What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
372 Comments
- NBCLocal, on 06/24/2009, -0/+301This is absurd. If the judge rules in favor of the MPAA, the recording industry will follow suit. It also begs an answer for the question, what about online sales? Can I burn the TV show I buy of itunes for back-up purposes, or so I can watch it in my TV?
This is ridiculous. - raustin, on 06/04/2009, -4/+235What about half of a copy?
- CoreyTamas, on 06/04/2009, -0/+202Dear MPAA,
I'm making copies of my DVDs as I see fit. I will not sell them or distribute them because I don't believe that's legal, but you can be certain that I want to protect my investment in this over-priced media and I have a right to do so. There will be copies of my DVDs on my hard disk for me to watch as I please while the DVD sits safely on the shelf so that it isn't hurt.
I'm not scared of you. Come get me. - spiri, on 06/04/2009, -5/+173WTF, Digg. No one has written "***** the MPAA!" yet?
- robbob, on 06/04/2009, -1/+147Judge should rule to have the MPAA be required to provide a downloadable copy be available for our fair-use back-up
- ShingoEX, on 06/04/2009, -1/+111I seriously hope you realize you can burn more on a DVD than a movie.
- maximilen, on 06/04/2009, -14/+121It's only illegal if you get caught... Which isn't going to happen... Unless you're mass selling the bootleg ***** on eBay. Hell, even then you won't. (True story: I once bought a claimed genuine Iron Man DVD on there, but when I got it I found it was just a burned disc in a cheap home-printed case. When on top of that it didn't work, I got pissed. Finding out the eBayer in question just closed his account got me even more pissed. And guess what I did? I ***** called the FBI. And know what they told me? Basically to ***** off... The prickly-voiced gentleman said they might peruse the case with eBay, though most likely not. When I asked him what the purpose of the FBI warning logo at the beginning of every film was, the guy just told me to give them a call when I find out who the importer is and where they warehouse the shipments, otherwise he said don't bother their asses.)
So yeah, moral of the story, the MPAA and the FBI ain't comin' after you and you aren't gonna go to the penn and get told to shave everything below your waist by Carl if you make a stinkin' copy (to backup for yourself or sell by the dozens on eBay).... - sgerwel1985, on 06/04/2009, -3/+100Dear MPAA,
Lick my nut sack.
Truly yours,
The World - lotsofgadgets, on 06/04/2009, -0/+81And the copy has to be DRM free so it is playable on present and future platforms
- inactive, on 06/04/2009, -2/+76Don't obey bad laws.
- SoCalChris, on 06/04/2009, -1/+74On that same thought, would buying a movie from itunes, and then having itunes copy that movie to your ipod be illegal? After all, you've now got a copy on your computer and your ipod.
- theendlessnow, on 06/04/2009, -0/+71CoreyTamas,
We have decided to come and get you. The future of America is at stake and your terrorist actions will NOT be tolerated any longer. However, you will be happy to know that the new government administration has ruled that torture is wrong... so we're simply coming to kill you.
Have a nice day (what's left of it),
The Feds - Exedous, on 06/04/2009, -10/+77Why do they make DVD burners then?
- veriix, on 06/04/2009, -2/+63You wouldn't steal a baby...
- GoatMonkey2112, on 06/04/2009, -1/+61Well if you copy everything except the copy protection you technically have altered the files and it's not a direct copy.
- beachtrader, on 06/04/2009, -2/+58Home made porn.
- sinisterouge, on 06/04/2009, -0/+53So even thought I take great care of my discs, they do sometimes get scratched and become unplayable.... Does the MPAA really expect me to buy another full priced copy? ***** NO WE WON'T GO!
- skellener, on 06/04/2009, -0/+53Exactly! If I convert a DVD (MPEG2) to an MP4 isn't it a subsampled conversion? Not a bit for bit copy. If it's OK to do when it's analog because you lose some quality, what's the difference here?
- trucanadian, on 06/04/2009, -0/+48to copy homemade/non-copyrighted dvds. There are so many of them. Where have you been living?
- BoneheadFarker, on 06/04/2009, -0/+47Nope...the goal is to impose a one-payment-one-view arrangement for content. And they seem to be using the courts pretty effectively in attaining this goal.
