Re: What's the best way to backup to dvd?
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 13:56 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> After spending some time searching, I have to agree with you. It seems
> that it is legal to install deCSS, it is not illegal to distribute it,
> which means that whichever website you get it from is breaking the law,
> but you are not by downloading it. It seems to be very much like the
> films and movies here.
>
> According to what I have read, it is a first amendment issue, which of
> course only applies in the US. It's a bit like finders keepers. You
> find the software, you can keep it, but you're not aloud to lose it.
The first test of the DMCA here in the U.S. was the 2600 case. 2600 is
a hacker magazine that published DeCSS code on its website and was sued
by the MPAA. Unfortunately, the First Amendment defense failed to
protect the magazine. The judge ruled that while computer code is
clearly "speech," it is not "protected speech" because of its nature.
Despite the First Amendment, all speech is not created equal.
Commercial speech, for example, is subject to extra restrictions so that
a company can't (legally) promote a product as a cure for cancer if it
is not, in fact, a cure for cancer.
But it does strike me as odd that in the U.S., it is legal to explain
how to make a bomb, or legal to claim that Holocaust never happened, but
it is illegal to explain how to watch an encrypted DVD on a device that
doesn't have CSS built-in. As you said, weird laws.
European countries have a different approach to the issue of speech, so
I was curious about how the copyright cartels are managing to press
their agenda in light of that approach. It seems to me they are just as
successful there as they have been here.
But then as Steve Jobs noted, if the Europeans really wanted to get rid
of DRM and have interoperability between audio playback devices, they
have that power. After all, three of the big four music distributors
are European-owned (UMG is owned by French company Vivendi, Sony/BMG is
jointly owned by Sony of Japan and BMG of Germany, and EMI is British
[1]). I confess I get a little tired of Europeans blaming the U.S. and
the RIAA for the situation when the companies controlling the purse
strings are mostly in Europe's yard. Follow the money, and you'll see
who is *really* benefitting from draconian DRM and laws designed to
protect it.
> It doesn't really matter to me because I feel that it's my right to use
> my computer however I see fit as long as I don't affect other computers
> in the process. Playing media has no effect on other computers, unless
> of course I'm streaming it.
I agree.
[1] The fourth, Warner Music, is no longer a part of American company
Time Warner. It's owned by Edgar Bronfman, a Canadian, and his
investors.
--
Michael M. ++ Portland, OR ++ USA
"No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions
of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to
dream." --S. Jackson
Reply to: