US Motion picture studios suing Samsung over DRM bypassing

Hurry, everyone buy SAMSUNG products!

They are currently being sued by US movie studios for having a DVD
player that bypasses Region Coding and HDCP! Hey, ANY manufacturer
that bypasses DRM is worthy of MY support. I'll take a DOZEN! (i hear
it's not really that great a DVD player, htough). I wonder if it also
bypasses PUOPs...

-goro-

http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/20/s...tinued-player/

Like a number older DVD players, Samsung's long-discontinued DVD-HD841
can be hacked via a sequence of remote-control keystrokes to, among
other things, become a region-free player and disable copy protection.
And even though Samsung stopped selling the DVD-HD841 in the US in
October 2004, the big US movie studios have decided to make an example
of the company. Disney, Time Warner, Fox, Paramount and Universal have
filed a suit against Samsung, demanding that the company recall all
affected players. Samsung execs are puzzled by the lawsuit and can't
understand why the studios are going after the company over a player
that the company says was discontinued after the copy-circumvention
issue came to light. In the meantime, the lawsuit will likely only
serve to call attention the player, which is still available via eBay
and other sources for as little as $50. Thanks, guys!

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/biz/...9273711910.htm

Samsung Electronics, Asia's most valuable high-tech company, is
scrambling after multiple U.S. movie studios reportedly took the
Seoul-based firm to court, alleging glitches in its DVD players.

Over the weekend, Bloomberg news reported Walt Disney, Time Warner and
three other major film makers filed the lawsuit against Samsung in U.S.
court.

They claimed that Samsung's DVD players allowed consumers to avoid
encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication and demanded
a recall of all the problematic products, Bloomberg said.

The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that the movie
industry lost $5.4 billion last year due to piracy.

In response, Samsung refused to confirm the high-profile suit that
involves Paramount Pictures, 20th Century Fox and Universal Studios on
top of Disney and Time Warner.

``In fact, we do not exactly know the contents of the lawsuit and the
intention of the plaintiffs. We have yet to receive the
complaint,'' a Samsung spokesman said.

He guessed that the film makers take issue with DVD-HD841, which
Samsung had sold in the United States between June and October 2004.

``If so, I do not know why the movie studios are complaining about the
products, of which production was brought to an end more than 15 months
ago,'' the spokesman said.

``We stopped manufacturing the model after concerns erupted that its
copy-protection features can be circumvented by sophisticated
users,'' he said.

In this climate, he said Samsung would react to the lawsuit after the
outfit recognizes its real intention.

Samsung Electronics is the flagship affiliate of Samsung Group, the
nation's foremost conglomerate. It is the world's biggest maker of
memory chips and flat-panel displays.

Goro

Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> They claimed that Samsung's DVD players allowed consumers to avoid
> encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication and demanded
> a recall of all the problematic products, Bloomberg said.

This is a *great* lawsuit for the consumer.

The Samsung player merely allows HDCP to be turned off. The movie studios
will have to prove that HDCP actually could "prevent unauthorized
duplication" in order to win their case.

If they can't, then it would no longer be even a hint of a DMCA violation
to disable HDCP, because DMCA only protects systems that prevent
duplication...not those that prevent "unauthorized viewing".

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/LostPassword.gif

Jeff Rife

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> > They claimed that Samsung's DVD players allowed consumers to avoid
> > encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication and demanded
> > a recall of all the problematic products, Bloomberg said.
>
> This is a *great* lawsuit for the consumer.
>
> The Samsung player merely allows HDCP to be turned off. The movie studios
> will have to prove that HDCP actually could "prevent unauthorized
> duplication" in order to win their case.
>
> If they can't, then it would no longer be even a hint of a DMCA violation
> to disable HDCP, because DMCA only protects systems that prevent
> duplication...not those that prevent "unauthorized viewing".

of course, the great part is that they "demand a recall of the
problematic product"... which is a no-longer produced item....
erhmmm...

-goro-

Goro

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> > They claimed that Samsung's DVD players allowed consumers to avoid
> > encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication and demanded
> > a recall of all the problematic products, Bloomberg said.
>
> This is a *great* lawsuit for the consumer.
>
> The Samsung player merely allows HDCP to be turned off. The movie studios
> will have to prove that HDCP actually could "prevent unauthorized
> duplication" in order to win their case.
>
> If they can't, then it would no longer be even a hint of a DMCA violation
> to disable HDCP, because DMCA only protects systems that prevent
> duplication...not those that prevent "unauthorized viewing".

excuse me if i'm dense, but isn't it the case that they would need to
show that DISABLING HDCP allows unauthorized duplication?

