Students complain about unfair DVD restrictions

Today we came across an interesting article in a student online newspaper called The Phoenix, (Swarthmore College's Online Newspaper). It's not uncommon to browse through our forums and hear many complaints about copy control and the restrictions placed on us by the Movie Industry concerning importing DVDs. On this particular College Campus, there is an entertainment club called "Film of Fury", which is dedicated to showing martial arts movies.

Matt Singleton, treasurer of Films of Fury explained to the author that restrictions placed on DVDs can make it a daunting task to import a definitive version of Fist of Legend, a classic Jet Li movie. While the movie is available to buy in the United States, it is missing several minutes of the movie including an opium scene which is vital to character development. The subtitles also supplied with the U.S. version are apparently less understandable than those supplied with the Taiwan version of the movie.

However, the complaints from the group about importing the DVD concern the copy protection mechanisms on the disc, including Content Scrambling System (CSS) and Region Coding which is designed to ensure that DVDs can only be playable in certain regions of the world where they have been bought. Fortunately, mainly because of Norwegian hacker, Jon Lech Johansen, these restrictions can be removed from the DVDs making them viewable in other regions and you no longer are required to use a "licensed" DVD player.

Of course, Hollywood was and still is furious over DeCSS and other software as it means their control on importing DVDs from other countries can be beaten. However, use of DeCSS and other tools capable of circumventing copy protection mechanisms on DVDs is illegal in the United States due to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). So playing a legally purchased DVD on certain players in the world simply doesn't work due to the Region Coding, yet it is still illegal in the U.S. to remove copy protections from your legally purchased DVDs.

So in conclusion, this is simply a bunch of complaints that we hear at AfterDawn very frequently, but it's an interesting example of how copy protection puts unfair restrictions on consumers that Hollywood depends on to stay alive.

Source:
The Phoenix Online

Written by: James Delahunty @ 15 Sep 2005 7:53

Advertisement - News comments available below the ad

63 comments

gsuscrazy

im first? i'll be damned..

anyways, thats so sad for those poor college students, not being able to watch their opium scene. tragic yes? Come on, who cares. There are bigger issues at hand right now then arizona students not copying there Jet Li film...like porn. or the lack of gay midget mud wrestling + bearded woman porn. This is mind numbing, its like beating a dead horse.

15.9.2005 09:02 #1

GrayArea

"...copy protection puts unfair restrictions on consumers that Hollywood depends on to stay alive."

Dela, Dela, Dela...
I think it's fair to say that hollywood would be alive and well without these ill concieved restrictions. Sure, the top level execs and majority shareholders might not be quite as filthy rich, but they would still be in business. The music biz has not had any copy "protection" on audio CDs until relativly recently and in spite of the rank lies and propaganda they spew they are making more money than ever.

IMHO hollywood REALLY needed these restrictions to "stay alive" they would not be unfair. These mean spirited restrictions were based in greed to try to squeeze out those last little drops of profit. They do nothing but unnesessarily and unfairly penalize honest consumers, destroy fair use rights, and do nothing to stop real counterfeiting.

Dela, I know I'm being a bit nit picky, but lots of people read this stuff. Keep up the good work.

15.9.2005 09:41 #2

nonoitall

I wish someone would sue the Hollywood creeps and put and end to this crap. Wasn't there a guy not long ago who was complaining because he wanted to copy a DVD to VHS so he could play it at his grandma's house but couldn't because of Macrovi$ion?

Car companies don't put special devices in cars to stop people from speeding, or to stop them from driving on the wrong side of the road, or to prevent them from driving drunk. All of these things are far more dangerous than copying a movie or a CD. Just goes to show that money is way more important to the courts than human life.

15.9.2005 09:53 #3

Dela

GrayArea, nice piece, altho you'vbe misunderstood me ;-) i mean hollywood depends on consumers to stay alive ;-) not copy protection, it depends on copy protection to make even more billions and to help keep the dictatorship-like reign over the movie industry ;-)

15.9.2005 10:01 #4

mrchub

You miss the whole point, gsuscrazy (not to mention you expose your ignorance...Swarthmore isn't in Arizona, Einstein).

15.9.2005 10:12 #5

GrayArea

Ahhh, now I get it. Thanks for the clarification. Guess I was a bit fuzzy this morning cuz re-reading it the meaning is pretty clear. All that ranting for nothing. Sigh...

15.9.2005 15:20 #6

j0j081

I don't see how region protection makes the movie industry anymore money. Isn't it moreso a hidden censorship of sorts? For instance, the dvd "The Professional" has some scenes cut out of the US version that are IN the European version because whoever thought they wouldn't sit well with American audiences.

15.9.2005 15:56 #7

gsuscrazy

ya, a guy named Mr. Chub is going to put me in my place? YOU miss the point, i saw this thread, and simply replied because it was a virgin thread, you think i care enough to look for a "swarthmore" college? MY point is simple, who fuggin cares, people can cry about it all they want, but its VERY VERY easy to understand, YOU DONT LIKE IT, YOU DONT BUY IT. if someone says "here is a car, dont drive it over 55 or i will sue you" then im not going to buy it. AND SECONDLY, this shizz wasnt an issue until wordwide piracy exploded. There wasnt bloodhunger lawyers waiting to sue everyone, but since 99 million little kids download there favorite cd's and movies now, its a problem. If i was in the Entertainment industry i would feel the same way. If you owned a company that sold product X, and some kids outside your building started giving product X away to everyone that walked by, would you smile, and say "thank goodness"..no you wouldnt. Macro, and whatever else provided to pirates is wrong, its MAIN intent is theft, You wanna play foreign dvd's? buy a foreign dvd player.

and who really cares, either way? its a fuggin movie, not life and death.

15.9.2005 17:10 #8

diabolos

Ok, you could look at it that way. But I wouldn't. If some one was directly causing me harm via loss of profits, I would find a way to beat them at there own game. Thats what the Entertanment industry is doing. The problem is thier not beatting anyone. They keep making things more and more difficult for newbs. All you need to do is a google search and you can figure out how to start your own piracy ring! Ripping, Burning, Sharing, ect...

I think most would agree that it is time to move on and co-exist. In terms of technology, they need to find a way for P2P to thrieve and grow while at the same time achieving there profit goals. I have no problem with people making money if they do buisness in a honest way.

Micro-vision has been around since VHS and is easy and (for now anyway) legal to circumvent in the name of fair-use! Buy one of these:
http://www.videoguys.com/sima.htm#godvd

Ced

15.9.2005 18:18 #9

Chris1000

An easy way for them to make money would be to charge prices that people could actually afford. $20 for a DVD is a little more than I am willing to pay out, even for the latest Harry Potter movie.
I'll wait until it is in the bargain bin, or rent & rip. My local BlockBuster is charging $7 to rent a DVD, and that is about the price I believe DVD's should cost, so I see it as "Hey, I'm giving them their money, back off!"

The copy protection schemes are a JOKE. EVERY SINGLE ONE has been cracked, whether it be on CD's, DVD's, cassettes, whatever. It's just a black hole for money and apparently the MPAA's and RIAA's of the world are too dumb to realize this.
I'm betting that two weeks after Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are released, they will have their copy protections hacked and it will be possible to copy them to hard drives.

15.9.2005 20:31 #10

sisph

2 weeks? I really don't think that the encryption on BLU-ray and HD-DVD could be broken that fast. 2 weeks after DVDs came out there was nothing you could use to break encryption until DVD jon came out with DeCss, if it wasn't for him God only knows how long it would take. And even if you could rip the DVD, HDDs didn't have as much space as we have today. If you had the ability to burn media was so expensive that you really couldn't afford it.

I think you're gonna be seeing the same thing with BLU ray and HD-DVD. Wait a while for someone to break the encryption, for burners to come out, and media to cheapen.

