Why Anti-Circumvention Laws Are Evil: Hollywood Gets To Veto DVD Jukebox, Despite Complete Lack Of Infringement

from the why-do-we-let-this-happen? dept

Wed, Mar 14th 2012 10:40am — Mike Masnick

As mentioned, it looks like Canada's new copyright law will include the "digital locks" provision, which is more accurately described as giving Hollywood a veto on any technology it doesn't like. If you haven't followed the specifics, the "digital locks" provision is an anti-circumvention rule that makes it against the law merely to break a "digital lock" (i.e., to route around any form of DRM, no matter how weak) even if (and this is the important part) you are breaking the digital lock for perfectly legal reasons. For reasons that I still cannot comprehend, Hollywood has insisted that anti-circumvention provisions -- even if there's no infringement -- are of utmost importance. If it was really about protecting against infringement, they would make it clear that the anti-circumvention provisions only apply in cases where copyright law is broken.

The real reason why they want anti-circumvention even when there's no copyright infringement is because it gives them a veto on any new technology. All they have to do is put in some sort of weak digital lock and suddenly the company has to "negotiate" a deal or they can be sued out of existence.

This is not theoretical. In fact, we now have yet another very real example of Hollywood's ability to kill a technology that only has legal uses thanks to the absolute nature of the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause (on which Canada's law was modeled). We've written about Kaleidescape a few times in the past. The company makes super high end DVD jukeboxes, that allow people to take the DVDs they own and store digital copies on a home (not internet-connected) server, to make it easier to watch those movies. The company has gone to amazing lengths to prevent its product from being used for infringement. Here, I'll let the company explain the details directly:

Kaleidescape has carefully designed its products to protect the rights of content owners. The hard-disk copy of each DVD retains all of the DVD CCA's scrambling and adds more encryption. The Kaleidescape System is a closed system that prevents DVDs from being copied to the Internet, to writable DVDs, or to computers or mobile devices. Furthermore, you cannot download a pirated movie from the Internet to a Kaleidescape System.

Every Kaleidescape customer must agree to copy only the DVDs that he rightfully owns, and must reaffirm this agreement upon copying each DVD. Kaleidescape Systems identify rental discs and prevent them from being imported. This combination of business practices and technology has been so effective that after years of searching for evidence that Kaleidescape's customers use their systems to steal content, the DVD CCA admitted in writing that Kaleidescape has done no harm to any of the motion picture studios, and was unable at trial to show any harm to the DVD CCA itself.

At one point, the company even went to such ridiculous extremes that it required users to put the DVD in the jukebox any time it wanted to play a movie from it -- effectively taking away the device's entire purpose, just to appease Hollywood.

And, none of it mattered. A court has issued an injunction against Kaleidescape selling these devices (pdf and embedded below). The specifics of the case revolve around questions of whether or not Kaleidescape breached the specific CSS license agreement that covers the DRM found on DVDs (which, again, Kaleidescape not only retains but enhances in its product). But that license agreement only has force because of the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA.

In other words this product, which can only be used for legal means -- and for which there has been no proof presented (ever) that it was used to infringe -- has been killed by a court... thanks to Hollywood's veto on this technology.

And the amazing thing is that all this does is make things worse for Hollywood. Considering how much Hollywood has been whining about DVD sales falling lately, a device like this only serves to make DVDs more valuable, meaning they would sell more.

Kaleidescape was founded in 2001 to bring consumers a fantastic experience for enjoying their movie collections. The Kaleidescape movie server makes digital copies of DVDs and Blu-ray Discs to hard disk drives so families can play back their movies instantly from any room of their home. A movie starts directly from the beginning, without forcing the family to endure advertisements, trailers, and confusing menus. With the company's wide-ranging innovations, customers can jump directly to the greatest scenes and songs in movies and concerts, and small children can start their movies all by themselves.

[....]

Over the years, Americans have amassed over 13 billion DVDs and Blu-ray Discs – about 110 per household. This means that many American families have a few thousand dollars tied up in a library of movies they hoped to enjoy over and over. However, with collections that size, families soon realize that it takes so long to find what they're looking for that it just isn't worth buying more discs. This frustration has led to a well-publicized 58% decline in revenues from the sale of DVDs since 2006.