- DirtPile, on 06/04/2009, -2/+49For pirating games, of course.
- WalkerTXclocker, on 06/04/2009, -4/+48***** the MPAA!
Too late? - ddotccDPU, on 06/04/2009, -0/+44DMCA rules that music CD's can be dupe'd for backup purposes. Why wouldn't this apply to DVD's? Stupid double standards... oh, and ***** THE MPAA
- haramachi, on 06/04/2009, -0/+44The disconnect between the music and movie divisions of some of these conglomerate media empires (Sony, Viacom, etc.) is truly astounding. As is the number of years that have passed without clear legal guidance on the subject of making fair use copies of digital media. Either it is or is not legal. Somebody, please just figure it out and tell me so I can get on with my life, either as a vindicated consumer or as a criminal. I really don't care.
- nerd64, on 06/04/2009, -1/+45When I buy a movie, I'm not paying $15 for the disc, I'm paying for the movie that's on that disc. So I think I can do whatever the hell I want with that video as long as I'm not breaking any laws. The MPAA keeps getting more and more ridiculous...
- spritom, on 06/04/2009, -0/+42Dear MPAA,
You've lost touch with reality and the law. May your flagitious efforts be as successful as Edsel, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, and the Spruce Goose.
Sincerely,
The World
PS - at least the 3 massive failures above had some people with good intentions, unlike yourselves. - StuartGibson, on 06/14/2009, -2/+43No, as that is explicitly allowed in the iTunes EULA you agree to before purchasing anything from the iTunes store.
Not that I believe EULAs should be legally binding documents, but the point is that the copyright holder has agreed to this use of their content. Once again, when it comes to personal use I don't think the copyright holder should have any right to dictate what you can and can't do. - RiotHeart, on 06/04/2009, -1/+41Or would I?
- sockpuppets, on 06/04/2009, -0/+37To mock you.
- merreborn, on 06/04/2009, -0/+36What, you want me to burn linux ISOs to floppies?
- kronzdigg, on 06/04/2009, -0/+36I think we should stop buying media from any company supporting the RIAA. Is there a list?
- appleofdischord, on 06/04/2009, -1/+36Or a thousand 1/1000th copies that can then be streamed over the internet to various other computers.
- anthropodeus, on 06/04/2009, -1/+33or two half-copies?
- JasonCox, on 06/04/2009, -26/+58Wow, no one has said this yet? Well, I guess I have to...
***** THE MPAA - senae, on 06/04/2009, -0/+31What if it was just half a baby?
- therealkid, on 09/10/2009, -0/+31The thing is, they're fighting a lost battle. Not a losing battle, a lost one. DVD backup isn't just a secretive anarchist underground movement done in effort to spite the industry. The general public is part of it as well. Not to mention, when I buy a product, I'm purchasing any and all rights to that product. No one else has any say in what I use it for.
- jockc, on 06/04/2009, -1/+31I think I speak for everyone when I say MPAA can eat a dick.
- ianzu, on 06/04/2009, -0/+30Remember how they got Al Capone? If you become a thorn in the government's side they'll get you for copying one DVD.
- Thistlejack, on 06/04/2009, -0/+30If this is true, it's bad business. It's well known that in the psychology of purchase world that:
1) People vastly overestimate the amount the amount they'll use a product when they purchase it for an up-front cost - E.G. I think I'll watch a movie at least 4 times when I buy it for $20 and could have chosen to rent it 4 times for $5.
2) People have a fixed "unhappiness" cost associated with making even small transations. E.G. I'm less happy making 20 $1 payments than 1 $20 payment (all things equal). - Platypus3333, on 06/04/2009, -3/+32I respect the need for copyright, but man, the DMCA is a *****.
- JackSchittt, on 06/04/2009, -1/+30Anyone who's read any of my other posts on this subject knows I'm VERY anti-piracy. Most of the reasons people give to justify their illegal piracy are flimsy and can be easily shot down. However, even I believe in "fair use" laws and believe that, in this case, the MPAA can go eat a dick.