15.9.2005 22:24 #11

nonoitall

Yes, but prior to DVDs there wasn't really any need to crack encryption. Now a lot of smart people have come out of the woodwork and there is more of a focus on digital decryption. I think the next-gen discs will be cracked quicker than DVDs were.

15.9.2005 23:37 #12

gsuscrazy

man, i swear. Its THEIR PRODUCT, not yours, what dont you understand? they dont want to sell it to you for 7 dollars, thats the same as not wanting to pay 20 thousand dollars for a new car, so you steal one. or borrow one from someone and take it to a chop shop, its not your decision, its not your choice, its not your movie. Abide by what they ask, or dont complain, and dont steal. i mean, what dont you get? so what, they overcharge, so does my local diner, but i dont go steal food, my gas station is way to expensive, im not heading down there and ripping off gas....think about it...

16.9.2005 02:05 #13

webwise

Yes. But when you buy your gas or you buy your food you actually buy the rights to it.

No food retailer says ' I will sell you this food as long as you don't eat it'. No garage says 'I will sell you this gas as long as you only use it in a Ford'.

The entertainment industry wants its cake, it also wants you to have yours. But it wants to tell YOU how to eat it.

16.9.2005 07:00 #14

DMW

I'm not gonna say much about the prices, because I and many others do believe the prices ARE too expensive!! I'm thankfull that places like CDWOW are still around to give discounted prices.

gsuscrazy, do you just like ranting or do you actually read all the post? Mrchub was right, by reading your posts it seems you DO miss the point.
Quote:There are bigger issues at hand right now then arizona students not copying there Jet Li filmIt's not about copying a film, it's about watching a film the way it was meant to be seen by the makers.
If they buy the region 1 version, they won't get this, but if buy the region 6(maybe 6, not sure) then it won't work on their players. Only way round it is with DeCSS, then they are breaking the law?!?!

Won't bother quoting your other posts, but you seem to go on a lot about theft and blatent piracy, but the fact is, these guys don't want to steal it, they want to buy it!
It's not theft in anyway, but the way the bull***t laws are made, they have to break them to watch the original designed film.....unless of course they buy an imported player, which WOULD make DVDs hellishly expensive!!! :)

My personal opinion is that these guys should just buy the import movie and rip it, but I guess if they wanna stay inside the dumb laws they can't!!!

Just sucks in general.

16.9.2005 09:43 #15

vidserv

Buy a region free DVD player. They are all over eBay. Then you can play anything you want. Of course, the unit converts PAL color standards to the U.S. NTSC plus bypasses region encoding. On a brand that I am very familiar with you can change the deck to the region that corresponds to the disc's region. That overcomes some of the additional encoding that companies like RCA Columbia put on some of their discs that would recognize a "region free" DVD player and not play. No need to worry about copy protection since it is not an issue with a region free DVD player

16.9.2005 10:45 #16

kragshot

"Man, i swear. Its THEIR PRODUCT, not yours, what dont you understand? they dont want to sell it to you for 7 dollars, thats the same as not wanting to pay 20 thousand dollars for a new car, so you steal one. or borrow one from someone and take it to a chop shop, its not your decision, its not your choice, its not your movie. Abide by what they ask, or dont complain, and dont steal. i mean, what dont you get? so what, they overcharge, so does my local diner, but i dont go steal food, my gas station is way to expensive, im not heading down there and ripping off gas....think about it..."

Man, that's an inaccurate analogy and I'll use your own example to explain it.

Yeah, it's their product, but I won't go to jail or get sued by GM or Ford, if I decide to let my buddy use my car or even just give it to him.
Once I buy a car, or any other mass-produced product, it's mine to do with as I please. If I decide to have a "let everyone drive my car for free day" it's my choice.
This is all a spinoff of the old neighborhood record/tape clubs. You know the one...where a group of friends decide to share the cost of music. When a new album is released, one friend buys the album, and then he allows his buddies to record a tape of it. Then the next person buys the next album and shares it, and so on....

My problem here is that they are not attacking the genuine pirates. They are just picking on the little guys. A buddy of mine got dragged into court for selling mixtapes, not pirated CDs and got his a$$ sued. However at the same time (it was a simultaneous trial with 4 defendants) there were three other genuine CD pirates who had tons of money and they got off scott free and are still selling pirated music to this day.

They are just thugs, going harassing and bullying old ladies, college students, and folks who they know do not have the financial support to fight back.

So don't cry foul over this business. Besides, I'm sure that everyone here knows that the RIAA gets a piece of every piece of recordable audio media sold, right?

They are not the poor, starving and hurt businessmen that they claim to be.

16.9.2005 11:58 #17

gsuscrazy

man, i cant think of another way to say this, ive tried being very nice, but you guys are not seeing the trees for forest.

Is it your product? did you make the movie/cd? NO. THEY did, meaning they can make whatever ridiculous claims they want on the product. YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO BUY/STEAL THEIR PRODUCT, LAW DOESNT SAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE THEIR ITEM DOES IT????

as for the gas in the car analogy, you twisted it up, think about this, If I buy a DVD, i can lend it to whoever i want, free of charge, they can borrow it, watch it, hell i can even give it to them to keep..just like a car. The problem is that WE CANT duplicate a car, we cant give 10 of our friends the same car to use or have without buying 10 cars, so why should it be different for dvds?

I am not a fan of the RIAA, or MPaa, but i understand their point of view. 99 % of all use of hack tools are made for illegal distribution, or putting on the internet. why shouldnt they be mad?

And as for "legal rights" i dont have a legal right to go and duplicate money, because i feel i dont get paid enough at work. That is a crime.

I cant duplicate stock certificates because I feel that my stock is worth more, that is a crime.

So why should i be able to duplicate movies/cd's because i think they are to expensive?

and as for the kids not being able to watch a foreign movie without hacking the dvd..BOO HOO, those poor oppressed college kids, whatever will they do? maybe perhaps watch it in their computers? buy a region free DVD, or simply, not support the company who produced that dvd, and decline to purchase ANY copy.

but under any circumstance, does it allow someone to go against the wishes of the manufacturer just because "you dont agree". its live and let live. Why push it?

16.9.2005 13:41 #18

nonoitall

gsuscrazy, you're missing the point. The movie industry is completely crippling their products before they sell them. They are so terrified of letting people actually own what they buy that they will actually prevent many people from using the product altogether - even (especially) paying customers. A car owner can't tell you that you can only drive your car in the US - that would be ridiculous - you PAID for the car so you OWN the car so you can do whatever you want with it. The reason the movie and music industries are so mad is because they are becoming obsolete. New technology means more freedom, not less freedom and they are unwilling to grow up and face it.

16.9.2005 14:19 #19

gsuscrazy

you know, your right. so everyone steal anything they dont agree with then. right? i mean forgive me if i dont comprehend your logic, but isnt that what your saying, its ok to steal because you dont like how they run their business, and if ford made a car ONLY for the US, its ok to steal it? because thats not fair? i mean, isnt that what it boils down to, where instead of just not buying a product, you are saying its ok to steal it? because you dont agree with them?

16.9.2005 15:00 #20

kragshot

Not at all.

Theft is wrong. However, the bigger issue here is control of an industry, a technology, and cultural expression. But before I go into that, allow me to say again that once you buy a product, it is yours.

Currency does not truly belong to a person, it is an issued certificate saying that the government will back the person who holds the certificate for X amount of the standard available for barter or trade.

However, when you purchase something with money, that item is yours.

Not rent, not lease, purchase. They want to change that.

The problem here is that MPAA and the RIAA are trying to have their cake and eat it too. Nobody of any worth truly supports piracy. However, there is a difference between piracy and fair use and both of these organizations are trying alter the definitions of the two in their favor.

