Now suppose I invite you to my house, and we watch that DVD together.

Have I not effectively “distributed” the content to you, since your memory will now be one that has seen the movie, the songs might run through your head, and things you see or hear in life can now recall to you scenes and bits of dialogue from the movie?

seriously, modern copyright laws being put into place are not rigid.

modern copyright policy is designed for one-way flexibility. It empowers the rights holders to “decide” what is considered covered under the legislation, within the baseline boundaries in which it was created. There is absolutly no consistancy, and the consumers have to do whatever the other party decides, with no basic rights to the same flexibility as the other party. It is simply put, an unfair advantage.

The same thing is true in the US. In theory libraries and other educational institutions have the legal right to make copies of digital works for archival and other purposes, but they don’t have the right to circumvent the copy protection so they can actually copy the works.

An interesting challenge would be to start a service that converts media sent to them to any format the customer wants. You send them a DVD, they send you a XviD.

Or console modding, so people can play copied games. I bet you’re not allowed to sell mod chips, but you are apparently allowed to backup your games.

Fail.

I personally believe such a law is kept in place as a backdoor which allows (additional) accusations against suspects. Because it doesn’t matter that your computer was confiscated, let’s say, as a part of a drugraid, what matters is that there are DRM-broken materials on the PC. And even if no evidence is found about you being a druglord they still have your machine that is full of illegal stuff so they can smack you with that. Not as hard as they would have for drugtrafficing, but still.

1. when you buy the media if it gets scratched damaged and becomes un-playable you can return it to the shops or a special place where they will give you a free or 90% replacement.

2. if its a game which the Activation servers get removed they then refund your money, if the game disc gets damaged they offer you the same game in a digital format (EADownloader) Steam.

Don’t say it cannot be done it can i bought BF2 the ulitimate collection the disc because it had to always be in the drive got damaged i wrote to EA.

10 emails back and forth they told me i’d have to re buy it…

hang on i pay for the licence to use the product not the actual product since i down own it, and without the disc working i cannot stick to the licence.

they told me nothing they could do i told them yes there is you can transfer my game(s) free of charge to EADM since i already paid for the licence

4 emails later they broke and agreed to put all my games on EADM.

Now it took 4-5 days of arguing with them back and forth to get back to playing my game i purchased and paid for a licence to use.

The Disc is just a distrobution system to get that game you’ve paid a licence to use to you nothing more.

DRM stops me making a backup copy SafeDisc, SecuROM stops me running a backup so when my original gets damaged due to their MANDATORY game must be in drive when playing bs its going to get damaged pretty quickly.

Sorry.

Indeed, it is corporate greed and will not see reason, cease and desist downloader victimisation voluntarily.

The nature of corporates is sociopathic, we all know that.

I am not anti establishment, far from it, but i’ve little tolerance for corporates who couldn’t give a damn who they cause to suffer in their puruit of greater profit even though they are the few with the most money where the many are suffering badly these days

Which is why governments considering legislation’s and controls, such as the UK’s digital economy bill and others in Europe doing similar, USA etc would need to insist they, the greedy corporates, who are more at fault than uploaders and downloaders would be if torrent hosting websites and the peer to peer community agreed to only upload and download material which passes a period where creators/artists and retail make their primary profits and the curve falls to negligible losses when downloaded.

People will always go to see a new release at the cinema, buy a new release album, latest software etc but many cannot, most who download do so because they cannot afford to buy or pay cinema prices etc because they are among the masses who are not affluent.

Or do film creators, music artists etc think that what they throw out there is only for the rich and affluent, the rest of us have to simply see adversity for such and never be able to see or hear the material.

No, i don’t think they do, it is the corporates who are as you say still making huge profits, their losses are already minimal, i agree and have always said similar.

So is why i suggest governments, as i suggested to Lord Mandelson, explore the third way philosophy, and see if talks with pirate parties and scene representatives, torrent site owners can agree with only allowing material to be uploaded after admin on torrent sites, mod’s etc, cross check release dates to pertinent databases and allow torrent uploads of material 3-6 months from DVD’ release or box office rounds finish whatever.

If we want free, we wait, those deviating from agreed parameters are then fined, shut down whatever while those abiding by the spirit of co-operation compliance allowed to thrive.

instead of a wholesale punitive action against the peer to peer communities which will have very damaging consequences.

i rather think tolerance to uploads after profits are made and losses then negligible after a set period is preferable to damaging the online market places etc, because the majority who download do so because they cannot afford and use the online market places to make whatever meagre disposable income, benefits whatever go further, not frivolous spending but thrift, same people use those online stores etc to save money because they are poor, cut them off and the digital economy will suffer, cutting people off will be the only means at their disposal which will stop file sharing because of encryption/IP obfuscation/proxies etc, darknet.

A punitive approach is not necessary, it only appeases the already rich who don’t care how much damage they do online or to the poorest in society.

As somebody else has mentioned on another thread, what about people living in the middle of nowhere, in undeveloped countries, ex-pat’s downloading material in their own language, TV material from country of origin, etc, etc, etc.

