Forums | MacLife

Bat · 2009-08-14 5:14 pm

...never, nohow, no way.

Making one copy is stealing one copy, says MPAA

This week a landmark verdict was handed down to RealNetworks with deep implications for fair use and personal property in America. The ruling wasn't about filesharing, piracy, or malicious computer use. Rather, it was fight over whether users should be able to make copies of digital content that they legal own. And in a precedent-setting decision, the media companies beat a small software vendor and fair use advocates and laid down an imposing decision -- copying DVDs that you own is illegal.

The suit filed against RealNetworks centered around the company's RealDVD software, which ripped through protection technology to allow users to make digital copies of their legally-owned content. RealNetworks had plans to release a DVD drive/software bundle called Facet, which would make the process even quicker and easier.

The company's business model, though, was put to the legal test. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) filed suit against the company over alleged violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and breach of contract in a lawsuit filed last fall. The MPAA's assertion was simple -- consumers do not have the right to copy DVD movies -- ever.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15969

Fair Use... pfft. Cheery thought for the weekend.

Graphic Autist · 2009-08-14 5:22 pm

Is this really surprising?

Bat · 2009-08-14 5:44 pm

A bit, especially after the RIAA conceded that DRM was on the way out, with music downloads.

This doesn't just affect Real, or commercial software, or... it means you at home have no right to make a backup copy of a movie you bought on DVD in 1999. If you have one, you'd better destroy it, in theory.

Where's bratboy when you need him?

Hmm, maybe this is more suited to MT. Not much tech involved, lotsa poli.

ukimalefu · 2009-08-14 5:50 pm

yo ho!, yo ho!

Metacell · 2009-08-14 8:11 pm

Hmmm....what about copying it to VHS? Or burning a from TV? Suddenly I know a lot of criminals. Anyways, if you are not sharing, its unenforceable.

Mr. T · 2009-08-14 10:14 pm

Bat wrote:
A bit, especially after the RIAA conceded that DRM was on the way out, with music downloads.

This doesn't just affect Real, or commercial software, or... it means you at home have no right to make a backup copy of a movie you bought on DVD in 1999. If you have one, you'd better destroy it, in theory.

Where's bratboy when you need him?

Hmm, maybe this is more suited to MT. Not much tech involved, lotsa poli.

You rang?

It seems like DailyTech jumped the gun, a little bit.

Judge Patel wrote:
RealDVD makes a permanent copy of copyrighted DVD content and by doing so breaches its (Content Scramble System) License Agreement with the (DVD Copy Control Association, the group that oversees the protection of DVDs for the major Hollywood studios) and circumvents a technological measure that effectively controls access to or copying of the Studios' copyrighted content on DVDs.

This is about a breach of contract, and the ruling was made on that basis. My guess (and we don't know) is that RealNetworks signed an agreement which contained a provision which specifically forbade the company from making software that circumvents CSS protection. In the event that there was no such provision, this ruling would set the precedent that the distribution of DVD copying software is inherently illegal. Either way, I believe that RealNetworks is in the right, and I do not agree with the ruling.

That being said, this ruling has nothing to do with consumers or fair use. The headline "U.S. Court Rules Consumers Never Have the Right to Copy DVD Movies" is more than a stretch --it's a complete misinterpretation of the ruling, imo.

Last edited by Mr. T (2009-08-14 10:15 pm)

sturner · 2009-08-14 11:12 pm

What qualifies as permanent? Ripping to a new codec and placing on a harddrive? Placing it on an iTouch?

Bat · 2009-08-14 11:36 pm

This will be one to keep an eye on, if only for clarification. Other sources are sure to cover it. Ars should have something soon.

..The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) filed suit against the company over alleged violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and breach of contract in a lawsuit filed last fall. The MPAA's assertion was simple -- consumers do not have the right to copy DVD movies -- ever.

RealNetwork's defense was that the ARccOS and RipGuard protection technologies it circumvented weren't designed as anti-copying technologies, and further that anti-copying technology was built on CSS, something that RealNetworks held patents on and licensed. It argued that as it owned these rights, it had a right to alter the resulting software This defense fell apart when it was established that ARccOS and RipGuard are not, in fact, included in the CSS license.

So, Mr. T, the suit & ruling against were only partly based on contract law. The other part was about violating the DMCA, which says it is a crime to circumvent anti-copying technology.

The MPAA met the verdict with elation. MPAA Chairman and CEO Dan Glickman states, "We are very pleased with the court's decision. This is a victory for the creators and producers of motion pictures and television shows and for the rule of law in our digital economy. Judge Patel's ruling affirms what we have known all along: Real took a license to build a DVD-player and instead made an illegal DVD-copier."

When the MPAA is happy... that not good, in my experience.

I think the answer to both your questions at this point seems to be yes, sturner, if the source is a commercial DVD or other copy-protected source. (Damned DMCA, sponsored and pushed thru IIRC by Hollywood's tame Congersman).

Mr. T · 2009-08-15 1:36 am

You're quoting DailyTech's assessment of the situation, which, to me, seems slanted toward's their poorly-supported thesis. And later, you quote the MPAA --they're reputation preceeds them. There's two possibilities: Either DT got it right, and merely failed to provide sufficient support of their thesis, or DT got it wrong, and intentionally mislead readers to beef up ratings --Either way, it's bad journalism.