Hell, if the people who you are defending had their way, you would have to pay a fee every time you wanted to listen to the same song. You would purchase the song and the media it was recorded on would only have a lifespan ranging from hours to days. Then the media would degrade and you would have to buy the song all over again if you wanted to hear it after the media degraded.

If you factor what is happening with broadcast radio (and what they are trying to do to internet webcasting), then where are we at?

Furthermore, if you take a really good look at what they are doing, the RIAA and MPAA are opening up a huge can of worms by stating that a manufacturer can be held liable for illegal acts performed with a product that they made.

Two words: wrongful death.

Back to the car analogy- so based upon their logic, if somebody uses a car in a crime, then the automobile manufacturer can and should be held liable because their technology made the opportunity possible for the crime to be committed.

A totally fallatious argument, at best.

As an artist, yes I want to get paid for my work, but I don't want to rip somebody off either. Give me what it's worth...in this digital age, a single song should not cost more than one dollar and an album should not cost more than six to ten. Most of the cost for a contemporary album is pocket padding.

Heck with it...I'm spent.

Either you'll get it or you won't.

Either way, you have a good weekend, guy.

Go in peace.

16.9.2005 15:58 #21

kkjer

I agree and disagree with copying dvd's. I think that copying dvd's to give away or sell should be illegal, but copying a DVD that one legally purchased to protect an investment should be legal. Case in point, I have a very large DVD collection, all legally purchased, but if I want to copy a couple to take with me while I am traveling, I should be able to. Insurance and airlines won't cover this stuff if damaged or stolen while traveling. I know, I lost several hundred dollars worth of dvd's, that where stolen from my luggage while traveling and all I got from the airline and my insurance company wasa big I'm sorry.

16.9.2005 16:14 #22

gsuscrazy

kragshot-

you make good points, you really do, but what im saying is, no one has to buy that cd, movie, or whatever. I am not supporting "them" in my statements, I am simply saying, If i wanted to sell you my personal cd, for too much money, and put unfair restrictions on it, like you cant listen to it more then 4 times a day, you simply wouldnt buy it..right?

same thing. Dont agree? dont buy it. Either that company will be forced to change to compensate for the financial losses, or go out of business. Either way, that should be your recourse. deny them your business. Support artists Like Korn, and others who refuse to follow and abide by unfair rules.

but if you buy an album, upload it to a torrent, and then say "that will teach them" all you are doing is becoming the problem, whereas you could boycott labels tied to the RIAA, and then become the good guys, reflecting negative press onto the company that unfairly treats its members, rather then them playing the "poor us, we are being robbed".

but its a waste of time, there are those that understand how to protest a product, and others who decide to pirate it.

16.9.2005 16:42 #23

JXP2307

@ gsuscrazy

Just got a simple question. Do you rip DVD's?

I got that simple answer right here.... sure you do.

A simple aD search on username not only reveals that you have asked advice on how to rip DVD's, you have also given advice on how to accomplish this task... If I remember correctly, don't you "Backup" all your movies to VCD? hmmmmm...

Thief...

16.9.2005 16:50 #24

kkjer

No, I don't rip dvd's, but since I got ripped off I am very tempted to do it. I am in a financial situation where I could launch a very good legal defense if any agency tried to charge me with some mickey mouse law about duplicating private property. There is tons of case law in contiguous fields, and I feel that any individual who copied his own personally purchased property, regardless of copyrighted, copy protected or whatever, would prevail on a court of law, as long as he was preserving and protecting his own legally purchased property.

16.9.2005 17:19 #25

gsuscrazy

yes, i can make vcd's, dvds, svcds, and just about every other facet of duplication. let me ask you this, what is the date on that post?

where do i say "I stole xxxx dvd" It is very simple, I am glad my arguement led you to searching all my threads about the topic, obviously you cannot defend your actions, so you "dig up" something on someone else, very good, soon we may be voting for you in an election. Point of the matter is this, it is wrong. I do not duplicate anything else anymore, previously, i thought it was ok it you could dup something as long as it wasnt readily distributed, I was wrong. I threw away my vcd's and svcd's that i had no right to own. I dont dup movies anymore, and ive realized that it is wrong...

hey, maybe, now that I have...someone else might too.

16.9.2005 17:58 #26

mistian

why is everyone fighting about 'stealing' dvds, didn't these kids buy the import DVD.

16.9.2005 19:13 #27

cchonez

gsuscrazy -
Thank you! Rationalize all you want, kids, but it's theft. YOU didn't envision it, YOU didn't spend YOUR time, YOUR energy, and nearly YOUR sanity on it. YOU didn't CREATE it. That's why copyrights exist: to protect something that was created, not by you, by another. Theft is Theft!

Oh, wait, didn't the movie industry just "rip you off"? Didn't like it, did you? Just as we who create don't like what you do!

16.9.2005 19:46 #28

sneakygc

what a passioned arguement, im coming out of the closet, i copy purchased dvd's i also rent/rip borrow/rip and am
seeking 12 step program to rid me of my DC++ addiction, my name is sneaky and i have a problem...

enjoy your weekend all, drink beer mow yard be happy :-)

16.9.2005 20:29 #29

JXP2307

Rationalize all YOU want. The point is you did it.

I am glad you are so enlightened.

I am not quite there yet. I am under the impression that if I have bought it, I own it. Am I wrong in that assumption? Of course not. It is mine. I did buy it. How is it stealing if I already bought it?

Just like you threw your Dvd's in the trash, I can copy them, kick them, spit on them, whatever. I can and WILL do as I please with my property.

I OWN THEM.

Bottomline is this. You also took food from those poor hollywood executives mouths. Shame, Shame.

Don't preach at us for what you yourself have done.

16.9.2005 20:33 #30

gsuscrazy

your mistake in that ASSumption, is that the dvd's that i copyed into SVCD format was not for profit, distribution, or personal gain, it was a misinterpretation of what was allowed, and what wasnt.

the lines are drawn now, no one will hear another side.

i believe you, so i am "buying" your arguement..

now i am shitting all over your arguement, throwing it away, and realizing how pathetic it is...and i can do that, because its my arguement, i bought it.

16.9.2005 21:46 #31

gsuscrazy

attack PETA too, because if you buy an animal, you should be able to rape and kill it, heck, i mean, its yours right? you bought it?

and if you buy a gun, you should be able to shoot it wherever and whenever at whoever you want, heck why not? you bought it, its yours to do what you want with right?

and you can also buy land, why not turn that land into a whorehouse, i mean, why not? you bought it, its yours right?

see, THERE ARE LAWS THAT GOVERN EVERYTHING,REGARDLESS IF YOU OWN SOMETHING OR NOT YOU ABIDE BY THOSE RULES OR FACE CONSEQUENCE PERIOD.

just because you "own" something, doesnt give you the right to do WHATEVER you want with it, you still have to abide by the laws that govern your state/county/country/province because without law, someone would break into your house, beat you to an inch of your life with a baseball bat...and it would be ok, because it was there baseball bat...i mean..they bought it right?

16.9.2005 21:50 #32

nonoitall

@gsuscrazy:

Doesn't matter if your DVD copying didn't cause a loss of profits - the movie industry still considers your making personal backups illegal simply because they didn't authorize it. They are control freaks who don't want to part with the products they sell, so they do everything they can to tighten their grip on what they sell - even after they sell it. That's like a restaurant owner asking you to please regurgitate your food when you're done with it so you will come back there to eat again - oh, and don't you dare prepare chicken the same way the cook there does or they'll sue you for copyright infringement.