The Kaleidescape System eliminates that frustration. Because it's so easy and fun for Kaleidescape customers to enjoy their movies, they start buying movies again, and with a bigger appetite. The average Kaleidescape family owns 506 movies on Blu-ray and DVD.

But thanks to digital locks and anti-circumvention rules, such a product got voted out of existence by the very industry it would help the most.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: anti-circumvention, copyright, digital locks, dvd jukebox, dvds
Companies: kaleidescape, mpaa

110 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:43am

Wow. It still shocks me sometimes how greedy Hollywood can be... wow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:46am

"Every Kaleidescape customer must agree to copy only the DVDs that he rightfully owns, and must reaffirm this agreement upon copying each DVD."

Seeing that plenty of websites have terms that require you to upload only material you have the rights too, and yet are packed with pirated material... it seems like an empty promise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:49am

Re:
It really shouldn't, as Albert Einstein said:

"Only two things are infinite, the universe, and Hollywood's greed"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:50am

Re:
Quick, shut down everything!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:53am

does anyone think that at some time the various governments and law makers will ever see how bloody stupid they have made themselves look, how super powerful they have made the movie/music industries and how much harm they have done both to new businesses and to customers by continuously siding with these self-interested bastards! i know of nothing else that is encouraged so much to be bought and once purchased so little can be/is allowed to be done with it. it's a little circular piece of plastic, for Christ's sake! get a fucking grip!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:59am

Re: Re:
Nahh, it's just bullcrap to say "the users promised to be good!" as a justification for the business model.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:03am

Kaleideswho?
"The Kaleidescape System is a closed system that prevents DVDs from being copied to the Internet, to writable DVDs, or to computers or mobile devices. Furthermore, you cannot download a pirated movie from the Internet to a Kaleidescape System"

Or I can just download/RIP content that can be run from my network on any damn device I choose.
And before the greedtards say oh that's illegal I ask, how many of you did 55, and came to a complete stop at stop signs today? And say F you greedtards, Ill do what I damn well want with my DVD/Music collection.

Yet another nail into the coffin that is the entertainment industry.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Justin (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:04am

Well, back to the pirate bay drawing board I guess
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tim K (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:05am

Re: Re: Re:
And yet, if they left that out they'd probably be bashed for not saying that. It's not like that's all they did. They also 'identify rental discs and prevent them from being imported' and 'retains all of the DVD CCA's scrambling and adds more encryption'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Doe, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:06am

Just use Handbrake
While this is an abuse of the law, there are plenty of ways around it. Handbrake will rip a DVD to the hard drive. It won't break encryption, but there is a little ole DLL that will. Put it in the Handbrake directory and you can rip a DRM encumbered DVD to the hard drive in one painless step.

Now we shouldn't be criminalized for doing this, but it is a risk I am willing to take.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lavi d (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:06am

Awesome
After thirty years, Hollywood has finally managed to kill the VCR.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:06am

Reverse-engineering is allowed under certain conditions. Why can't we apply the same standard to DRM? What makes DRM so special that we need anti-circumvention laws?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:07am

Re:
The selfishness of IP extremists maybe amazing, but not surprising.

Given their history of comments and lies here on techdirt and their previous history in general, this is only expected.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:08am

Re:
Because they have the lawyers. So shut up and take it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:08am

Re:
"and how much harm they have done both to new businesses and to customers "

They don't care, the only thing they care about is themselves. Their own campaign contributions and the revolving door nice job that they get after leaving office.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:11am

Hollywood's remaining life
Someone who has done the research, PLEASE answer this. At the current rate Hollywood is going, and assuming they continue to refuse to adapt to the digital environment, how much longer (an estimate is fine) until they declare bankruptcy, require a government bailout, or something of that nature?

I pose the same question for the RIAA and MPAA as well. For those who have done the question, please answer.

I would like a rough estimate of how much longer these abuses will continue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nathan F (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:11am

Re:
Damn Dirty Pirates, that is what makes DRM so special that we need anti-circumvention laws.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:12am

Hollywood, An Empire of Their Own
Interesting...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2YZws9xYEQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnFvYgg bw-8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpfMW-rVBsQ&feature=related
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:15am

MPAA: You have violated the DRM of that DVD. We will be suing you for 10 million.
Customer: But all I did was remove the plastic wrap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rich, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:17am

Re: Re: Re:
Really? Should I have to promise not to break into houses when I buy a screwdriver?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:19am

Re: Hollywood's remaining life
They made billions from shitty movies last year alone. They ain't going anywhere. The propaganda that they are dying and need more money and more special treatment, has been their specialty for the past 80 years. That's how they got this dominance position in the first place.