Back to your point, in situations like this, judges try to make decisions based on the most well-established law, if it can be done. Setting a precedent is (ideally) a last resort. In DT's only quote of Judge Patel, he specifically stressed the contract side of things, suggesting to me, that this was the basis for his decision. If it turns out that DT got it right, then they couldn't have chosen a worse quote as proof.

So, it'll be interesting to see what happens. IMO, this fails the "smell test," but who knows...

Bat · 2009-08-15 6:25 am

Mr. T wrote:
You're quoting DailyTech's assessment of the situation, which, to me, seems slanted toward's their poorly-supported thesis.

Please. At least a little due diligence; follow the links anyway.

A judge has ordered RealNetworks to suspend the sale of RealDVD, the controversial software that hands users the ability to copy and store films to a hard drive, according to a report published by NewTeeVee.com, a technology-news blog.

The film industry sought to prevent sales of RealDVD last week when it filed a lawsuit against RealNetworks. The Motion Picture Association of America accused Real of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and breach of contract.

According the story on NewTeeVee, the court wants sales to cease until Tuesday, when it has reviewed all the papers involved in the case. On Sunday evening, the RealDVD site notified visitors that because of the legal action taken by Hollywood, RealDVD was unavailable.

"Rest assure we will work diligently to provide you with software that allows you to make a legal copy of your DVDs," the post read.

Representatives from the MPAA and RealNetworks could not be reached Sunday.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10058574-93.html

And later, you quote the MPAA --they're reputation preceeds them.

I do because it certainly shows how they feel. I don't, but that's not germane.

but who knows...

Tell you what- you follow up on this and ease my 'workload.' tongue

It wouldn't be a first. Remember DVD X-Copy? That was pulled too, and never returned.

Last edited by Bat (2009-08-15 6:25 am)

Mr. T · 2009-08-15 9:16 am

Bat wrote:
The Motion Picture Association of America accused Real of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and breach of contract.

Right, but the judge is quoted on the contract argument, suggesting to me, that the DMCA was not a factor in his ruling. Even if he bought the DMCA argument, he shouldn't rule on it, if he finds the contract argument sufficient.

but who knows...
Tell you what- you follow up on this and ease my 'workload.'

And spoil your fun? I think not! tongue tongue

It wouldn't be a first. Remember DVD X-Copy? That was pulled too, and never returned.

True. Yet nobody jumped to the conclusion that consumers can't copy DVD's (or maybe they did, and everyone forgot). That's my main gripe about this article --It doesn't provide enough evidence in support of the author's interpretation of the ruling. If this were an English paper, he'd get a C-.

NightCougar_37 · 2009-08-31 4:15 am

Heh, hope they never catch onto "Put that cocktail down"... sneaky shhh, can't say real name, theyz might be watchin! sneaky

pirloui · 2009-08-31 10:20 am

yes, the "Put that cocktail down" people are good guys.

CG5Addict · 2009-08-31 11:12 am

This may be a dumb question but, I brought a movie called "Twilight" which had a disc which let you install it on your computer. My question is when I get my new Mac Pro will that mean I can't burn it to a DVD even tho they allowed me let me put it on a computer from with their permission? confused

sturner · 2009-08-31 3:03 pm

That's right, unless you want to be a "criminal".

Pariah · 2009-08-31 4:12 pm

We are all "criminals" if you use the RIAA/MPAA's logic.
Think you're not? Have you ever saved an image from a web site to your HDD? If you have you are a criminal.

Jokotai · 2009-08-31 8:54 pm

Pariah wrote:
We are all "criminals" if you use the RIAA/MPAA's logic.
Think you're not? Have you ever saved an image from a web site to your HDD? If you have you are a criminal.

With that argument, you could say that the newest version of Safari, by taking screen caps of every domain you visit, is violating the law... not to mention the image cache. Of course, these guys are so desperate to put down piracy that they're trying to espouse draconian measures in order to achieve their goals. Meanwhile, by increasing the availability of streaming video-on-demand, the industry is making headway into fixing the problem simply by providing their audience with what they wanted in the first place.

c_norris1 · 2009-10-03 12:08 pm

Jokotai wrote:
Meanwhile, by increasing the availability of streaming video-on-demand, the industry is making headway into fixing the problem simply by providing their audience with what they wanted in the first place.

As long as we have "free online file conversion" I think we'll be fine to "have it our way" for this too... can't, of course, say the real name, or we might lose that one too.

Hint: begins with a z, ends with an amzar

Last edited by c_norris1 (2009-10-03 12:10 pm)

Forums | MacLife

#1 2009-08-14 5:14 pm

Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#2 2009-08-14 5:22 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#3 2009-08-14 5:44 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#4 2009-08-14 5:50 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#5 2009-08-14 8:11 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#6 2009-08-14 10:14 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

Bat wrote:

Judge Patel wrote:

#7 2009-08-14 11:12 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#8 2009-08-14 11:36 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#9 2009-08-15 1:36 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#10 2009-08-15 6:25 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

Mr. T wrote:

#11 2009-08-15 9:16 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

Bat wrote:

#12 2009-08-31 4:15 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#13 2009-08-31 10:20 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#14 2009-08-31 11:12 am

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#15 2009-08-31 3:03 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#16 2009-08-31 4:12 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

#17 2009-08-31 8:54 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

Pariah wrote:

#18 2009-10-03 12:08 pm

Re: Federal Court Rules Consumers Have No Right to Copy DVD Movies

Jokotai wrote:

Board footer