16.9.2005 22:15 #33

gsuscrazy

a dvd is not a consumable item, you dont EAT a dvd, come on now, whats next Air comparisons, enough with the assinine comparison being used to suite your arguements.

a dvd is not a cheesburger, or chicken. And as far as recipies go, if you copy someone elses, and sell it in a book as your own, YES YOU CAN AND PROBABLY WILL get sued.

if you buy Mcdonalds, walk down the block, and sell it as your own, or duplicate a big mac receipe and sell them, YES YOU CAN AND WILL GET SUED.

If you take buy a ford, make an exact copy of it, call it a Gord, you will more then likely get sued.

if you buy a white T-shirts, and put NIKE on them, you can get sued.

anything else?

16.9.2005 22:33 #34

gsuscrazy

that is Some instead of A white t-shirts..

and also just buy a ford, rather then Take buy

16.9.2005 22:34 #35

captsteel

Okay. I have read this thing and now im getting involved.Listen Gsuscrazy do you know how this first got started? For a long time the music industry and movie industry enjoyed ripping off the customers one putting out a cd with 18 songs 1 good 17 trash, they stopped making cd singles and they charge you almost 20 bucks for it. the same with dvd'S, RIP OFF CITY.. People have grown tired of being ripped off and now they are fighting back and hey no mistake about this is war.I have watched fist of the north star the american version, and then I watched fist of the north star the true japanese version and one thing I noticed a lot of thing were missing in the american version,the US always likes to edit and change movies instead of leaving well enough alone thats why people have to import the true version.Look its simple and plain if you work and you see a movie you want you give cash for that movie its yours no one and I mean no one has the right to tell you what you can or can not do with a movie you legally purchased, you cant tell them what to do with the money they take in from the purchase so its just like back when people would trade cattle or wheat for payment.If I received land from you for lots of cattle and wheat the cattle and wheat is yours and land is mine so bottom line I dont agree with you at all. People like RIAA and the MPAA need to be taught a true lesson about greed.This is a war they can not win. And as far as im concerned my dvds are mine all of them and no one will take or tell me what to do with them unless the pay me for for them........Captainsteel

16.9.2005 23:29 #36

nonoitall

Quote:a dvd is not a consumable itemNo, but if the movie industry had its way, it would be. Quote:And as far as recipies go, if you copy someone elses, and sell it in a book as your own, YES YOU CAN AND PROBABLY WILL get sued.

if you buy Mcdonalds, walk down the block, and sell it as your own, or duplicate a big mac receipe and sell them, YES YOU CAN AND WILL GET SUED.

If you take buy a ford, make an exact copy of it, call it a Gord, you will more then likely get sued.

if you buy a white T-shirts, and put NIKE on them, you can get sued.Nobody is talking about selling anything. If, in the privacy of my own home, I reproduce a meal I ate at a restaurant, it would be ridiculous for the owner of the restaurant to try and sue me. Quote:anything else?How about some relevant comments?

16.9.2005 23:35 #37

duckNrun

Some fo you are right, some of you are wrong.. some of you are just pewing forth propaganda and sheep mentality! Oh no... you cant do that..why? well because they say you cant!

The problem lies in the contradicting laws that are now part of the US legal code. Existing copyright law allows you to make ONE archival backup of your purchased media (music, dvd and games). However the DCMA dis-allows any circumventing of copyright protections. This is a catch 22. You can legally make ONE ARCHIVAL backup (not a backup to sell, give away, or share over the net) but you can no longer circumvent the macrovision, or other protections, to exercise that right. And YES it is a right...it is a legal right under established and current copyright law.

The resolution?

First contact your senators and congressmen and voice your support for HR1201. This bill already has a few co-sponsors (but it need more!) and if passed it will adjust the DMCA to allow circumvention of copy protections when done so for fair use/archival purposes. This law will also require TRUE LABELING on all media by the industry. This means that a CD or DVD that has protections on it that may make it unable to play in YOUR system must clearly and in bold letters state "MAY NOT PLAY IN ALL CD/DVD PLAYERS" and will require that refunds be made if a customer purchases media and finds it doesnt play in a standard CD or DVD player. (btw this is one reason the RIAA and MPAA hate this bill. They do not want to have to label something as possibly non functional... it will decrease the incentive for people to buy it!)

Second tell all your friends, family and people in the other forums you visit to do the same! Everyone here (and everywhere) bitches about their rights being taken.. then do something to get them back! Rights are never given... but they are taken! Check out EFF.org

Finally, under the current system there are a few ways to still be able to use that 'other region' DVD as well as making that archival backup. The DMCA states copy protections cannot be removed. If you dont want to purchase an outside region (or region free) dvd player we all know about AnyDVD. As long as one only uses AnyDVD to view the movie (perhaps through using a pc and projector or any number of other solutions) they will not be in violation of the DMCA (since no copies would be made and protections would still be intact on the disc). In terms of backing up a disc any program that splits a DVD9 to two dvd5's, shrinks a DVD9, removes menus/extras etc. obviously is removing these protections (otherwise you couldnt do these things). Hence under current law it is legal and illegal simultaenously!

The work around? Make an exact copy without removing the protections. If you have an EXACT duplicate of the origional then copyright hasnt been broken and DMCA hasn't been violated. Yeah you end up with the previews and the menus/extras. Sure its not as small a file. But it is legal (remember for ONE ARCHIVAL backup only!) (sidenote: there is settop equipment as well as pc solutions on sale now that will actually produce a 'live' recording of a copyrighted vhs/dvd and the copy will be unprotected. The MPAA is trying to get the settop thing shut down but it is currently considered legal) As for the othe rsolution: its called a bit copy. Thats how the 'real' pirates do it. Of course you can also be a maverick and just say screw it and be making your backups under copyright law and wait for the DMCA to be ammended you may be illegal now but one day your currently illegal actions will be back to being legal....unless no one cares to write their legislatures..in which case you all deserve whatever sh!t and hampering of freedoms you get!

I of course am going on the premise that no one here is actually defending, nor interested in, the stealing of IP, or the illegal down/uploading of IP. Only people interested in using their fair use and legal rights.

And again it is legal.. and it is your right!

to gsuscrazy: your thought process is flawed. A razor company decides that using a face razor for any other purpose than shaving a face is in violation of their IP because they designed the razor for a face not a womens (i assume a womens lol) leg or armpit? And so a wife/girlfriemd/daughter must purchase a seperate razor for her legs, armpits and man's (again i assume man's lol) face. After all it IS their product and YOU dont have to buy it...

Or what about when toilet paper is exactly that: toilet paper... not tissue paper... or to wipe up a spill or whatever... after all YOU DONT HAVE TO BUY IT...

Perhaps that coffee mug shouldn't have Pepsi in it..

As you said:
"man, i swear. Its THEIR PRODUCT, not yours, what dont you understand?.... its not your decision, its not your choice, its not your (item)...Abide by what they ask, or dont complain, and dont steal. i mean, what dont you get?"

This argument works for any number of ridiculous scenarios (mine above included) or are you now going to argue that only that special breed of business called Media (though hey that coffe mug design IS somebody's IP!) has a right to determine how their products are ultimately used? And as previously stated the industry is double dipping. We pay a surcharge on every blank disc that we buy. This surcharge is configured neatly into the price of the blank disc so the consumers dont know about it.. this surcharge goes to the media companies to compensate them for what they years ago cried would happen (theft).. in a sense they are being paid twice for services rendered (one music disc) and if you think about how many BLANK discs get sold each month.. the industry is cleaning up.. probably more so than actual music sales.

please dont accuse me of theft, just because I want to exert my rights and freedoms does not mean that I am a criminal. Though if more people think like you then god help us in the future, for then freedoms will be criminal! I am merely talking about the legal facts that we as Americans (you may not be in the US so the laws here wouldnt apply for you) have. I am not talking about stealing or illegal downloading. I am talking about fair use. Once someone has a cd or a movie they have the ability to do whatever they deem fit within legal boundaries. This means that a person who bought a cd should be able to convert it to mp3's and put it on their PC for PRIVATE USE (again not sharing!) a movie should be able to be converted into an AVI and stored on a harddrive (not shared p2p!) and a paid for iTunes song should be able to be converted and played in the cars mp3 player. Except when people sign up for iTunes they 'sign away' their freedom and agree to a licensing agreement. This agreement does not sell them the song but instead a license to use the song. This is done when they click 'I Agree' and this is why an iTunes song doesnt have to play in everything and can be created to only allow limited number of burns and be used on limited number of PC's. However, until a movie becomes a grant of license and not a purchase then your whining about it not being a purchase and the disc becoming private property is null and void. When it does become a license, and at wal mart or best buy you review and sign the EULA then that will be another can of worms all together....