Don't fall for it, thats what they want.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:21am

Re: Hollywood's remaining life
My real fear is that they will succeed at legislating what the want to and kill any new, useful technology that comes along.
Given the amount of money they have to spend and their unabashed tunnel vision, they will put us back to 1950 in user devices to be had.
Given all of the licensing fees they have in place now and want to do as soon as possible, they could easily make a draconian future for all of us and be happy about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PRMan, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:23am

Re: Hollywood's remaining life
I don't have any evidence, but I think within 50 years people will be able to make great movies on a shoestring budget and market them easily over the internet with a system that pays enough to create new content without ANY RIAA or MPAA involved.

And, as Mike has pointed out repeatedly, they don't want to make money. They fear losing control, because then they lose everything. And it's inevitable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:24am

It's not just new products that the DMCA is killing off.

Most software from the 1980s can't be copied without circumventing the DRM, which means that it can't legally be backed up. Considering that most software was sold on floppy disks which will eventually fail, there's now no legal way to preserve that software.

The Xbox uses a standard IDE hard drive, but you can't replace it unless you also mod the system, which is illegal under the DMCA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:26am

Re:
There will always be those that chose to do what they want.
Good thing the skill level and willingness to destroy the device is also only in a few.
Don't kill ideas because you fear the few. The jukebox is something I would buy. I have so many DVD's that it would be very useful to me. I had On Demand and prefer my own collection. So make it happen and I'd likely BUY MORE MOVIES.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:26am

Re: Re: Re:
Which is why VCRs are now illegal...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:26am

SYNECDOCHE! strikes back
Yes, quite valid point! Websites (ones which are so far removed from the protections built into this product, even to the point that there's practically nothing in common between the two other that digital media are involved) usually have similar verbiage in their TOS, therefore, clearly, the two are completely analogous and anything you can deduce about one must be true of the other. Critical thinking at its best!

Huh, and I had been thinking the thing that was noteworthy about requiring all users to sign this agreement was that the requirement is in addition to doing most everything short of attaching a TASER� Shockwave� to the product to take down anyone who even thinks about using infringing media with it. Silly me!

I am glad someone pointed out the truly relevant point here. :P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:28am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also guns.
Mp3 players.
Pseudoephedrine.
Alcohol.
Tobacoo.
Rat Poison.

I could go on for days.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:30am

[CORRECTION: "SYNECDOCHE! strikes back"]
Sorry, "accept" the agreement not "sign", simply a sign of my obvious inferior capabilities. ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bob223, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:33am

WalMart and UV
It seems that the big MPAA thinks that ripping is legal as long as thay get another dip in the trough, see Walmart starts UV service, $2 to $5 to rip what you already own/lease.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:34am

Re:
Greedy? No, just plain stupid..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chosen Reject (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:40am

Re: Re: Re:
Do you mean like how we're all allowed to have knives so long as we promise to be good?

Do you mean like how we're all told to do our own taxes so long as we promise to be good?

Do you mean like how we're all allowed to drive around metal boxes weighing over a ton at significant speeds so long as we promise to be good?

Do you mean like how we're all allowed to purchase ammonia and chlorine (at the same time no less) so long as we promise to be good?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cartman, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:40am

Re: Re:
whateva, i do what i want!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:41am

Re: Kaleideswho?
greedtards

I am letting you know that I will be infringing your copyright on this word for the rest of my life. And you will probably lose lots of money because of it. Or not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:43am

Re:
And when was the last time you saw an unmodded original XBOX? I saw one yesterday because I went to an old local game store, they only had one because, and I quote, "People bring in old ones all the time, but we can never accept them since they've all been modded".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:49am

And this system is exactly what the movie studio need. Think about a system where you can take movies you own and search on them by year, genre, actor, director etc. It can be played anywhere from your house (and would an internet connected device be asking too much) giving untold amounts of value to your movie collection. Such a system would drive more sales then anything else out there today. Such a system is a fantasy though and will only exist through people who do it themselves. Nice job MPAA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:50am

Re: WalMart and UV
You mean rip and inject some other DRM crap into the file. (I am just speculating on that.) I suspect the Mafiaa wouldn't allow this without SOME form of DRM being injected back in. Otherwise how would they tell a legally ripped version, from a pie-rate one?

