Back-up copies of DVD's?

[BMXTRIX]

If you can't copy anydvd then perhaps you should look on the web for anydvd copying program that allows you to accomplish the task you are trying to achieve.

It really is easy to copy anydvd if you want to.

 

[ruadmaa]

The Part You Don't Understand

It does not matter what the studio claims. Established case law and the copyright code(Title 17 of U.S. Code) are what matters. You can find similar warning on many music CDs today, yet they are not applicable to a normal user; you do not need authorization to copy and convert the digital data off of a CD, it is established as an accepted fair use by previous case law.

There is no direct reference in code to digital movie copies. I do not know if it would be handled as if it was software. But besides this, the federal courts have consistently upheld fair use concerning interoperability and time-shifting. One recent example is MP3 players. This method of copying digital data from the CD and converting to a compressed separate copy to use on a portable digital device is not covered in the copyright code. Taken at face value, it could be interpreted as a violation of copyright. However, this was set precedent in a California court as a fair use right by the consumer after the music industry tried to challenge a major [Rio] MP3 player manufacturer. The same goes for VCRs for copying copyrighted works off of television, which were blatantly illegal, but were deemed legal by the Supreme Court as a fair use when the movie studios challenged a major [Sony] manufacturer of VCRs. Based on the recent popularity of portable MP3 players with color video screens and video playback capability, it looks like an exact repeat of the VCR and MP3 player cases, but combined. If this were to go to the supreme court on this basis, it would probably be deemed a fair use since it is directly relevant to both the MPAA vs. Sony and RIAA vs. Rio cases. Currently, no such issue has yet occurred, there for it is technically illegal to remove a copy protection as specified by the DMCA for any reason at this time, excepting selective ones [TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 12 > § 1201] that are provided for in law for researchers, interoperability/reverse engineering, libraries, law officials and archives.

-Chris

It really doesn't matter much about the copyright law. If they suspect you of copying their material they simply send you a summons for a "Civil Lawsuit". Doesn't matter if you are innocent or guilty. In this type of suite they accuse you and it is up to you to prove you're innocent.

So here is what happens: If you ignore the Civil suite after a certain amount of time you are deemed guilty and will by law be required to pay up.

If you have your attorney handle the matter, it will cost you thousands of dollars in legal fees.

If you settle, which in many times is cheaper, it will still cost you well over $3,000.00.

If you think this is baloney ask those people that have been had this type of summons sent to them by the RIAA or Directv.

Win or lose, you pay big bucks.

 

[WmAx]

It really doesn't matter much about the copyright law. If they suspect you of copying their material they simply send you a summons for a "Civil Lawsuit". Doesn't matter if you are innocent or guilty. In this type of suite they accuse you and it is up to you to prove you're innocent.

The only pursuits of which I am aware, are ones involving actual commercial piracy(mass production of media for resale) or distributing copyrighted material online for download(as many people do on P2P clients). As for someone being sued for copying their own DVD for personal use? I am not aware of any cases off hand. Can you cite some? If there are some case examples, they must be so few in number as to be not worth considering in any statistical risk factor. Then consider that there is no evidence trail when you copy a movie for personal use - no wonder there is not a significant number of case examples to cite. Maybe a friend or family member will turn you in to the appropriate copyright holder?

-Chris

 

[jonnythan]

The only pursuits of which I am aware, are ones involving actual commercial piracy(mass production of media for resale) or distributing copyrighted material online for download(as many people do on P2P clients). As for someone being sued for copying their own DVD for personal use? I am not aware of any cases off hand. Can you cite some? If there are some case examples, they must be so few in number as to be not worth considering in any statistical risk factor. Then consider that there is no evidence trail when you copy a movie for personal use - no wonder there is not a significant number of case examples to cite. Maybe a friend or family member will turn you in to the appropriate copyright holder?

-Chris

It is extremely unlikely that you will get sued or prosecuted for making backup copies of DVD's for your own personal use.

It's also extremely unlikely that you will get prosecuted for jaywalking.

 

[BMXTRIX]

It's also extremely unlikely that you will get prosecuted for jaywalking.

