Artisan's High-Def Versions of Recent Discs

 
Old 05-04-03, 02:55 AM
  #1  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Artisan's High-Def Versions of Recent Discs

I wanted to reply to another thread, but it was closed.

Regarding Artisan's High-Defininition versions of some of their upcoming discs in Microsoft Media Player 9 format...

It's perfectly within one's rights as a consumer to make a backup copy in other media/formats of a recording or movie. This is protected by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. You can record a CD to MiniDisc or cassette to take with you while jogging - you can make a back up copy of a piece of software in case the original disc is damaged, and you can legally (although maybe not practically) back up your DVDs to another media, if you're able.

In fact, studios may be violating the DMCA by putting copy protection schemes in place that prevent licensees (i.e., those who've purchased a copy of the media) from making copies of the work.

In any case, no one suggested that anyone violate any copyright laws or anything else illegal. Since the new T2 disc has a version on it that's intended to be playable on one's computer, making a backup of that media is certainly a valid (and legal) concern.

I don't know the answer to the question in the other thread, but it would be nice to be able to view the HD version on a television, without having to buy a D-VHS tape system.

There's talk that Media Player files may someday be playable in stand-alone DVD players so that people can make use of their larger screen HD-TVs. I hope this is so, because as of now the HD versions are little more than a novelty if you have to sit in front of your computer to watch a movie.

-- Jough
jough is offline  
Old 05-04-03, 03:30 AM
  #2  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Astoria, NY, USA
Posts: 3,333
Re: Artisan's High-Def Versions of Recent Discs

Originally posted by jough
It's perfectly within one's rights as a consumer to make a backup copy in other media/formats of a recording or movie. This is protected by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
No, it isn't.

In fact, studios may be violating the DMCA by putting copy protection schemes in place that prevent licensees (i.e., those who've purchased a copy of the media) from making copies of the work.
No, they're not. Copy protection is the very thing that the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions make illegal to crack. For the DMCA to then make it illegal to actually use copy protection would be rather weird, to say the least.

Do you actually have any familiarity with the DMCA?

DJ
djtoell is offline  
Old 05-04-03, 04:06 AM
  #3  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Re: Re: Artisan's High-Def Versions of Recent Discs

Originally posted by djtoell
Do you actually have any familiarity with the DMCA?
As a matter of fact, I do.

The DMCA of 1998 contains provisions for preventing the circumvention of copy-protection schema. HOWEVER, section 1201 clearly states that the DMCA does not affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, nor does it alter the existing doctrines of vicarious and contributory liability.

Section (f) lists several exemptions to circumvention protection. Among these excemptions is the ability to circumvent copy protection for one's own use provided that the consumer lawfully obtained the copyrighted work and that circumvention is otherwise permissible under applicable law.

Due to the Digital Media Consumer's Rights laws of 2002 (HR 5544), it has become illegal for music and video manufacturers to employ copy protection that would disable the consumer's ability to make copies of that media for their own use without labelling the media as such, pre-sale.

Moreover, according to the "Digital Choice and Freedom Act" (HR 5522)

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(‘‘DMCA’’) was enacted as an attempt to safeguard the traditional balance in the face of these new challenges. It gave copyright holders the ability to fight digital piracy by employing technical restrictions that prevent unlawful access and copying. In practice, however, the DMCA also endangered the rights and expectations of legitimate consumers.

Contrary to the intent of Congress, section
1201 of title 17, United States Code, has been interpreted to prohibit all users—even lawful ones—from circumventing technical restrictions for any reason. As a result, the lawful consumer cannot legally circumvent technological restrictions, even if he or she is simply trying to exercise a fair use or to utilize the work on a different digital media device.

USE OF LAWFULLY OBTAINED DIGITAL
WORKS.—Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for a person who lawfully obtains a copy or phonorecord of a digital work, or who lawfully receives a transmission of a digital work, to reproduce, store, adapt, or access the digital work—

‘‘(1) for archival purposes, if all such archival copies are destroyed or rendered permanently inacessible in the event that continued possession of the work should cease to be rightful; and

‘‘(2) in order to perform or display the work, or an adaptation of the work, on a digital media device, if such performance or display is not public.
This is an amendment to the DMCA made in October 2002, so I can understand if you're not aware of more recent laws.

It's the "reproduce... [or] adapt" section that permits making backups of your DVDs as long as you do not make the performance of the content public.

Public displays of DVD content is prohibited under most extant copyright law, so that's mostly a moot point.

I hope this clears things up a bit.

