DVD Ripping to be Illegal

[kickarse]

http://www.geeknewscentral.com/archives/006586.html

The RIAA is a biatch in the roughest meaning.

It´s almost like if you have nice rims on a car you own, you have to pay the company again to use them on another one of the cars you own. How ridiculous is that?

[jool]

I thought it already was illegal ever since the DMCA and it's European equivalent were enacted. It doesn't matter how weak the CSS system is, it is still a copy prevention system and those are illegal to circumvent.

[stingwray]

It´s almost like if you have nice rims on a car you own, you have to pay the company again to use them on another one of the cars you own. How ridiculous is that?

Pardon.

That is a joke.

[kickarse]

It´s almost like if you have nice rims on a car you own, you have to pay the company again to use them on another one of the cars you own. How ridiculous is that?

Pardon.

That is a joke.

Yes it's a joke lol...

[Guest ABC]

your allowd to copy for back-up?

btw, if if i buy a dvd (say in HMV) can i rip it in divx and put it on my vision:m?

[Sparda]

Ripping DVDs is illegal in the USA regardless of what you do with the content. Your pretty lucky it isn't illegal to have more then one person in the room while the DVD is playing.

[uber_tom]

Ripping DVDs is illegal in the USA regardless of what you do with the content. Your pretty lucky it isn't illegal to have more then one person in the room while the DVD is playing.

There is still time

[Guest ABC]

whats the law around software these days? .. for backup?

[Sparda]

Depends on the software writer. While it is illegal to copy the software (duh), some EULA also make it illegal to 'transfer' one copy of the same software to another computer despite the fact that the same copy is no longer been used on the computer it used to be installed on.

[Guest ABC]

say i want to back up my ps2 games? leggsal, do bqack-ups work on ps2's?

[Sparda]

In America that is illegal. You are once again violating the DMCA. Sony tend not to care as much as Microsoft though.

[Guest ABC]

sorry for the typing in my last post .. what was i on O.o ... awwah, so what if they burn in a fire? or something

[Sparda]

You are fucked

[VaKo]

I believe that you may be able to get away with non-deployed off-site backups, but this may only cover physical materials and nothing regarding esoterically defined software licenses. Does beg this question though: The RIAA claim you don't own the song, just a license to listen to the song. Does that license cover the physical copy of the song provided (ie the disk) or the right to listen to the song itself? Or: If Ms Banks buys a CD, which is then scratched beyond usage, can she be prosecuted for then downloading a copy of the CD via a 3rd party? What exactly are you being sold when you buy a game, movie or album? A product or a license to use the product?

The license vs. product argument is a difficult one, mainly because the media company's want to use both definitions at the same time: the product and the license, enforcing which ever one will work at that given moment.

[SomeoneE1se]

The DMCA is dieing(read:going to die) it all requires it to be handed down to the lowest courts to enforce it... and somewhere along the line some judge will see that this is not lawful and it will die. Only a matter or time.... that or media will die one or the other.

/me Holds up a CC sign

[cooper]

Does beg this question though: The RIAA claim you don't own the song, just a license to listen to the song.

And that is precisely why I don't buy music downloads.

You've given money for something intangible, locked away in a locked down format that is almost guaranteed to not be around in 4 years time (as they had to move on to something else since the encryption wasn't good enough, even though nobody managed to crack the old one so far. And because of the insecurity the players will drop support for the format and thus you are fucked. Hell, you can't even transfer your keys to a different machine legally, so once your machine EOLs so did the music you bought). The fact that it's intangible makes the 'you bought a license' meme less difficult to prove.

When I buy a CD at a concert (don't buy at the shop. Those guys take a cut like you wouldn't believe), I pay money and in return get the physical CD. If some record company asshole wants to claim that I bought a license, please point out where exactly I accepted this license. License is short for license agreement, and I didn't agree to shit. I didn't click accept, I didn't break a seal that read "if you break this, you accept these limitations". I gave money for a physical object that I consider to be of equal or higher value than the money I exchanged it for.

And I can do whatever the hell I want with it as long as I don't distribute, as that is a special right the band signed away to the record company. I had the exact problem VaKo described: When I moved to my new home, somehow one of my Dimmy Borgir CDs that I bought and paid for got scratched to a point where the regular CD player began to claim that it wasn't an audio disk anymore. So I downloaded another copy, burned it and kept that along with the original. And I don't feel in the least bit bad about that.