Just for fun fellow high lord piracy apologists (Yes I still love that):
http://music.ign.com/articles/718/718259p1.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:50am

Re: WalMart and UV
I sent that in yesterday..heh...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris Hoeschen (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:51am

Why did Hollywood want the Kaleidescape killed. This line says it all:

A movie starts directly from the beginning, without forcing the family to endure advertisements, trailers, and confusing menus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:54am

Re: Awesome
Yep.

You know, if I had a time machine, I'd be tempted to use it to go to the past to change their fate in the VCR case. Then I could return to the future and see how much less powerful and wealthy Hollywood was.

I personally believe that if they'd have gotten their way with VCR restrictions Hollywood might be making an entire order of magnitude less money today than they currently are.

The VCR example is such a good example of how mindblowingly stupid the entertainment industry is.

If CD's had had encryption when they were introduced the music industry would have done this same thing to MP3 players. This would mean, no iPod, which would mean no iPhone, no iPad, no Android phones, no Android tablets, no iTunes, no Amazon Digital Music store. The outlook for digital music would be bleak, bleak, bleak. And the music industry would actually be dying instead of pretending to be....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:58am

Re: Just use Handbrake
Are there any documented cases of someone being convicted of ripping a DVD?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 11:59am

Re: Re:
Actually, he said "the universe and people's stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:00pm

Kaleidescape
as a former employee of Kaleidescape, i wanted to point out that the article TOTALLY missed the point.

the case was NOT about copyright, or hollywood, or studios, or anything like that.

it was about a contract dispute with the guys who hold the keys to DVD encryption. in order for K to build a legal system, they needed to legally use those keys. they examined the contract, they saw no issues, so they signed up and then built their system.

the tricky part is that the main contract you cannot see until you sign up for it with the "lite" contract. and the lite contract does not state that you can do certain things. but the detailed contract does state that you cannot do them. so K has been in a legal battle over these keys due to the fact that what they are doing is not prohibited by lite contract. and since it is the one you sign to get into the party, they argue that the additional details required by the full contract are not valid.

however at the end of the day, as much as everybody WISHES this was about content, or copyright, or hollywood... it is not. it is simple contract law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:01pm

Re:
Seeing that plenty of websites have terms that require you to upload only material you have the rights too, and yet are packed with pirated material... it seems like an empty promise.
And again I find myself looking for a "bat-shit insane" button and having to settle for "funny".
More than anything else this article highlights the stupidity and greed of the studios.
Stupidity because there are literally hundreds of software products that will do exactly this for you just fine, better in fact, and without all the restrictions and well within the competance of even a basic computer user. Here is a company that's TRYING to put as much protection in as possible, far MORE protection in fact than hollywood ever added, trying to play the studio's game and GIVE THEM A CHANCE AT MAKING MORE MONEY by making their product more valuable. Do the studios embrace it? Do they say "thank you for making our irrelevant plastic discs vaguely relevant again"? No, instead they AGAIN leave anyone who wants this kind of functionality no legitimate route just hundreds and hundreds of illegitimate ones. That has to be the very epitome of stupidity - literally making criminals out of customers.
As for greed, it again makes it clear that the studios want and expect to control every single thing about a movie forever, trying to dictate when and how you can watch it, who with, what equipment you can use, how often you're allowed to watch it, whether you're allowed to think about it or offer an opinion on it. What's next? Specially sanctioned "official popcorn"?

I can only assume you yourself work for a studio. Noone else could be THAT deliberately obtuse about what this company has tried to do, can they?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:08pm

Re: Kaleidescape
and it's impact on copyright and the basic rights the purchaser of a dvd has.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:09pm

I'm in for a fight
I'm sick and tired about all the shit that is going on around the internet where companies and governments are constantly trying to limit our access to the world, information and censoring free speech.
Its time to fight back, comments and opinions on issues just don't cut it anymore. We have the power, when we fraught SOPA we saw how big that power is when websites censored their content in order to raise awareness on the issue lets tweak that concept a bit. What if instead of censoring all the people from a website we could just censor by IP.
You have an IP from the Hollywood area/city redirect to static page: message Hollywood tries to censor the internet and my access to free speech, I'm censoring Hollywood you are a casualty of this war f you.
Hollywood is just an example and we should not limit ourselves to that we should include capitals where governments take these stupid decisions.