Freedom, it does a body good!

17.9.2005 00:36 #38

duckNrun

excellent comments nonoitall :)

lol I would love to see Emeril storm into everyones house worldwide and sue them for making the recipes he showed them on the tele...lol

finally... excuse my typos in the earlier post, I have a wrist splint on and its murder to type when you cant move your wrist (lol) I would have corrected all of the typos but between the pain meds and running out of white-out.....

pmsl

17.9.2005 00:41 #39

sneakygc

wooohoooo another texas A&M Aggie, white out on computer keyboard, lol
i hope you injured that wrist the legal way, prying off bottle caps,

but seriously, the movie industry is calling this 'loss of revenue' i dont think its loss of revenue when most people make copies of purchased media for thier own personel use.
this quoted passage is what i have issue with,
it does state that the industry needs to control what enters from overseas, and what it contains,. basically why would we worry about an opium scene being omitted, there is ample drug use portrayed on regular televison, and plenty of other hollywood releases not to mention hbo and cinemax. read just this passage and consider what it means, thats censorship, we dont need it

''Of course, Hollywood was and still is furious over DeCSS and other software as it means their control on importing DVDs from other countries can be beaten''

17.9.2005 01:13 #40

gsuscrazy

dont get all pissy with me because you think im "on their side" i am not in favor of the RIAA, MPAA, or whoever else is involved. I am not in favor of "big brother" watchin what we download, where we go...but tell me this, in the eyes of the media, courts, and non-involved persons..who is the bad guy in this? those who are "pirating, cracking, sharing" movies/music. Your intent is to "teach them a lesson" but all you have done is empower them in the court of law. simply put, you have approached this whole issue with a childs mentality, and are being treated like children (not saying you are children, but this situation has presented itself as such) you didnt like the way something was done, so you circumvented. Circumvention led to piracy, piracy + broadband= mass piracy on a worldwide level. removing protection on your movies, so be it, i dont really care, and neither wouldve the MPAA if torrents, p2p, newsgroups, and such didnt go to such lengths to provide everyone with pirated material. That drew attention and heat to everyone involved with CRPP, and in turn has made everyone involved in "the scene" a "bad guy"....thats what gets me, is that now we are handcuffed by even stricter regulations because people with the "war" mentality crippled the "consumer negotiation" that we used to have.

but who cares right? im just some lunatic that thinks pirating has gotten so out of hand that its ludacris now.

17.9.2005 01:23 #41

nonoitall

I'm not 'pissy' with you at all - I just think you misunderstand the big picture here. Quote:Your intent is to "teach them a lesson" but all you have done is empower them in the court of law. simply put, you have approached this whole issue with a childs mentality, and are being treated like children (not saying you are children, but this situation has presented itself as such) you didnt like the way something was done, so you circumvented. Circumvention led to piracy, piracy + broadband= mass piracy on a worldwide level. removing protection on your movies, so be it, i dont really care, and neither wouldve the MPAA if torrents, p2p, newsgroups, and such didnt go to such lengths to provide everyone with pirated material. How have I empowered them? So far, between the two of us, you're the only one who has admitted to illegal copy-protection circumvention. Also, you are making the common mistake of confusing copyright infringement, file sharing, and piracy - they are all very different things. Quote:im just some lunatic that thinks pirating has gotten so out of hand that its ludacris now.Again with the mixed up terms. Piracy is a problem, but not a very big one. What has become much more widespread is copyright infringement, which has been blown way out of proportion to the point where protecting copyrighted works from even being copied is more important than protecting human life. The copyright laws are the problem here and they are what truly empower the RIAA and MPAA. It used to be that these laws were meant to promote innovation and creativity. Now all they do is give big companies the power to ruin people's lives and sue software developers.

17.9.2005 02:24 #42

ripit02

Something that we are missing here is that in some circumstances, they are actually stealing from us!!! Sure the people here are edjucated and aware of various copy protections, region protections etc., but is the average person? So you have some 18 year old college student that goes into a small video store that carries specialty import movies. He buys one, gets it home, it won't play because its from another region, he goes back to the store to get his money back but they refuse because it has been opened. He purchased a product that he is being completlly restricted from using. Thier was no label saying that this dvd would only work in a certain country or on certain dvd players. How is the average noob suposed to know what the fine print on the back that says nothing more than region 1 is suposed to mean? So now he has a product that he cannot use and his money has been stolen from him.
Can you really argue that it is wrong for him to circumvent the copy protection so he can actually use the produce he paid for? They don't want big warning lables that say that it might not work, as some (particularly those less aware about what will play on what) won't buy it. They dont want you to be able to return it if it doesn't work (god forbid they actually give you your money back because thier product doesn't work as described, its a dvd, it should play in a dvd player).
Lets compare that to some other examples here. I buy a new car, it has a reciever that ties into the computer that only will allow the car to start if it is recieving the signal so the car can only be driven in Moab Utah. It is illegal to bypass the reciever (after all, they have the right to put whatever restrictions on it they want, right). Thier were no warning labels telling the restriction on the car (thier was a mu region 1 in the fine print in the corner of the window sticker) and we are suposed to magically kown what that means. So we cannot drive the car, we cannot circumvent the protection, and we cannot return it.
I don't think so.

17.9.2005 03:09 #43

frankacne

Most of the output from Hollywood is crap anyway so i rarely visit the cinema let alone buy or rent DVDs. On the few occasions when i actually do buy a DVD however, i automatically clone it, as i do with all my software and music on disk. I do this because i want to keep it and CDs and DVDs are notoriously prone to damage and subsequent playback failure. A backup copy is my right and if Hollywood dont like it they know what they can do... their own movies contain many appropriate expletives. Hollywood movies are not essential to life and we can do without them if thats what they want.

17.9.2005 05:27 #44

webwise

Thx frankacne. I think you got it about right.

I want the LEGAL right to back up my DVDs. I don't have that at the moment.

If I want to show someone my movie in my house I can.

I'm in the UK. If I want to show someone my movie in their house I can't. What crap.

By the way I love being a newbie at the age of 60 and 28 years in the puter game. Thx afterdawn (kids)

17.9.2005 09:12 #45

duckNrun

Region coding and CSS were never designed to enforce copyrights. Instead they were a system where the copyright holders could control the use of the (legally purchased) product once it went beyond their reach (the consumer's possession). The above anology of the car is a good example of what was intended. The screaming that Sony has been doing about the people in the UK buying the PSP being from other countries is an example of regional distribution controls. Just like sony wants to control how/when and where they distribute the PSP the movie industry doesn't want someone buying a Chinese region movie from the US. The reason? They are all pretty lame actually. They range from "supply issues" (for those countries where it has been released) to the "supply and demand" curve that would allow the only person who has a product in the UK to increase the selling price to unreasonable hieghts. In sony's case they could be seen as trying to maintain lower sales price by insuring that everyone in a given country has equal access to a product (thereby stopping the 'blackmarketing' of their product).

