Copying DVDs may be legal

Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.
A court in California will this month rule on the legality of an
ingenious new software package that makes perfect copies of movies on
DVDs even if they are protected with the latest anti-copying
technology.
The software has been developed by 321 Studios of St Louis, Missouri.
The company says its DVDXcopy program does not violate the 1998 Digital
Millennium Copyright Act, which makes it illegal to defeat
copy-protection schemes.
According to 321, the software is legitimate because it does not do
anything that the DVD's copy protection is designed to prevent.
DVDXcopy works by intercepting the digital video code just after it has
been legitimately unscrambled by the DVD player, but just before the
unscrambled code is converted into a protected analogue TV signal. It
then saves the unscrambled video on the PC's hard drive before copying
it onto a blank DVD.
The copied discs play perfectly. It is even possible to copy the copy
back to a hard drive, and then onto another blank DVD.
Part of 321's case is that its product reinstates the right of
consumers to back up their discs. The argument dates back to the taping
of records in the 1970s, but few in the entertainment industry accept
its validity.
http://www.seegoul.com/home.php/kWEWDKIL

syofcdyagwrq@yahoo.com

wrote:
> Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
> 'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.
> A court in California will this month rule on the legality of an
> ingenious new software package that makes perfect copies of movies on
> DVDs even if they are protected with the latest anti-copying
> technology.
> The software has been developed by 321 Studios of St Louis, Missouri.
> The company says its DVDXcopy program does not violate the 1998 Digital
> Millennium Copyright Act, which makes it illegal to defeat
> copy-protection schemes.
> According to 321, the software is legitimate because it does not do
> anything that the DVD's copy protection is designed to prevent.
> DVDXcopy works by intercepting the digital video code just after it has
> been legitimately unscrambled by the DVD player, but just before the
> unscrambled code is converted into a protected analogue TV signal. It
> then saves the unscrambled video on the PC's hard drive before copying
> it onto a blank DVD.
> The copied discs play perfectly. It is even possible to copy the copy
> back to a hard drive, and then onto another blank DVD.
> Part of 321's case is that its product reinstates the right of
> consumers to back up their discs. The argument dates back to the taping
> of records in the 1970s, but few in the entertainment industry accept
> its validity.

?! I thought 321 went out of business years ago b/c of the CAD order
and that there was no DVDXCopy anymore?

from http://www.dvdxcopy.com/

CAUTION: Authentic DVD X Copy software is no longer being sold
anywhere. Many "closeout", clearance, auction and discount websites are
selling fake DVD X Copy Software products and "patches" that are not
authentic, CANNOT be activated or are cracked versions that DO NOT WORK
properly and/or that contain spyware. Beware of any sites that continue
to sell version 4.0.3.8 and that guarantee activation. DVD X Copy
products purchased from these sites are not authentic, not eligible for
support or updates and should be returned for a refund. For information
on alternative DVD Copy software products, click here.

-goro-

Goro

On 1 Mar 2006 04:37:30 -0800, wrote:

>Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
>'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.

That is still a grey area. IMO I think personal backup should be
allowed as long as you keep the original with the backup (original
under lock and key if you wish) and that you should not sell the
backup or pass it around.

There has been debate over fair use for personal backup copy since VCR
and computer disks and was never settled because everytime a new
format comes out the big companies try to get the court to punish
everyone for making a single backup copy.
--
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

Impmon wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2006 04:37:30 -0800, wrote:
>
>> Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
>> 'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.
>
> That is still a grey area. IMO I think personal backup should be
> allowed as long as you keep the original with the backup (original
> under lock and key if you wish) and that you should not sell the
> backup or pass it around.
>
> There has been debate over fair use for personal backup copy since VCR
> and computer disks and was never settled because everytime a new
> format comes out the big companies try to get the court to punish
> everyone for making a single backup copy.

At least in the case of the VCR the DMCA did not exist; so the issue was
mainly fair use. The DMCA makes the process of backing up a DVD illegal
as it requires circumventing copy protection; so even if the reason your
backing up is legal fair use, the process to do so is illegal.

Nicholas Andrade

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 12:43:55 -0500, Impmon <> wrote:

>On 1 Mar 2006 04:37:30 -0800, wrote:
>
>>Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
>>'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.
>
>That is still a grey area. IMO I think personal backup should be
>allowed as long as you keep the original with the backup (original
>under lock and key if you wish) and that you should not sell the
>backup or pass it around.
>
>There has been debate over fair use for personal backup copy since VCR
>and computer disks and was never settled because everytime a new
>format comes out the big companies try to get the court to punish
>everyone for making a single backup copy.