It is FAR more likely you will be prosecuted for jaywalking actually. There actually are jaywalking tickets given out as people cause accidents and people avoiding jaywalkers can end up injured.

Backing up your own DVDs is protected under fair use laws. There has never been a single case won that I am aware of where the recording industry has prevailed over people's rights to fair use. VCR copies of television shows (copyrighted material). Putting audio information (copyrighted) into MP3 format. Copying CDs, etc.

The only issue is CSS encryption, and some websites openly discuss how to get through the CSS encryption. There are very few people who believe that copying DVDs that you own, for your own personal backups, is in any way immoral or illegal.

As for civil cases, you are not required to have a lawyer and the people filing the charges must have some sort of proof. Is the RIAA audio only or video as well? Because there hasn't been one court case won for audio backups, just for audio distribution in MP3 format, which is illegal.

If someone can find me a case where someone backing up their audio or video for personal use has been sued and lost, then I'm up to hear it. But, brining a lawsuit against someone does not mean that the person is guilty. They aren't guilty until proven innocent, they are innocent until proven guilty. So, the people making the claims of illegality have to PROVE that something illegal was done.

ie: If I backed up my copy of Star Trek, The Motion Picture, which forces me to use decryption software, they would have to prove that I personally and knowingly used the decryption software. Beyond that... there is no claim. The backup itself IS legal. Just the use of the decryption software.

 

[jonnythan]

It is FAR more likely you will be prosecuted for jaywalking actually. There actually are jaywalking tickets given out as people cause accidents and people avoiding jaywalkers can end up injured.

Backing up your own DVDs is protected under fair use laws.

Want to cite some law (case or letter) that defends the statement that violating the DMCA for personal movie backups falls under fair use?

The lack of convictions doesn't make it legal.

 

[Audioholics]

Regardless of what anyone THINKS... Regardless of what anyone KNOWS... Regardless of what seems to be COMMON SENSE... The RIAA can pretty much do whatever the heck it wants and they love to go after easy targets and high traffic locations that give out information on illegal copying, etc... Even if it's just links. They suck and they can make your life a pain if they choose to. It's not worth it (giving them an easy target).

So for that reason (though some people seem to take it personally - get a clue, it's not all about you) we don't feel comfortable allowing discussion of circumvented copyright stuff, etc.

That's our OFFICIAL policy.

Just watch what you say or post. There are likely plenty of sites that are hosted in the Ukraine where you can say anything you want... Wish it were so here.

 

[brian32672]

(though some people seem to take it personally - get a clue, it's not all about you)

Not sure whom you are referring to, whether it be anyone at all.

I am not taking it personal, and I could care less that it (my posts) was removed.

I was just saying, that if you are going to remove my posts (2 were removed)
That, please do the courteous thing of removing what was quoted from my posts from other members, as it does not reflect on the entire post that I had typed.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Want to cite some law (case or letter) that defends the statement that violating the DMCA for personal movie backups falls under fair use?

The lack of convictions doesn't make it legal.

Never said (once) that circumventing CSS was legal. Actually said several times that it is NOT legal. Backing up movies you own is legal and CSS is not required on all commercial DVDs, though 99% of them likely have it. Any movie you own, without CSS, you can backup without first using a program that removes the CSS encryption. This software is available at your local computer store and is perfectly legal to use. I will do some searching to see if I can find specifics that relate to it. But, the DMCA cases go after those who circumvented digital encryption, not those who copied DVDs.

 

[jonnythan]

Like I said earlier... copying a DVD is not against the law. Breaking the encryption found on essentially every DVD sold is against the law.

Here's your key statement which makes copying DVD's illegal in virtually all cases involving store-bought DVD's:
"Any movie you own, without CSS, you can backup without first using a program that removes the CSS encryption"

 

[BMXTRIX]

You know, most people get in their cars every day and head off to work and there is a sign that is posted on the freeway that reads... "SPEED LIMIT 55" Now take a look around you, take a look down at how fast you are driving, take a look at the police officer who just passed you...