Does a company have the right to sell a product in one country but not another? Or to materially alter said product between countries? Yes they do. It is after all their product. However, I have the right to buy said product from a different distributor from a different country even. The real question is whether or not I have a legal/ethical right to be able to use said product in THIS country (assuming it wasn't bought from a dealer in this country which would be a different scenario).

The real problem here is that business leaders have shaped the world in the image that they wanted... a Global Economy. 30 years ago this whole discussion would have been moot (besides the fact that 30 years ago was pre-vhs lol) These outdated distribution models need to be changed, and it is amazing how the industry doesn't see the dollars signs from doing so.

Obviously people would be interested in viewing dvd's from other regions..that means more $$
I know that there are cd's that have been sold in other markets that are not available here in the states. I know a guy who has bought music from germany and russia because it was a band he liked and that particular cd was only made available in those markets. It's actually a pretty ridiculous concept really... to only sell an in demand product to a portion of the interested buyers.

17.9.2005 09:42 #46

JXP2307

@ gsuscrazy

I am starting to wonder if you got sued by the RIAA..

First off, I DO NOT APPRECIATE being cussed at.

Secondly, Why do you feel it is okay to steal from Bill Gates? Piracy is piracy, yet you give advice advice on how to mod xbox's all over this site.

Bill owns the rights to your Xbox, just like hollywood owns the rights to your DvDs.

You are so hypocritical, I almost laughing...

ALMOST.

So how bout I crap on your argument for a while? You seem to enjoy doing it to everyone else...

17.9.2005 13:23 #47

Chris1000

An easy fix for the region stuff would be to just make ONE copy of a film, with every conceivable major language dub on it. When HD-DVD and Blu-Ray come out, they have already had people come out and say now that they have better storage capacity, they could do this with no real problems, other than putting more language choices in the language menu.

Some DVD's that I buy from Japan that aren't available in the United States I am leery of getting, but most of the people in Japan have realized that "Hey, Americans want to play these in their DVD players. We'd better make them multi-region or region-free."
Most of them have gone to that now, where they don't HAVE region-coding on them and will play in any DVD player.

17.9.2005 13:24 #48

gsuscrazy

you dont like being cussed at? ahhh to bad...pooor babay.

modding an xbox is LEGAL. in every aspect, it is legal. i do not "circumvent" and copy protection, i do not encourage the usage of piracy, or copyright enfringement. there is no law stating that I CANNOT modify my xbox, there are very many legal purposes for it, and no law restricts the simple modification of a mod chip. so get off my nutsac, i didnt steal anything from Bill Gates, so eat my a$$ im starting to think anyone hard up enough to keep searching through my threads are fuggin pathetic, i mean, are you so socially inept that you no longer can hold a converstation about something, so you have to slander me based on threads of topics you know nothing about? thats sad, because until that point, i was willing to discuss this topic, now? now you simply want to prove me "wrong" so badly you can see straight, getting all hard and wet because you search my old threads about xbox's. thats funny.

ive made such an impact on your thought process, you have nothing else to say to defend yourself, you can simply act juvenile "well see see, he does this, see see he is a hypocrite, see see, im telling the teacher"

lol...what a fuggin loser.

ive unsubscribed to this thread, so dont bother replying here to me. lol..thats an affect on someone when they spend theyre time running through the posts of another member looking for fault..SNAP!

17.9.2005 14:27 #49

nonoitall

Well, I'm glad that guy is gone. Stomping off in a huff seems a lot more childish to me than standing one's ground and defending one's point of view, but maybe that's just me.

17.9.2005 15:06 #50

JXP2307

I guess its true...

Can't stand the heat, get the hell out of the Kitchen.

Jerk

17.9.2005 15:26 #51

gsuscrazy

to both of yall, its not defending my view anymore, no one is challenging a view, they are simply attacking everything i post, anything about me, its not my view anymore...defend my point of view? its like 10 to 1, thats called "ganging up" i said my peace, dont knock me now, because one on one, i can destroy anyone in a debate, but 10 on 1 is stupid, and its gotten stupid, little ass grabbers searching all my threads, whatever.

17.9.2005 15:50 #52

gsuscrazy

the only one that actually had any validity was ducknrun..everyone else wsa just repeating what the last dude said.

17.9.2005 15:52 #53

sneakygc

u didnt think my comment about beer was valid?

17.9.2005 17:34 #54

nonoitall

People would be much less likely to 'gang up' on you if you were more polite and explained your view without repeating the same dogmatic arguments over and over, especially when your own actions do not support your arguments and, rather, do the exact opposite. Even when people disagree on something they can still be civil about it. Cussing out other posters because their thoughts do not agree with yours is not the best way to win friends.

17.9.2005 18:18 #55

gsuscrazy

man, to be worried about "winning net friendships" ....i may have to shoot myself in the face before that happens.

17.9.2005 19:57 #56

duckNrun

sneaky..... beer is ALWAYS valid! ;o)

umm...well..I guess it does depend on the beer, but I'm sure your sense of quality is uncompromised considering the fact that you are here on A/D :o)

gsuscrazy: Thx, I do try to stay on point and be constructive, but I don't think that it is fair to say you have been ganged up on. It's just that noone else here seems to agree with you (which doesnt really matter... or shouldn't anyways) but again your comments about mods is exactly the point that people have been making about dvd's.... it is legal (well... excepting the gray fuzzy contradicting areas that the DMCA has created...)

It is not about piracy, it is not about screwing the 'man' it's about being able to fully utilize a product that has been legally acquired. The predominant theory is: Once I have paid for it..it is mine. If I wish to make a secure backup for archival purposes as granted under copyright law then I should be able to do so. If I wish to place it securely onto my own private media server that is jacked into my home theater I should be able to do so.

Other concepts more 'controversial': If later, say on vacation halfway across the world, I decide that I wish to watch that same purchased dvd I should be able to access my VPN and stream it across the net to whichever pc/system I may be using at that time. Of course if I cannot backup the dvd legally then I cannot place it on my own personal media server. This then regulates not only where the disc can be played (region coding) but also how the disc must be viewed (only from the origional media when it is within my physical location--providing that I have a correct region dvd player to watch it upon). One analogy is that my new Ford must have Ford Gas put into it otherwise I am in violation of the licensing* (*not mine it was taken from an unknown source)

Now here's the interesting part... I can lend the physical DVD to my friend and he can take it home and watch it on his own dvd plater and give it back to me over lunch the next day... so... should I be able to give that same friend access to my media server's VPN and stream it to him? There really is no difference in lending him the physical copy or streaming the movie directly to him. Of course this does not give him the right to copy it while streaming (just as he cant copy the borrowed DVD) but is there a legitimate difference in letting him watch MY dvd regardless of whether or not it is the disc or the raw data streamed to him?? Should I, or another friend, be able to access that same movie file from a different location AT THE SAME TIME as my previous friend (since this couldn't be accomplished with a physical dvd unless I had multiple copies..or in terms of software... multiple licenses)?

What the content providers are trying to do is maintain profit (which is good) by maintaining control (which is bad). The future is now and tomorrow's future is even more exciting! The decisions we make regarding IP, Tech, and Fair Use as well as the powers that we give content providers and other businesses will shape tomorrow's future. Some powers will actually hurt future develpoment due to companies being deterred to create in case their product is percieved as POSSIBLY being able to violate, other companies will have to pay these providers a license fee to be able to market a product that said providers feel MAY infringe upon their IP...this will ultimately drive up the costs of products and decrease new innovations. We already see a history of this fromk both the RIAA and the MPAA. The RIAA fought radio/tapes/cd's because it would hurt them...the MPAA fought television, vhs, dvd's. Now the MPAA makes more from DVD sales than they do from the theaters and the RIAA makes more money from blank media than they ever lose through file sharing!