Of course a backup is legal. When you buy the DVD, you have purchased
the intellectual property.

Indeed, if your copy was destroyed, it would be legal for you to make
a copy from a rental, friend, etc. because you still own the
intellectual property.

Of course, if you sold, lost, or gave away the orginal, you no longer
own it.

As far as disabling copy protection goes, that is illegal. So just
how you would make the copy is another issue.

no@none.com

wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 12:43:55 -0500, Impmon <> wrote:
>
> >On 1 Mar 2006 04:37:30 -0800, wrote:
> >
> >>Story here that copying DVDs for personal backup may be legal under
> >>'fair use', if it uses a method which dodges the DMCA.
> >
> >That is still a grey area. IMO I think personal backup should be
> >allowed as long as you keep the original with the backup (original
> >under lock and key if you wish) and that you should not sell the
> >backup or pass it around.
> >
> >There has been debate over fair use for personal backup copy since VCR
> >and computer disks and was never settled because everytime a new
> >format comes out the big companies try to get the court to punish
> >everyone for making a single backup copy.
>
>
> Of course a backup is legal. When you buy the DVD, you have purchased
> the intellectual property.
>
> Indeed, if your copy was destroyed, it would be legal for you to make
> a copy from a rental, friend, etc. because you still own the
> intellectual property.

RIAA says this is not true for CDs. Infact, making a backup copy is
not legal b/c "Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily
available at affordable prices"

-goro-

> Of course, if you sold, lost, or gave away the orginal, you no longer
> own it.
>
> As far as disabling copy protection goes, that is illegal. So just
> how you would make the copy is another issue.

Goro

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:41:53 GMT, wrote:
<snip>
>Of course a backup is legal. When you buy the DVD, you have purchased
>the intellectual property.
>
>Indeed, if your copy was destroyed, it would be legal for you to make
>a copy from a rental, friend, etc. because you still own the
>intellectual property.
>
>Of course, if you sold, lost, or gave away the orginal, you no longer
>own it.
>
>As far as disabling copy protection goes, that is illegal. So just
>how you would make the copy is another issue.

A good example of why it's not a good idea to take free legal advice
from anonymous posters on Usenet.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Charlie Hoffpauir

"Goro" <> wrote:

> > Indeed, if your copy was destroyed, it would be legal for you to make
> > a copy from a rental, friend, etc. because you still own the
> > intellectual property.

I doubt that. You also are buying the form the IP is recorded on, and
if you don't protect your physical copy, you lose both the copy and the
license to use the Intellectual Property.

> RIAA says this is not true for CDs. Infact, making a backup copy is
> not legal b/c "Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily
> available at affordable prices"

A BIG LIE by the RIAA; do you have any idea how many CD issues have gone
out of print and are never reissued? I don't know, but I wouldn't doubt
that right now there are over 100,000 different out of print titles
exclusive to CD and now unavailable in any form.

It's less of an issue with DVD, so far, tho thousands of DVD-only titles
are unavailable, through being withdrawn from the market entirely.

The implication that LEGAL copies will always be "readily available at
affordable prices" is particularly misleading when talking about
recorded music in general. I would guess there are over a million
non-CD titles alone that are currently unavailable in any form, many
priceless musical gems that can never become popular again without first
braking the law.

[Crossposted to
alt.video.dvd,rec.music.classical.recordings,rec.m usic.beatles,alt.movies
..silent which are all currently or recently flooded with RIAA/MPAA
politically oriented anti-consumer bullshit.]

Anyone gettin tired of industry idiots trying to make you feel guilty
for buying CD/DVDs?

Walter Traprock

Walter Traprock <> appears to have caused the
following letters to be typed in news:wetraprock-67FF83.18084701032006
@comcast.dca.giganews.com:

> A BIG LIE by the RIAA

Imagine that!

Q. How do you know a representative of the RIAA is lying?

A. His mouth is moving.

> Anyone getting tired of industry idiots trying to make you feel guilty
> for buying CD/DVDs?

Yes, but (un)fortunately it hasn't stopped me!

--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made. ~ FDR (attrib.)

Matthew B. Tepper

And speaking of copying CDs, I am still hugely enjoying your dub for me
of Geraldine Farrar/Fritz Kreisler.
You don't have that on DVD as well, do you?
Cheers old chap

anthony