DRM’s and other technological solutions will not work for toffee so cutting people off wholesale will be the only way to stop it and that will damage the public /domestic Internet immensely, the world has changed so governments and corporates must understand tolerance is the only way, else it is victimisation of those who are worse off economically to start with, isn’t the majority in society suffering enough!

Film and Music industry lost a case on it ages ago.
(Just after the sony rootkit scandal.)
If you buy a product you should be allowed to play it on whatever medium you prefer.

Thus DRM on cd’s and dvd’s were prohibited.

You’re wrong about the whole issue of selling software for copying DVDs, DVD Burners and the DiVX/XViD formats.

I’m on your side btw, but personally I use DVD rippers myself to perform perfectly legal rips of DVD movies made my family and friends (home videos) and use burners to put those back onto other DVDs, sometimes with some editing/compilation in between. I also use those DVD burners for much more than just burning movies. I use them as my main data backup system too, to store archives of work.
I find that the home movies I rip and burn back to DVD use quite large filesizes, so it’s very handy to be able to compress those files down using a codec like DiVX, and even better when I can burn those DiVX movies to a disc and play it back on a hardware device that supports it, which saves me a lengthy transcode later!

There are many perfectly lawful AND legal scenarios for all of these technologies which is why they are allowed to exist. If there were no lawful/legal justification for them, they’d be outlawed in a flash – we know how the ‘entertainment’ companies hold immense sway over legislative power after all.

Straight from the MPAA site…

* The Domestic box office continued to grow in 2008, reaching $9.79 billion after a 1.7% gain. (refer to page 3 of the 2008 MPAA Theatrical Statistics report)

* Worldwide box office reached another all-time high in 2008 at $28.1 billion, an increase of 5.2% over 2007. (refer to page 2 of the 2008 MPAA Theatrical Statistics report)

And still they claim they are loosing money! They are simply greedy and will never change!

A QuikFit outfit were even prosecuted under copyright law still in statute from the 1960′s, technically a few years back here in the UK and were found guilty and fined.

But QuikFit in that instance were playing the radio in the car bay, for customers and is one instance of the decades old legislation being used to sue somebody for copyright infringement through playing a radio in public, technically one is still required to possess a TV licence to even use a radio, still on statue but never enforced.
At the end of the day…

Anti piracy agencies and the organisations using them cannot address every downloader of films or music and will only ever be corporate greed victimising a sample minority in order to scare the millions upon millions who are the majority and offset costs of living which are forever rising, by downloading entertainment media etc, games and software’s.

Victimisation, is all it is.

If they prosecute in the civil courts, or with any change in law making copyright infringement by downloading, criminal, one single individual, they should prosecute everybody!

They cannot do that, the Digital Economies bill will not change anything but cause a lot of economic damage and i say a way forward i call “Compliance through co-operation” be seen by us downloaders and media entertainments corporate as the way forward.

where Cam versions are made criminal by multilateral agreement, Cam versions being a main cause of primary profit uptake losses.

Then admin at torrent hosting sites do more to stop DVD rip torrents from being uploaded until a 3 to 6 month period has elapsed allowing DVD retailers and hire outlets to gain secondary profit uptake until the curves drop to negligible loss to retailers.

music albums should be similar, a few months to allow artists to make profit and then after 3-6 months torrent uploads permitted, even if buying single by single over weeks, music is now pocket money prices at that level so if people want a freebie they wait a few months.

Same with software’s, only previous versions of software’s be allowed, new version releases not uploaded at all, want a freebie then use a prior version.

People will always want to see films at the box office, buy the DVDs, buy a music album, latest software’s.

Not many low income and unemployed people can afford to do so and the industries need to understand that by all the actions they are currently taking, only the worst off in society stand to be affected, they catch somebody earning £50,000PA they laugh at fines imposed and the industry cannot rationalise million pound lawsuits that isn’t gonna happen.

At the same time, downloaders cannot continue to compromise entertainment material from realising a good amount of primary profit uptake because it will impact the ability to produce new material, software developments etc.

So i feel that we the downloaders as well as the entertainments industries, software developers, game developers etc etc etc, need to find a happy medium and stick to that.

That happy medium i suggest is complience through co-operation where no new material is allowed, we want free material, we wait until those creating or developing the material have their primary profit and the industries accept the world is different, there is a major economic shift everywhere on the planet and low income and the unemployed have improved quality of life by being able do download certain material and leave copyright action alone when films or anything is beyond a period from release dates.

Everybody is then happy, all it requires is tolerance by authorities and torrent sites to disallow any material newer than 3-6 months from release, no box office cam version at all, no brand new software’s etc.

If we want it free, we should wait!

I ran this by Lord Mandelson, wonder if my concept of “Compliance through co-operation”, third way philosophy, was even given a second thought.

As DRM’s are bunkum, nonsense that may as well not exist and wanting to penalise the poorest in society in the name of greed is utterly out of order and is simply victimisation and desire to cause social adversity.

the world has changed, governments and authorities need to understand that, as too downloader communities need to understand the opposite factors.

I for one am stopping all Cam downloads, did so a while ago now and checking to see when DVD’s are released on IMDB, already deselecting several newer released scifi films i want to see and will wait until next Febraury/March until i do download them, not hard to do, we want free, we wait.