Is it reasonable to expect that as technology increases that our personal freedoms and choices should decrease? One has always been able to share music, make copies of music, make mixed tapes from ones music and play that music wherever, whenever and however one decided was right for them. Now the RIAA (with the help of outfits like iTunes, Yahoo Music et al) are raising a whole new generation on the premise that if they pay an equivalent price for a lower quality form of the same product that they can do less with that product. They are also using protections in Cd's to provide this same decreased level of choice as well. The movie industry is doing what this whole thread was about.

With VHS tapes we used to be able to combine 3 movies onto one vhs tape (using slp mode..scary that I remember that! lol) and thereby reduce the number of tapes to 'haul around' as well as protecting the origional from constant use which wore down the quality of the product. Now we cant make copies to place on our PC's, cant protect the media from being damaged by making a copy, and the industry acually takes offense at someone wanting to edit out the nudity and swear words of a privately owned and paid for movie to make it family friendly for their kids. Thats like the RIAA saying that you MUST listen to every lyric on a song...you cant bleep out the fcuks and sh!ts...oops but thats already done aint it.. its called decency laws.... see there are many more contradictions in this whole topic than we have already touched upon.

Now we are expected to just roll over and be good little consumers and do what we're told.... just because we're told to so? Regardless of what the law says? And regarding the contradictions in the DMCA is it wrong for people to try to pass laws (or change them) for their own perceived benefit? Heck if thats the case then only business would be served by the law because business pays for the law to be changed. The only difference here is that the law hasn't been changed... it's been sidestepped and turned into this quagmire that we are now discussing. And yes, in part this was because as tech advanced it allowed the less scrupulous people to more fully achieve their desires to thieve and rip-off. But that is the risk that is taken in a free society. Freedoms are not curtailed and hemmed in just because they pose a danger of being broken. The benefits of freedom far out weigh the costs....for everyone, even the MPAA!

17.9.2005 20:22 #57

duckNrun

The sad thing is that these business models just don't work anymore. The sadder thing is that the businesses who employ these models either just dont see that or can't figure out a better model to use.

Either way that spells disaster bigtime. The RIAA is an entity that is no longer needed. With web distribution models a band can produce and sell via downloads CDA quality tracks direct to their fans for less than the Recording Company and keep a higher percentage of profits to boot. Most every band has a website... add a Band Store and BAM! there ya go! You could even still have artists compile jpegs for the jacket art and such.

Up and coming bands who would not have a following yet would still need the benefits that the recording industry could provide... but this could also be superceded through a centralised web distribution model. Radio stations could license themselves and download music for airplay just the same as they order music currently. They could see 'webboard' reviews and stats to decide what they should be playing. There really is some high quality pc based recording gear for what seems really fair amounts of money. A centralised distro model could offer samples of each and every track that a new (or old) artist had created... buy what you want... download it... burn it.. voila! Right now most the money that a CD makes is not paid to the artist and none of the money that the RIAA is suing for is paid to the artist.

Movies pose a different problem because you cant recreate space very realistically in your basement (unless you want to resemble the origional star trek :p) nor tornadoes, aliens etc. But the MPAA's time is nearing as well. But the MPAa is at least trying to react slightly faster than the RIAA has. Theater sales are decreasing, DVD's are being released closer to the theater release dates, Television series are being released at the end of the season. They are beginning to learn that they cannot hoard this data or they will be punished in the P2P realms. And for anyone who would be happy with a free 635MB version of a movie that otherwise composes 7.2 GB worth of VOB's wouldn't buy the movie regardless! I could not imagine watching any of my movies compressed by a factor of 10+ and being satisfied with the results in my home theater. I just couldn't.

When the industry (and software as well) talk about 'lost revenue' they are using data that they are trying to coorelate to non existant sales. Most people who only copy or d/l would not have bought it anyways... so this lost revenue is a paper fantasy!

Anyways, I'm getting off topic... this topic just covers so many implications and other areas.

Thanks for bearing with me...

now its time to get to sleep so on sunday morning I can go do my patients write ups (for Monday's clinicals) and pray that my 3" hairline radiator crack I fixed with JB Weld holds

Peace to you all!

17.9.2005 20:58 #58

YOBUZZB

I think it's laughable for someone to imply childish behavior and in the same conversation, show it. Next, to want to match wits as if this is a cock fight! Can you say, "I dare you to cross this line"? I thought the discussion was to be about consumer rights as it pertains to fair use. Let's use some diplomacy and decorum as civil adults should. That said, allow me to enter the fray. A number of you have made interesting analogies. We all have the same common goal, which is to be able to do as we wish with our property. Simply put, if I purchase it, it belongs to me and no one has the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my property. Being human, we're prone to mistakes. The laws, as there currently written, are a mistake. Fortunately, being human, we can correct them. As mentioned before, write your congressman. Let them know your displeasure and fight for your rights. I have written my congressman several times and have urged almost everyone I'm in contact with to do the same. Let's be responsible and accountable for our rights. This is a small issue in the grand scheme of things but remember this, big problems usually start small, landslides and avalanches start from small movements. If we don't take care of this, how much more will we give up by not standing up and taking action when we should.

19.9.2005 19:12 #59

plazma

Firstly gsuscrazy sounds like hes another bod at the RIAA come to try and sway pulic view in his spare time, lol anyway.

Can i just say, histroy is full of things that were once captilisted on by some fat cat who got greedy off it, theres sale value and getting greedy. ANYWAY. The world has changed and although its valid to say that the recording industry feels people are steeling from them.

Its also just as valid to understand that the internet has made large forms of information in the grasp of common man and women (sorry ladys i didnt forget u). So for people to wounder why music should not also follow the flow of so much of the content on the internet is unfair and narrow sighted.

Ah the coin has two sides.

I know to some extent that some music companies are standing by sites like napster.com and itunes, however this should not be only the only corner stone of the future.

As the orange advert used to say "what if"

But we are all part of the what if generation, we have already been part of so much and made so much happen, the world will always change, ur either along for the ride or its a long walk home.

I cannot help but feel that hollywood its self may be left behind if its not open minded about how technology will be used instead of concentrating on how technology could be restricted to fit an age old game plan.

Take for example the british film industry once nearly all powerful, however due to a larger viewer base and the relivant mediums hollywood took over completely.

How long will it be before someone comes up with an idea that works out or even partially works, just enought to make those few bucks to fund a film or to buy out a nearly bancrupt film producer. Allowing for the same creations as before but on a new more lucrative medium, which was desired by its customers over the existing products.

Cutting the old and somewhat cancerious part from the equation, dont get me wrong im not calling the film industry a cancer, more so that it wants to make sure it doesnt become an unwanted part of it all.

Or just maybe thats why they are so worried in the first place? its one thing to lose your market share its another to lose the market all together.

Microsoft once said that linux was a non starter, it wasnt a serious contender in the game, now a very large proportion of the worlds internet servers run on it. Entire countries goverments are shunting microsoft to move over to it!

Why, because linus saw the market hole, he could present a better way of doing it, however linux as a contender was better on paper that in the real world. Thats some years ago and many say its maybe still not there yet as a replacement for windows, but it still lives is and its growing by the day.

Anyway enough of diving down a diffirent path, you get the idea.

Finanlly, in this era of the re-make, god knows if there was any competition for hollywood maybe we would get some more original story lines more of the time, who knows......

