I think you all would like to read this if you havent already. http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6064016.html?part=rss&tag=6064016&subj=news
After reading http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6064016.html?part=rss&tag=6064016... things like a browser's 'Save Page as..,' download, even one's computer registry file and various buffers on one's hard drive can be construed as being illegal. Knowing the Nafia-like mentality of the MPAA and the RIAA, the concept of any hint of a copyrighted material being anywhere near one's computer will be an excuse for them to swing into action. The new laws mention using drug confiscation laws as a model for the new copyright laws. The government, under the drug laws can confiscate everything one owns just on the suspicion of drugs. many of rhese people have been found to be innocent but they lost everything anyway. The state of Florida stoppes drivers all the time and takes any monies that the driver and passengers have claiming possible drug money. It costs around $5,000.00 to get ones money back. If the cops grab $1,500.00 and it costs $5,000.00 to get your money back, most people will take the loss, but the cops look at it that you must be guilty because you DIDN'T try to retreave your money. Legalized theft is what this really is and the studios are shooting for this power....Follow the money trail. On another note, I conntacted an orginization that is fighting the new copyright laws and the re-copyrighting of public domain material. Their answer is below... First, since Congress DID, in HRRC's view unfortunately, change the law in 1998, anything from 1923 onward can still be protected for decades to come. Even some movies that, through technical mishaps, were considered to be in the public domain, such as "It's A Wonderful Life," have been effectively "recaptured" by focusing on elements, such as parts of a soundtrack, that are still protectible. So your understanding that the content itself is public domain material might not be correct or, at least, up to date. Second, and fortunately, one of HRRC's biggest victories has been protecting from movie industry attack the copyright law's "first sale" doctrine, which is a part of U.S. law but might not be part of the law in some other countries. This provision, 17 U.S.C. Section 109 -- http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000109----000-.html -- says that even though the content owner has rights over the COPYING or the PUBLIC PERFORMANCE of a work, it does NOT have rights over the physical distribution of the material on which the copy resides -- such as a book, video cassette, or DVD -- after its first sale in commerce. This is what keeps libraries, for instance, lawful, and it is what allows a video store to BUY a DVD and RENT IT FOR A COMMERCIAL PURPOSE without needing any permission from the content owner. (Some exceptions for the RENTAL of music CDs and computer programs were enacted I think in 1988 but they too can be re-sold as used.) SO, whatever copyright rules might apply to copying from your DVD, the law is clear that content owners have no power to control or object to the subsequent sale or rental of DVDs once they have been sold. (The law is less clear in this regard about content that you obtain by buying a DOWNLOAD to a blank, recordable DVD -- this is likely to be a controversial issue; stay tuned.)