That will be fun, I would like to see a governors face when he wants to read an article an a blog that one of his friends sent him a link to it and get a big f you on the screen. Ahh priceless....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scott@DreamlandVisions (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:10pm

I think you all missed the key reaon
"A movie starts directly from the beginning, without forcing the family to endure advertisements, trailers, and confusing menus. "

This is why the Kaleidescape had to die. If products that are legal (which this obviously was) *and* allow people, en mass, to skip all the cruft, then the value of that kruft drops significantly.

The movie distributors are PAID to put that kruft on the DVD and force the viewer to sit through it. It's a major part of the profit made on the DVDs. As the number of eyeballs guaranteed to see that kruft drops through the use of such systems as the jukebox, the price the distributors can charge drops.

It all comes back to business models predicated on control of the viewer and control of the distribution channel. You are not the consumer, in this case, you are the product.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:11pm

Re: Re: Re:
You are really coming out against one of the most fundamental aspects of ALL user/customer utility agreements?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:14pm

Re: Kaleidescape
Ironically, you are the one missing the point, despite mentioning it yourself. Without the combination copyright, the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause, and the DRM scheme on DVDs, Kaleidescape would not need any absurd licensing agreement with a bunch of useless bureaucrats simply to allow customers to play their legally purchased DVDs where and how they want to play them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:15pm

Re: I'm in for a fight
I'm way off topic here, sorry for that, just got mad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:16pm

Re: Kaleidescape
I'll have to disagree with you there. The argument is all about having the power to veto new technologies that threaten Hollywood's business model: the potential breach of contract is the weapon being used in this case
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:18pm

Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
I think within 50 years people will be able to make great movies on a shoestring budget and market them easily over the internet with a system that pays enough to create new content without ANY RIAA or MPAA involved.

The future is here! All that you say is can be, and is being, done right now, today.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:22pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I bought some industrial strength drain clog remover and had to sign a waiver saying I promise to be good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:23pm

Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
I really have no real talent for making movies and like a few of what Hollywood makes. Seriously, you don't want to see what I would come up with.
I just wish they would find a way to have people cheering them on, instead of seeing them as the evil empire. I really believe they could do it if they wanted to.

That and the government caring about the people would be cool too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:23pm

Re: Re:
"Noone else could be THAT deliberately obtuse about what this company has tried to do, can they?"

Trolls
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greedtard (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:26pm

Re: Re: Kaleideswho?
I'm going to sue!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:29pm

circumvention not always absol... oh, wait, nevermind...
Stop whining, fortunately the DMCA provides very straightforward and easy-to-obtain exemptions to the anti-circumvention measur...

Sorry, wait, well, there are exemptions, but only if the Librarian of Congress says it's oka...

No, no; hold a sec... only if the Librarian of Congress agrees after receiving a recommendation from the Register of Copyrights reques...

Ummm... (Wow, there's a lot of stuff in there, hold on, I'll get it...) Oh, okay, so: if the Librarian of Congress says it's okay after having received a recommendation from the Register of Copyrights, after consulting with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce, then you can... oh... sigh...

Okay, got it this time: if the Librarian of Congress says it's okay, after having received a recommendation from the Register of Copyrights, who, after having consulted with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce, then reports and comments on his or her views leading to the recommendation, then, finally the exempt...

wait, almost there...

Actually it's: if the Librarian of Congress (after having received the recommendation from the Register of Copyrights, who consulted with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and reported and commented on his or her views leading to the recommendation) makes the determination, in an on-the-record rulemaking proceeding, that persons using a copyrighted work are adversely affected (or are likely to be so within a 3-year period) by the anti-circumvention rule [wait, wouldn't that actually be anyone that wanted to do formerly allowed things, like making backups, or playing things on alternate players, or scores of other things?] while considering various factors listed in the law plus the Librarian's own judgement... THEN it's perfectly okay to circumvent the measure... Well, for the next three years, until the next round of rulemaking begins.