The authorities will do a lot of damage to the internet and online economy if we don’t curtail the main downloader factors denying primary profit uptake and i don’t want to be part of that damage, nor will i ever stop downloading the material i do because i am on the poverty line, if i was currently working and disposable allowed, i’d purchase, but same as all too many people that isn’t the case.

It’s something everybody needs to think about, pro and anti, not doing so is self serving and selfish.

Peace.

PaxDeltaPan.

Enlightened Evolution.
Tempered From The Chaotic Forge Of Life.

They don’t want laws to change.

The copyright laws, all over the world, are so messed up and dubious, that the difference between you winning or loosing a case is defined by the size/quality of your legal staf.

Its perfect for them, they can go after soft targets all they want, raking in lots of money, staying clear from hard targets like the guy in this article, who is clearly looking to prove a point.

If he infringed on copyright, or caused monetary or other loss to the media owners, then the owners should sue him.

Anyone wishing to copy their paid media for own personal use should save this email and use it as a legal doc for when they are dragged to court.

You say the movie industry wants to control the internet. Then why are they fighting creating a business model which would OWN the internet instead of fighting internet distribution tooth and nail? As a US citizen, I’ve learned that big companies have only one concern – the bottom line. The MPAA has completely failed in any attempts to control the internet, stop file sharing, and in finding ways to make the internet contribute to their profits.

“The MPAA wants total control of the internet as well, because it removes the control of distribution of movies from the MPAA,…”
If your above statement is true, then why have they totally failed to utilize the internet as a way to increase profits?
Your comments prove you don’t have a realistic grasp of the way corporate America does business. Trust me, they don’t give a rat’s ass about your e-mails, etc. Your e-mails won’t contribute to a higher EPS next quarter.

I refuse to buy any entertainment from a clutch of organisations with such despicable, morally corrupt business practices.

BOYCOTT THE FVCKERS.

Since the law is already broken by the entertainment parasites there is nothing left to break and we can do whatever we want.

If these pieces of crap believe that we are waiting for their advices about that they are delusional.

We want them dead and we will get what we want.

then i would take it much further all these company’s making cd copying dvd ripping tools but claim it only works on none DRM (CSS/ACSS) content.

their selling you high price software which they know full well 99.9% of every commercial CD/DVD is copy protected so their software is actually useless but they keep promoting new versions new builds.

then DVD copiers the whole point a dvd copier is to copy dvd’s but if all them DVD’s are once again protected just how is it possible your meant to use these drives for what they was intended for?

Then i’d SUE the FCC for rubber stamping and approving DivX players.

Sony, Hitachi, Panasonic and hundreds more support DivX and XviD but even though these formats are widely supported and approved by the FCC their is no LEGAL media on this planet or a online/Walk in store where you can buy MEDIA to play in this format??????

lol the FCC approves of a format and a DVD player which under legal terms is illigal to use which ever way you look at it.

Their breaking the law by making and supporting a device that you cannot buy media in the format it supports.

99.9% of DivX/XivD is capped or ripped from DVDS these players sell in their billions but yet not 1 single way of legally buying DivX/XviD content to play on these damn things.

Then i would hit Game companys using 5 installs and constant activation and have that made illegal.

imagine buying a microwave that after 5 times using it just told you to get stuffed?

Late for work again GrX??? yes sir i drove my car 4 times this week so it’s locked me out until next wensday.

Hey GrX you’ve cut your front lawn but the back lawn’s a complete mess what happened?

Oh, my lawn mower will only cut the front garden it turns off soon as i try to cut the back…

My oven only works with mc’ain oven chips anything else it just refuses to cook?

Sounds stupid eh? well this is happening with digital media world wide right now.

Pfft.. under the law you can make a backup copy but if there is restrictions on that media then by law you can’t make a backup copy lol

how backwards of a law is that bullshit

If they really meant that, there would be no use for the DRM that the guy is circumventing. If they are saying it’s OK to actually circumvent it, then they the last thing its gonna do is:

“ensure against abuse of films and music being illegally copied and distributed further”

The only thing it will ensure is its pissing off the PAYING CUSTOMERS!

I support the guy fully. Hopefully this will be yet another step to fully opening the flood gates on this issue.

“If you paid for a licence to watch it- you can watch it – End of story”

Not according to Danish law, which is why Henrik Anderson is doing what he’s doing. Miss the point much?

“However breaking CP so 1million people can dload it over the net, your sorry ass should be hauled off to juby.”

Oh really? How about giving us an explanation for that bullshit?

Obviously all on the same day, date and time.

If you paid for a licence to watch it- you can watch it – End of story
Like anyone gives a fCuk if you have a copy on MCE PC-yep the Police are gonna break ya door down over that one.(NOT)

However breaking CP so 1million people can dload it over the net, your sorry ass should be hauled off to juby. Leave the inet to those law abiding citizens. The sooner the better all these crims are locked up. You can “$hare a cell” as you like sharing so much

that’s nice to hear, they have finally succeeded in their aim to gain might!

They should sue him for $500,000,000.