According to US law, is AnyDVD legal?

ireland · Jun 29, 2006

Lp531

ye is on the money..

garmoon · Jun 29, 2006

Paladin (Have gun will travel) was one of the coolest western dudes on early B&W TV from the fifties. Richard Boone, star and bad A$$ for hire.

youmike · Jun 29, 2006

The law varies from country to country. Where I live, making backup copies is technically illegal, but the law is almost impossible to enforce. I suspect that much the same applies in USA & UK. I'm pretty certain of the UK situation. I also believe that selling pirate copies for profit is a criminal matter, but that making pprivate copies is a civil matter, which means in effect that Hollywood has to go after each person one by one. I suspect they will say to themselves that it's just not worth the effort. But commercial copying is another matter. This is pursued vigorously in US, UK and where I live.

To go back to the original question, AnyDVD is probably illegal in US law.

bilbo65 · Jun 29, 2006

And before "Have Gun, Will Travel" see this for Historical basis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paladin

witenoiz · Jun 29, 2006

I think you can rent the whole series from Netflix! Or you could go out and buy the entire series and make your own back-ups and learn how to miss-quote an old late 50's early 60's TV hero. "Have Gun, Will Travel . . . Wire Paladin, San Francisco."

BigMike2 · Jun 29, 2006

17 pounds for a DVD in Britan? Thats better then 32 USD! Thats outrageous!! I thought the 15 - 20 USD that I pay for a top notch new release was bad.

Lp531 · Jun 29, 2006

@ireland
Thanks, Not trying to sound like an attorney just trying to understand if my rights have changed.

[Quote:"only the sale & distribution of tools that circumvent copy prevention technologies"]

Wouldn't the key words be SALE & DISTRIBUTION
Possesion of the software being still legal? (As long as used legally, I KNOW TRY NOT TO LAUGH!)

I'm just try'in to find out if I still have a GOOD'OL LOOPHOLE...for possesing software.

The =USA= is all about LOOP HOLES...

arniebear · Jun 29, 2006

You can have the sw, it is what you do with it that pushes legality. My daughter uses Shrink all the time, but not for ripping movies. She uses it to do PowerPoint DVD Slide Shows for Parents/Schools and other agencies. It is becoming a business with her. So this sw can have other purposes. She does nothing illegal with it.

Lp531 · Jun 29, 2006

@arniebear
Good Point same here, I use Copy to DVD SE the ripping component of 1clickDVD to back-up my documents and just about everything else to DVD.

People don't just use their DVD software to back-up movies.

ThadiasJ · Jun 30, 2006

I wouldn't worry about it. If you have the program then use it. I still only use the free ones and they work find for now (DVDdecrypter, DVDshrink, ifoedit, and FabDVD).
Bottom line is you do not own the data on the DVD only the physical DVD.
If you are still ok with that then go ahead and make your "backups". I like making "backups" of movies because I can edit out parts of movies that I don't like. But, most of the time I just make a simple "backup" of the movie only with DVDshrink. Have fun and enjoy.

Noqoilpi · Aug 12, 2006

Treatise on DVD Backup - You do not own the movie, but you have the right to make one backup of the DVD!

Excerpts from
Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

Chapter 5 Copyright Infringement and Remedies

§ 504. Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits
(a) In General. - Except as otherwise provided by this title, an infringer of copyright is liable for either -
(1) the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or
(2) statutory damages, as provided by subsection (c).

§ 506. Criminal offenses
(a) Criminal Infringement. - Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either -
(1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain,or
(2) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000, shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, United States Code. For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement.

Chapter 10 Digital Audio Recording Devices and Media

§ 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.

Chapter 12 Copyright Protection and Management Systems

§ 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems2
(a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures. - (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected. -

(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

§ 1204. Criminal offenses and penalties
(a) In General. - Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for

purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain

Click to expand...

[bold]Fair Use[/bold]

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years. This doctrine has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work;

and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.
Click to expand...

Daniel J. Peng Office of the General Counsel Copyright Office

http://www.copyright.gov/1201/comments/038.pdf

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act clearly violates the fair use principle for all copyrighted works in digital form. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes no provision for fair use when prohibiting circumvention of copyright protection systems and hence clearly obstructs fair use of any copyrighted work. Users of every class of works are likely to be “adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make non-infringing uses” of those works.
The fair use principle has a long and respected history, and its advantages have been firmly established. When I obtain a copy of a copyrighted work, I have the right not only to view and enjoy the copyrighted work, but also to make copies for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research,” among other purposes.
It often takes a panel of judges, two teams of lawyers, and several months, if not years, to determine fair use; a simple “technological measure” cannot possibly be expected to determine fair use. Since non-infringing copy protection cannot distinguish between copying for fair use and copying for unfair use, non-infringing copy protection effectively stops all copying of works, even copying for fair use. For instance, the Macrovision copy protection technology unconditionally stops DVD-to-VCR copies, regardless of whether they qualify as fair use; no consideration is even given to fair use. Nearly every other copy protection scheme on the market today and in the foreseeable future makes the same error, stopping copying of works under any circumstances, even those of fair use.

Click to expand...

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/mgm/cea-ccia-hrrc.pdf

IN THE Supreme Court of the United States

METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS v. GROKSTER, LTD.

III. THE COPYRIGHT ACT FORECLOSES JUDICIAL ABROGATION OF THE BETAMAX DOCTRINE.
A. Copyright Is a Carefully Balanced, Statutory Right Intended To Serve the Public Interest that Should Not Be Judicially Expanded.