-- Jough
jough is offline  
Old 05-04-03, 04:35 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Astoria, NY, USA
Posts: 3,333
Re: Re: Re: Artisan's High-Def Versions of Recent Discs

Originally posted by jough
The DMCA of 1998 contains provisions for preventing the circumvention of copy-protection schema. HOWEVER, section 1201 clearly states that the DMCA does not affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, nor does it alter the existing doctrines of vicarious and contributory liability.
That is true, but it does not have the effect which you claim it does. While § 1201(c) does state that "[n]othing in [it]...shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use," that does not grant a fair use exception to § 1201(a). The key phrase in (c) is "to copyright infringement." While the DMCA does not affect the availability of the fair use defense to copyright infringement, (c) does not grant a fair use exception to (a)'s prohibition on circumvention. You're reading (c) much too broadly; all it does is make clear that DMCA anti-circumvention violations and copyright infringements are wholly separate issues. So while the DMCA does not affect the fair use defense to copyright infringement, that does not mean that there exists a fair use defense to a DMCA anti-circumvention violation. And, indeed, there is no fair use defense to a DMCA anti-circumvention violation.

Section (f) lists several exemptions to circumvention protection. Among these excemptions is the ability to circumvent copy protection for one's own use provided that the consumer lawfully obtained the copyrighted work and that circumvention is otherwise permissible under applicable law.
You're omitting extremely important words which limit the broad statement you make here. (f) deals with the specific instance of reverse engineering only. (f)(1) grants an exception for those who have "lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program...for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs." (f)(2) likewise limits itself to reverse engineering, and (f)(3) and (f)(4) just elaborate on (f)(1) and (f)(2).

Due to the Digital Media Consumer's Rights laws of 2002 (HR 5544), it has become illegal for music and video manufacturers to employ copy protection that would disable the consumer's ability to make copies of that media for their own use without labelling the media as such, pre-sale.
Sorry, but this hasn't been signed into law. The last movement on the bill was that it was sent to the House Judiciary Committee on 10/3/02.

Moreover, according to the "Digital Choice and Freedom Act" (HR 5522)
Sorry, but this hasn't been signed into law. The last movement on the bill was that it was sent to the House Judiciary Committee on 10/2/02.

This is an amendment to the DMCA made in October 2002, so I can understand if you're not aware of more recent laws.
I'm aware of the bills, but I'm also aware that they're not actually laws. They haven't even been up for a vote before the House yet, they've only been introduced and sent to comittee. In fact, they weren't even introduced in the current session of Congress (they were introduced in the 107th, but it is now the 108th), so I think they have expired and need to be re-introduced.

DJ

Last edited by djtoell; 05-04-03 at 05:17 AM.
djtoell is offline  
Old 05-05-03, 03:32 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Astoria, NY, USA
Posts: 3,333
BTW, it might be worth noting that, upon further research, the last sentence of my post turned out to be true: both bills expired and were reintroduced. The Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act is now HR 107, introduced 1/7/03 and sent to the House Judiciary Committee on that date. As of 3/6/03, it was sent to a subcommittee. The Digital Choice and Freedom Act is now The Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations (BALANCE) Act, HR 1066, and was introduced on 3/4/03 and sent to the House Judiciary Committee on that date. According to the Information for Public Affairs' Billcast prediction system, these both have about a 1-2% chance of passing the House.

DJ
djtoell is offline  
Old 05-05-03, 02:02 PM
  #6  
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 6
within rights or not, I hear the T2 Hi Def is 6.5 gigs of files and that it's copy protection makes it so that it can only be played off of a DVD....so, no DVD-R will work (4.7 GB is too small) and no hard drive will work. You gotta buy the disc....but you could always ouput it from your HTPC's DVD-ROM to a hi def monitor.
ideations is offline  
Old 05-05-03, 05:02 PM
  #7  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
It's not really a matter of buying the disc as it is wanting to watch the HD version on a HD TV rather than on a computer.

The real problem of course is that there's no HD-DVD standard, so I guess we'll have to wait a few years to see T2 in true HD.

-- Jough
jough is offline  
Old 05-05-03, 06:10 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Ginwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kent, WA
Posts: 7,242
I don't have an HDTV, and I do have the ability to watch these on my computer, but I'm still not going to be buying this for the HI-Def version because, in spite of having a 21" monitor and decent sound and a couch in the computer room, I really don't enjoy watching movies on my computer.

I watched those BMW videos that came on the "free" MS disk on the computer, and those were ok, because they were short, but a full length movie I'd get too antsy--for some reason, it just doesn't hold my attention as well as settling down on the recliner to watch a movie.

Last edited by Ginwen; 05-05-03 at 06:13 PM.
Ginwen is offline  
Old 05-05-03, 07:18 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,513
Whether or not you will be prosecuted under DMCA or USC codes, depends on a few very important factors:

1) The purpose of making the copy

2) The amount of copies

Whether or not it's legal, is really not the issue, because a court or DA, will not prosecute you for making a single copy backup of a DVD. It might be illegal to jaywalk, but how many people get ticketed for it, and would it be a necessity of the courts? No.

In other words, as long as you are not a copyPirate, and have several copies of the SAME movie or cd, and are not making a profit off of those copies, you're fine.

We can argue legality all we want, but what it comes down to is, will you be prosecuted and the probability of it.

Several states have laws against heterosexual sodomy, but are they actively enforced? Nope. Is it illegal to have a little kinky sex with your girlfriend. Yes--in about 20 states, it is.

So, we have many laws--too many--and yes, we do things that are considered illegal by law all the time.
DVD Polizei is offline  
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.