If you ask me, Sony has the money, the power and the existing contacts for it, they just need to just take a step back, a hard look and realise instead of playing in someone elses ball park. Under someone elses set of rules, when they could just go down the road build a new park and before they knew it they could steel the entire show and play be their new rules that suited everyone a bit better ;)

22.9.2005 15:39 #60

fridgman

There is something here that I don't understand or more appropriately annoys the hell outta me!
20years ago a friend of mine used to record the weekly chart from the radio onto cassette and it was shared. New albums were released and the kids with more pocket money bought it and everybody got a copy onto a C90 or C60 for a small sum.
I can even remember the advent of the tape-to-tape machine. But I never heard of anyone being sued for copyright infringement. Every music store had huge supplies of blank cassettes and sold millions. What did the music companies think people were doing with them? The concept of music sharing became socially acceptable many years ago. Technology has made it easier but they forget that somebody has to buy the stuff to be able to share on P2P networks. (unless they have employees leaking copies! screeners perhaps?).
Do not misinterpret my comments. Of course I know that sharing is illegal! But my mother taught me that sharing was good!
If it is evident that mass copyright infringement has benn socially adopted for years does the law not then adjust accordingly? Something along the lines of "you didn't prosecute then so you can't now"
Welcome to the modern moneydriven land of suits!

22.9.2005 16:01 #61

banjobill

All of you are missing the main point because you have fallen into the logical fallacies that the Swine of Hollywood entrap you with. The main point is not money but power and monopoly. The hypocritical Orcs of Hollywood are the ORIGINAL PIRATES. Read this and put your little pea-brains back on top. It's the MEDIA, baby! Whether it's CDs, DVDs or P2P file swapping ... it's the Media, you whiners.

The Orcs of Hollywood and their Battle for the P2P Networks
by William Forrest

You hear a lot about software piracy and downloading videos and music files "illegally" on the Internet. But not enough people understand that this problem that the Orcs of Hollywood is causing us all, is not just an attack upon alleged "copyright infringement" but upon the very freedoms of speech, opinion, publishing and association that is granted to us ... if not by our own governments then by the Internet, itself.

The Orcs of MPAA, the RIAA and its related minions of greed are not as interested in the loss to them of a few millions of dollars in lost sales as they are in gaining Monopoly Control of the Internet and its file sharing networks. With Monopoly, they gain complete control of all profits and can name their price. They have had monopoly control of the Media for over one hundred years but the Internet took it away from them.

And so, these attacks should not be viewed as some namby-pamby game involving courts and lawyers but it should be viewed as it actually is: an act of war where-by our attackers camouflage themselves as Movie mogols and lawyers though they have blood in their eye, greed and avarice in their hearts and mayhem in their minds. The Orcs of Hollywood self-righteously proclaim their "copyrights"; they shed crocodile tears about their "lost revenues"; they point their hypocritical fingers at the P2P Community and hiss "for shame" through their stinking, lying teeth, but their own history is not the shining example of virtue that they would like us all to beleive.

To merely play the art of war by the rules of the enemy, is a guaranty of defeat. They WANT you to either shut down and let them have their monopoly of the ENTIRE CULTURE AND ARTS OF SOCIETY or to fight them in courts! Both ways, they win. So, we of the P2P Coummunity should practice alternate ways to victory.

I believe that fighting them is the only logical response. But they are swindlers in business suits who really overlook the power of the baseball bat and molotov cocktail. They all live in penthouses and drive automobiles but they should not do so feeling at leisure or at ease. They should learn to respect the Power of the People.

A solution to a problem first requires a knowledge of the Cause of the problem. The Orcs of Hollywood are the problem. But where did Hollywood start? It started with some New York-types stealing Thomas Edison's movie-making patents and running off to California to make money without paying Edison any royalties. That's how it all began. The Orcs of Hollywood got their start as copyright thieves and con artists.

So, you see, we are not dealing with honest businessmen of the MPAA who are concerned about piracy. We are dealing with the sons of the original pirates and media thieves and criminals who ripped off Thomas Edison in the silent movie days. They will attack us with lawyers, but they only understand brass knuckles, silenced pistols and molotov cocktails because that is their nature.

Yes, Hollywood was founded by the media pirates and thieves who stole Thomas Edison's invention for their own profits. The sons of these media pirates are the ones who are trying to keep their monopoly power, today, by eliminating what they like to call "ruinous competition" -- which is all of us.

You see, the Orcs of Hollywood are supreme hypocrites. They pretend to be Capitalists who are all for freedom and competition, but in fact, they are actually Communists and Leftists in their politics because they want to have sole control and sole power and sole profits from the Media.

You may not believe this but money is not the primary objective of the MPAA regardless of the lies that they tell. What they primarily want is POWER. They know that Money can buy Power (as they have achieved through our treasonous Congressmen who kiss the Orcs' asses). But with POWER they can TAKE money (as they are trying to do by taking over the file sharing networks). No, the Orcs of Hollywood do not want the P2P networks to be closed down because they are too valuable and the People already know of their usefullness. Instead, P2P will be taken over and used like Napster to sell Orc products. They don't want competition, they want a media dictatorship. And along with profits and monopoly comes "control of the masses", brainwashing, and propaganda which they, alone, control and disseminate. After all, if you look at what the Orcs of Hollywood produce, you will see that violence, pornography (packaged as "art"), hatred, drug use, glorification of criminality, denigration of virtue, crass consumerism, ridicule of religion, promotion of juvenile delinquency, destruction of family values, and vilification of patriotism are among their stock in trade. And it is all published and broadcast through the Orc Media Monopoly -- with no dissenting productions allowed.

Today's Hollywood Orcs are the very sons of the fathers who were the original Media pirates who ripped off Thomas Edison. But who were the Orc Grandfathers? Were they innocent of the actions of their children or were they promoters of it?

The grandfathers of today's Media Orcs were, in the 1800's, Media monopolists, themselves. Only in their day, the main media was the Morse Code and the telephone transmitted over copper wires. These 18th century Media Bosses had monopoly control over not only the transmission of Morse Code messages and telephone conversations, but their INTERNATIONAL corporations also owned the mines and smelters where copper was extracted and the foundries where the metal was extruded into wire. And so, in the 1800's, copper wires and media control were the same industry although the players worked behind the scenes with varied corportions to hide the true ownership -- as their grandsons do today.

But SURPRISE, SURPRISE!!! Marconi invented the radio and made it possible to transmit messages and voice without wires! A fantastic step forward for all of Mankind! Were the Media Orcs interested in this new, wireless media? Indeed, they were! The corporations that owned the copper wires, bought the new radio invention from Marconi AND THEN THEY SAT ON IT FOR TEN YEARS!!!!!!!!! They only bought Marconi's radio patent in order to suppress it.

Why? Because they didn't want anyone sending messages through the airwaves without paying them for the privelege. They wanted the world to only use copper wires and to pay them the toll-tax for using their monoply control of the copper wires.

Imagine!!! Western civilization was put back ten years in the world of media and communication because these grandfathers of today's media swine wanted to continue their monopoly of copper wire production and Morse Code transmission! Marconi had to sue to get his patent back and radio has changed the world ever since. [You can read about this in "Spy Catcher" by Richard Wright]

And so, the Orcs of Hollywood come from a long line of greedy and malevolent pigs who are willing that the entire world should suffer, remain in darkness and ignorance, and to be impoverished so that they can fill their fat bellies and control the lives of the people of the world ... Thus, we have The Orcs of Hollywood.

22.9.2005 16:26 #62

shiva_42

With all due respect, you are ALL missing the most important point in these arguments from BOTH sides:

1) Either I OWN it after I pay for it, which means I can do whatever the hell I wish with it, or
2) I DON'T own it, which means:
a) I don't have to pay ANY sales tax on it
b) I can deduct it from my taxes, as any other leased item
c) The manufacturer will have to FOREVER take responsibility and liability for it, and replace it if it EVER stops working -- if they are going to claim that THEY still own it.

Resolve this huge discrepancy and the other issues will rectify themselves.

28.10.2005 09:31 #63

AfterDawn: News