From the very first, this Court has consistently held that a copyright is solely a creature of statute, not the common law or any theory of natural or moral right, and that the scope of the right is strictly limited by the statutory grant.

(holding that the right “does not exist at common law—it originated, if at all, under the acts of congress”

The Copyright Act expressly defines an “infringer” of copyright as one “who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner.”

{17 U.S.C. § 501(a). The exclusive rights are defined as the rights “to do or to authorize” six specific activities with respect to a copyrighted work,

the most relevant here being reproduction and distribution to the public.
Click to expand...

Noqoilpi · Aug 12, 2006

Opps
I am seeing double!

mainomega · Aug 12, 2006

Good thing I don't live in the USA, But in an island with no copyright laws.

tranquash · Aug 12, 2006

My eyes!!! My eyes!!! Can't stop them from spinning...!!!! Help!!!

So, I shouldn't have to worry for fair use. But anydvd circumvents..., right??

What ever happened to the Office of the General Counsel Copyright Office comments, dust in the wind???

Noqoilpi · Aug 12, 2006

Congress can make any stupid law they want to pander to big bussinss. The problem for them is the Supreme Court of the United States may not uphold the law.

Big bussinss is not going to court with anybody who is abiding by fair use. They will try to put raod blocks in the way.

One of the original selling points of CD / DVD tecnnology was the act of playing the media did not damage [wear] the media, so it would last. The problem is once you take it out of the player it is easily damaged.

Why is it that CD / DVD do not come in a protective case like a floppy?

XweAponX · Aug 12, 2006

i do believe that even in the states, or anywhere that has copy right laws. that you are breaking that law if you copy a protected disc, to copy said disc you have to break the protection on that disc therefore making it an illegal copy.
you may own the disc, but not the content
so therefore your not allowed to make even 1 copy
Click to expand...

Really now? Well I state flat out that I copy every single DVD I buy, borrow, or rent. I use every protection-cracking method that is reported on these boards. I do this several times a day.

Also, I encourage everybody to do this, and I hold several private classes per week to show people how to use DVD Shrink, DVD Decypter, Ripit4me, FixVTS, and DVD Region + CSS Free.

I have run across a few DVDs I could NOT copy: These were the ones I brought back to the store and promptly got a refund for. When I was asked the reason, I told them, "COULD NOT COPY THE DISK" Now, some of these reasons get back to the manufacturer.

Moreover I have gotten several of my friends to start doing exactly as I do.

SO: Here it is. I consider that the law provides for me to make "ONE COPY" of ALL of my CD's and DVD's. If I cannot copy the CD or DVD because of a protection, I use alternate methods of getting the content OFF of the media. If none of the alternate methods work, BACK goes the software or DVD to the store with the express reason given, "I COULD NOT MAKE BACKUP COPY" - Therefore I cannot use this.

My backup copies have literally saved content I have spent thousands of dollars on. Since the US Government SAYS I have a right to this kind of protection, I WILL USE IT.

Oh yes: Since the law provides for me to keep "One Copy as Backup" - I make sure I have fresh backups every month, of every backed up program and DVD I own. Copies go bad, just like the original.

And so, to little pissant goodie goodies who come in to these forums and eject So Called Moral-poo out of their mouths, I would say stay the fook away from this forum, away from this website, and PLEASE, Feel free to NOT use DVD SHRINK, AnyDVD, NERO, ImgBurn, CloneDVD, and EVERY OTHER PROGRAM DELIBERATLY DESIGNED TO REMOVE PROTECTION FROM DVD MEDIA.

Now, as far as I can tell. DVD SHRINK also removes some of the protection. Not all of it, which is why we can still download DVD Decrypter. Because I believe sincerely that MacroPissin CANNOT HAVE any legal claim to DVD Decrypter as developed by Lightning UK and altered and assimilated by several million software developers under open source. He gave it to us as FREEWARE and OPEN SOURCE. I utterly reject their claim of ownership of this software by MV, and I continue to use it several times a day.

So, to these ratgasbags that would keep whining about how we are breaking the law, please go elsewhere. The rest of us: WE wish to discuss our Problems and other issues related to DVD SHRINK.

Thank You.

arniebear · Aug 13, 2006

Well I state flat out that I copy every single DVD I buy, borrow, or rent
Click to expand...

I consider that the law provides for me to make "ONE COPY" of ALL of my CD's and DVD's
Click to expand...

It is one thing to make a backup of something you own, but another to backup something you do not.......it is called piracy and illegal.

Log in or Sign up

According to US law, is AnyDVD legal?

ireland Active member

garmoon Regular member

youmike Member

bilbo65 Regular member

witenoiz Regular member

BigMike2 Member

Lp531 Regular member

arniebear Active member

Lp531 Regular member

ThadiasJ Member

Noqoilpi Regular member

Noqoilpi Regular member

mainomega Member

tranquash Regular member

Noqoilpi Regular member

XweAponX Member

arniebear Active member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

According to US law, is AnyDVD legal?

ireland Active member

garmoon Regular member

youmike Member

bilbo65 Regular member

witenoiz Regular member

BigMike2 Member

Lp531 Regular member

arniebear Active member

Lp531 Regular member

ThadiasJ Member

Noqoilpi Regular member

Noqoilpi Regular member

mainomega Member

tranquash Regular member

Noqoilpi Regular member

XweAponX Member

arniebear Active member

Share This Page

Useful Searches