Speaking of legality and laws that people actually follow and the plain old 'this one can be ignored' type of stuff is reality. The DMCA regulations on digital encrytion, especially how it pertains to DVDs is worthless - they amount to a rule that says "We know this has ZERO affect on piracy, we know it has ZERO affect on Internet distribution, we know it ONLY harms those who want to follow the law, and we are far to stupid to care in the least!"

This is our government right now. Completely clueless about things that matter, and happily being reelected every few years. Anyone who wants to copy anydvd can do so but they just have to break the law. If they are copying rented movies, then that is something I definitely frown upon. But, if like me, you have kids and you want to protect the DVDs you purchased over 10 years and spent thousands of dollars on, then it is time to push the pedal a bit harder, nudge it up to 60mph, and see who really gives a damn.

Since it is obvious that the people writing the laws don't.

 

[mustang_steve]

Fair use has always been a legal hotbed. Remember the whole crapfest over videotape recorders? Cassette recorders?

Pretty much DMCA will apply if you copy a disc, however there are laws in place that allow fair use backup, so you will be covered if you do make a copy, but there is one exception.

That exception is you cannot alter anything on the disc, including bypassing copy-controls. This means an exact copy. To my knowledge, there is no way to do this, without designing hardware specifically for this puropse (which if memomry serves, is illegal according to DMCA).

Basically you are catch-22ed into being illegal, despite you having a consumer RIGHT to a fair use backup.

My take on it: if you feel so strong on making backups, then google it...plus there are commercially availible softwares that cna do it (although they do it via a HUGE legal grey area). Otherwise get a mega-changer.

I wish Pioneer made a DVD changer that used cartidges, like their 18-disc CD changers of olden days. that would be prety much kid resistant, so long as they don't try to get the discs out of the cartridges.

 

[ironlung]

I thought mega changers are know for being hard on disks. You might want to put your backups in them


I still can't free my DVDs43 of them to be exact.

 

[BOSS10L]

Fair use has always been a legal hotbed. Remember the whole crapfest over videotape recorders? Cassette recorders?

Yeah, but that means we're dating ourselves then.

My take on it: if you feel so strong on making backups, then google it...plus there are commercially availible softwares that can do it (although they do it via a HUGE legal grey area). Otherwise get a mega-changer.

I agree, but the mega-changer is in some cases more trouble than ripping the legally owned DVDs. I guess a part of me is into the principle of the whole thing. While I WHOLEHEARTEDLY support giving artist's their due by purchasing their work legally, once I own it, IMHO, if I want to rip it to another one of my devices that I also legally own, then so be it. This is one of the issues I have with iTunes. I bought the albums in good faith, I should be able to listen to them in good faith. And I don't share songs, so that doesn't factor into it.

I wish Pioneer made a DVD changer that used cartidges, like their 18-disc CD changers of olden days. that would be prety much kid resistant, so long as they don't try to get the discs out of the cartridges.

Tell me about it. I have a Pioneer shelf system 6-disk CD changer system that uses the same type of cartridges. I bought it nearly 15 years ago and it still works flawlessly. It was recently relegated to backup duty when I put together my 5.1 system, but it still rocks!

BTW - BOSS10L = SVT's circa 1994 10 liter monster project. I bleed Ford blue.

 

[mustang_steve]

Heck yeah!

I've been a fan of the 2.3L mustangs....they are pretty craptastic off the line, but a nice F/R weight ratio gives a nice weight transfer around corners that makes them outright potent dirt and autocross machines in the right hands, even stock. Nothing is quite as fun as having a guy ask you if it's got a turbo, then popping the hood and showing them it's bone stock.

....well only the engine/tranny was stock, it did have some weight reductions that they didn't know about and an upgraded suspension

It didn't add anything as far as speed is concerned, but it did help cornering some

 

[ironlung]

off topic

Mmmmmm Autocross. I used to(99-03) beat the heck out of my '97 Chevy Camaro SS in chicago region SCCA. Couple of trophys but mostly in the 30s or 40s overall out of 140.

It was to long a day for me. 9 hour day for 5 or 6 40-60sec runs. Now I blow my loot on HT goodies instead of race rubber. The SS sits in the garage waiting for all the things I wore out.

Hijak over,
Ironlung