit...". Congress would be quite interested to hear that. Congress is made of people, after all, and they almost never have the tiniest clue as to how their laws will be interpreted by trained nit-pickers. The idea that they did any of this intentionally is farcical. A more realistic phrase would be something like "Due to a bizarre, completely unanticipated technicality in over-analysed legalese, we are not allowed to ..."
This reminds me of literary analysis. People will get PhDs writing about what some 300-year-old poem really meant, but they never think to ask the poet (ouija boards have come a long way...). Only in this case people are actually affected by this literarary masturbation.
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
Am I the only one who thought that link would lead to some sort of gun that shot knives?
...
No one?
Slashdot is a pretty cool guy eh posts dupes and doesn't afraid of anything.
"No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
That's awesome then. All we need to do is train monkeys in decryption techniques and we're set!
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face