By that same logic, I also feel that people who bought an LP (you know, those big black things) are entitled to downloads of the tracks of that particular LP. As long as you can show up at a record company with an original LP, you should get that right. The argument against that is that record company assholes claim that the CD is better. Personally I feel that indeed the recording of a song placed on a CD is superior to that exact same recording placed on an LP, though I have friends with STACKS upon STACKS of LPs that would take violent offence at the mere thought of this. "Sacrilege!" would probably be uttered a number of times.

Still, even if the CD recording can be considered superior, should that really be a sufficient reason to deny a customer access to that same recording on a different medium? You CAN rip an LP to MP3, you know...

[Guest K1u]

[sarcasm]we should listen and follow these rules bcuz we need to be ethical[/sarcasm]

[Arsenic]

I just don't get proof and ownership hoopla...is it our responsibility to keep records or theirs...

What constitutes as proof that you bought the recored or movie? The physical disk? The covers from the case? Or do I need to save, photocopy, and file every receipt I ever get...not to mention having to go back to the headquarters of every store that I have ever bought an album from, and request a copy of a receipt to cover the stuff I have lost, or thrown away the receipt to in the past.

What if 'THEY' bust in to my house tomorrow and say that the burned copy of that sublime CD laying in my room is going to cost me $3000 unless I can prove that I have bought a copy... What if I don't know where the CD is, because I lost it, but have the case... hell, what if the original copy is a friend's....or what if my original copy is AT my friend's house and now I'm going to get fined....

[cooper]

Well, unless I'm mistaken, having an illegal copy in your posession is NOT illegal. The reasoning here is that you can argue that you paid someone the full amount because you thought it was in fact an original. When you bought a stolen car, and the police pull you over, the worst they can do is take away the car to return it to its rightful owner. The money you spent is gone, but nothing more (assuming of course you can make it reasonable that it wasn't in fact you that stole the car in the first place).

What people are being busted for is DISTRIBUTION. So if you had multiple illegal copies of the same disk in your home during a bust, "THEY" could argue that you had them with intent to sell, and that last bit is what they'll get you on. Back in the Napster / Grokster / KaZaA days you could cover your ass by setting the program to not share anything from your own harddisk.

One could argue that the same thing goes for torrents, but with those programs unless you're sharing you won't get decent speeds for the coveted download.

[Mr_Mischif]

When you bought a stolen car, and the police pull you over, the worst they can do is take away the car to return it to its rightful owner. The money you spent is gone, but nothing more (assuming of course you can make it reasonable that it wasn't in fact you that stole the car in the first place).

The problem with that is that cops here in the US are charging people with theft BY RECEIVING. I'm gonna try to become a canadian resident later in my life.

[VaKo]

And in the UK, if you buy a stolen car you are charged with receiving stolen property, regardless of any ignorance of the cars status. I'm sure you can argue against it in court, but your still charged with it when arrested. So if your pulled over in a stolen car, expect to spend at the very least a night in the cells.

[wetelectric]

Fair use statutes in the UK allow for copying dvd's, cd,tapes etc...

[VaKo]

Fair use statutes in the UK allow for copying dvd's, cd,tapes etc...

No they don't actually. Its technically illegal to copy a CD you own.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/10/30/co...aw_change_call/

[Kateweb]

Fair use statutes in the UK allow for copying dvd's, cd,tapes etc...

No they don't actually. Its technically illegal to copy a CD you own.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/10/30/co...aw_change_call/

Oh how nice. I copy all my CD's and keep the originals in the cases and tote around my Copys I don't care if a 10¢ get scrashed all to hell but the $20 disk i do care. I hate how all this DIMCA stuff only hurts the consumer.

[take it take]

Ripping DVDs is illegal in the USA regardless of what you do with the content. Your pretty lucky it isn't illegal to have more then one person in the room while the DVD is playing.

I don't think that's not entirely true. Circumventing copy-protection is illegal, but not all DVDs have copy-protection. Plus, I've seen DVDs with Creative Commons Licensing and they do allow redistribution and copies of its content.