As soon as the technology became affordable, I copied all of my old VHS tapes (some were 10-20 years old) to DVD. I'm glad I did because most of those tapes were irreplaceable and getting worn out. These days, I make backups of all my kids' DVDs so they can take them to grandparents' houses, relatives, friends, wherever, and I don't have to worry about them getting scratched/ruined/lost. If something happens, I can just make another copy from the originals without having to shell out another $15.
And I will continue to do this no matter what the MPAA says about it. I've bought my copies legally, and the law says I have the right to back up what I own in case of loss, theft, or wear-and-tear. And I will continue to do just that. ***** the MPAA. - LordBacon, on 06/04/2009, -2/+29Video or it didn't happen.
- 3242130193, on 06/05/2009, -0/+26You'd still have 25% left. Simpleton mistake
- mburk, on 06/04/2009, -0/+25***** THE MPAA
Okay, now let me explain their thought process. The companies represented by the MPAA make a vast majority of their money by distributing content to various exhibition outlets (movie theaters, television networks, DVDs, etc.). The goal is to increase the total amount of product that they've distributed, and they count each exhibition outlet as a new "distribution." So if you were to download a movie from iTunes and then burn it so you can watch on your TV, then you've taken two "distributions" and turned it into one. The reason that you're able to download from iTunes and copy to your iPod is because of the licensing agreement between the studios and Apple. Both parties understood that there was a logical connection between downloading from iTunes and copying to an iPod, and it was thus accounted for in any licensing negotiations. There's no way for the studios to create a licensing agreement with Apple that would involve television sets (why would Apple compensate the studios for a platform that have no control over), so that particular use is in violation of the license agreement.
To Bonehead, there's a subtle nuance between one-payment, one-view and the concept of "distributions" that I explain above. Of course you can rewatch the DVD you've paid for 100 times, but you can't transfer it to a new platform. To nerd64, notice how I didn't say anything about the movie itself in my explanation above? That's because they don't think in terms of movies; they think in terms of distribution. You may be paying for the movie, but in their eyes you're paying for a particular way to consume that content.
All that said, this is a fundamental difference in philosophy about how content should be distributed. We as consumers want to think of it as a "pay per title" model, whereas the studios are running on a "pay per distribution" model. Their model is in desperate need of revision. This is a generation gap that makes perfect sense to those who grew up in an era where content can be easily copied and redistributed. Unfortunately the people who currently run the media companies didn't grow up in that era.
So what can you do? Come out to LA or NY and get a job in the media industry so we can all try to shape this policy from the inside. There's no incentive for them to listen to the masses, 'cause you'll all just keep buying the ***** anyway. - r0g3r, on 06/04/2009, -0/+25They are trying to set legal precedent to eliminate fair use.
- hivoltage815, on 06/04/2009, -2/+26"It's only illegal if you get caught"
Do you actually believe that? You only get in trouble if you get caught, you are still breaking the law regardless. Otherwise I could justify murder or any other high crime.
The question is whether you think the law is ethical and whether you choose to follow it. If you're willing to take the risk, fine, but don't bitch if you get caught. - TheCheeks, on 06/04/2009, -1/+22I think you're on to something...
- StuartGibson, on 06/14/2009, -0/+20Different argument. You are explicitly allowed to make a copy for backup purpose. However, the DMCA *also*, in a stunning display of retardedness, explicitly prohibits the circumvention of copy protection, even for backup. CDs don't have copy protection (for the most part, anymore).
- maximilen, on 06/04/2009, -0/+19"It's only illegal if you get caught."
Speeding is illegal. I still do it. I try not to get caught. I go faster (around 80) because I think it's still just as safe. I however don't go 100 and weave in and out of traffic on a busy freeway. Catch my drift?
The same applies to copying. I'll ignore any law that says I can't copy for non-redistribution, since I don't agree with it and I know it's not harming anyone. I won't however go on eBay and sell the copies for profit since I don't agree with counterfeiting. - takeodrizzt, on 06/04/2009, -1/+20maximilen isn't contributing to the problem by calling the FBI in this case. He was trying to legally purchase a DVD that was advertised as legal, and was scammed. It is and should be illegal for people to copy DVDs and then sell them. The article and argument is that the law should not extend to those of us who make copies for our own personal use.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 377 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is