-goro-

Goro

In article < .com>, "Goro" <> wrote:
>Hurry, everyone buy SAMSUNG products!
>

>In response, Samsung refused to confirm the high-profile suit that
>involves Paramount Pictures, 20th Century Fox and Universal Studios on
>top of Disney and Time Warner.
>

Paramount hast o find some way of making money since they threw out the star
trek franchise on its ass.


>``In fact, we do not exactly know the contents of the lawsuit and the
>intention of the plaintiffs. We have yet to receive the
>complaint,'' a Samsung spokesman said.
>
>He guessed that the film makers take issue with DVD-HD841, which
>Samsung had sold in the United States between June and October 2004.
>
>``If so, I do not know why the movie studios are complaining about the
>products, of which production was brought to an end more than 15 months
>ago,'' the spokesman said.
>
>``We stopped manufacturing the model after concerns erupted that its
>copy-protection features can be circumvented by sophisticated
>users,'' he said.
>
>In this climate, he said Samsung would react to the lawsuit after the
>outfit recognizes its real intention.
>
>Samsung Electronics is the flagship affiliate of Samsung Group, the
>nation's foremost conglomerate. It is the world's biggest maker of
>memory chips and flat-panel displays.
>

GMAN

In article < .com>, "Goro" <> wrote:
>
>Jeff Rife wrote:
>> Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
>> > They claimed that Samsung's DVD players allowed consumers to avoid
>> > encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication and demanded
>> > a recall of all the problematic products, Bloomberg said.
>>
>> This is a *great* lawsuit for the consumer.
>>
>> The Samsung player merely allows HDCP to be turned off. The movie studios
>> will have to prove that HDCP actually could "prevent unauthorized
>> duplication" in order to win their case.
>>
>> If they can't, then it would no longer be even a hint of a DMCA violation
>> to disable HDCP, because DMCA only protects systems that prevent
>> duplication...not those that prevent "unauthorized viewing".
>
>of course, the great part is that they "demand a recall of the
>problematic product"... which is a no-longer produced item....
>erhmmm...
>
>-goro-
>
LMAO, like they can force a consumer to give up THEIR own property.

GMAN

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 23:34:30 -0500, Jeff Rife <> wrote:

>This is a *great* lawsuit for the consumer.
>
>The Samsung player merely allows HDCP to be turned off. The movie studios
>will have to prove that HDCP actually could "prevent unauthorized
>duplication" in order to win their case.
>
>If they can't, then it would no longer be even a hint of a DMCA violation
>to disable HDCP, because DMCA only protects systems that prevent
>duplication...not those that prevent "unauthorized viewing".

Another thing: They'd have to prove that Samsung did intend for
customer to hack their player or if it was supposed to remain a hidden
feature for tech service and not be widely known hack.

Anyway last I checked region hacks doesn't allow DVD to be copied at
all, just allows DVD from other regions to be viewed.
--
When you hear the toilet flush, and hear the words "uh oh", it's already
too late. - by anonymous Mother in Austin, TX
Spam block in place, no emil reply is expected at all.

Impmon

Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> excuse me if i'm dense, but isn't it the case that they would need to
> show that DISABLING HDCP allows unauthorized duplication?

It's pretty much the same thing. If they prove that disabling HDCP
allows unauthorized duplication, they also prove that not disabling
it prevents unauthorized duplication.

But, it might be enough for them to show that even though disabling HDCP
doesn't automatically allow unauthorized duplication, it might make it
more likely, thus HDCP would be thought to "prevent unauthorized
duplication".

So, the studios could win and not necessarily have anything definitive
stated about HDCP and its effectiveness.

If the studios *lose*, however, and fail to prove in any way that HDCP
prevents unauthorized duplication, then disabling HDCP is thus *not*
subject to DMCA rules about "disabling methods that effectively control
copying".

--
Jeff Rife | "Hey, Brain, what do you wanna do tonight?"
|
| "The same thing we do every night, Pinky...
| try to take over the world."

Jeff Rife

Impmon () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> Anyway last I checked region hacks doesn't allow DVD to be copied at
> all, just allows DVD from other regions to be viewed.

Correct. That part is not subject to US copyright law in any way.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Sherman.../LoanedDVD.gif

Jeff Rife

"Jeff Rife" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Impmon () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
>> Anyway last I checked region hacks doesn't allow DVD to be copied at
>> all, just allows DVD from other regions to be viewed.
>
> Correct. That part is not subject to US copyright law in any way.
>
> --
> Jeff Rife |
> | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Sherman.../LoanedDVD.gif

The MPAA has long held that the DMCA covers region coding as part of copy
protection.

Logos