Sheesh and some of you guys act like the DMCA restrictions on circumvention are, like, onerous and set in stone or something... ;) :P

[And, don't give me that bull about how bad it is that they've put in this requirement for a proceeding etc. that prevents all you freeturds from just circumventing away and then pretending that it's okay just because you otherwise would have had a legal justification for your actions... I mean, really, why wouldn't you want the law to make sure that a further political hearing is required to affirm that you are actually adversely affected by being unable to exercise your rights due to DRM? Hell, maybe you're better off... builds character... um, uphill, both ways... y'know, get out and get some exercise or something instead of just sitting there circumventing all day. ;)]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:30pm

Re: Re: Just use Handbrake
I don't think so. I believe all lawsuits have been directed at companies "trafficking in decryption software" which is illegal. I believe it is still legal in the US to rip DVDs you own however if I read this article right, that is no longer legal in Canada.

This was an interesting and relevant case though.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/10/judge-suggests-dmca-allows-dvd-ripping-if-y ou-own-the-dvd.ars
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:35pm

I thought it was Al Gore...
...and what he really said was, "Only two things are infinite, the Internet, and the number of politicians that Hollywood has in its pocketeses, and I'm not sure about the Internet, except that I invented it."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:37pm

Re: besides, current measures don't "effectively" contr... no, nevermind...
Besides, the law requires that the protection measures "effectively control" the items in question, so things that are already easily circumvented don't really do tha...

Oh, my bad, "effectively control" just means that the protection measure requires, "to gain access to the work," either the "application of information, or a process or treatment" with the authority of the copyright owner. [sheesh, so basically it sounds someone could provide a static serial number, "1", and require that you enter the "1" to gain access, and if you enter "1" without having permission you would be in violation of the anti-circumvention measures. amirite? ahh well, no matter.]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:40pm

Trip trap, trip trap! Who's that circumventing my technological measure? :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BentFranklin (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:40pm

What Hollywood doesn't like is your ability to watch the same DVD in any room in your house. They want you to buy a new copy of the DVD for each room. Then they will make it illegal for you to move your DVDs from room to room. Then they will require interlocks between your doors and your DVD players so people can't watch a DVD playing in one room from outside that room. Then pirates will install Dutch doors, so Hollywood will pay politicians to pass legislation making it illegal to circumvent the anti-DVD-room-sharing door interlocks. People who manufacture or even publish schematics for Dutch doors will be jailed. But people who love freedom will still find ways to room-share.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:42pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
"I just wish they would find a way to have people cheering them on, instead of seeing them as the evil empire."

The best way would be to stop being an evil empire.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:46pm

Re: Re:
Doesn't mean its not "illegal" just because everyone does it. Ever heard of napster?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:46pm

RE: Changing the outcome of the VCR case
OOO! Sounds like a job for Inspector Spaceti... I mean:

Sounds like a job for the Space Traveler Who Can Also Travel Through Time!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:47pm

Re: Re:
Doesn't mean its not "illegal" just because everyone does it. Ever heard of napster?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:48pm

Re: Re: Re:
So to run with your idea, it is Hollywoods fault.

They still put CSS on DVD's when they know it has been broken by the "bad" people. They continue to pay for a system that has been bypassed and offers them no protection whatsoever, then complain that people are bypassing it.

They keep providing content without actual protections and are "SHOCKED" that people find ways to bypass it, because there is a law that says even a worthless lock means you can't make your legally authorized backup.

If they were actually serious about cracking down on DVD "piracy" they would withdraw the flawed product from the market.

So in this case I guess the justification for the business model is but but "piracy", that they totally could stop and opt not to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re: Re:
I heard about it once, some asshole from this band Metallica was calling it the devil. At the time it was funny because his bands success was tied directly to them encouraging fans to share their music taped at shows.
Then there was like some lawsuit.
Then the media companies got ahold of it, turned it into a giant joke, then I think it got turned off and locked a buncha their users out of their "purchased" music licenses or something...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:54pm

Re: Re: WalMart and UV
Just locked into the Walmart owned video streaming service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:57pm

So to run with your idea, it is Hollywoods fault.

Yes it is Hollywoods fault for holding onto the notion that they can change the will of their customers and stop them from consuming Hollywoods product without asking for permission first. This is like standing in front of a tsunami with an umbrella to hold back the water. It just will not happen no matter how hard you try.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 12:57pm

Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
"they will put us back to 1950 in user devices to be had"

I can't wait to pay extra to add color to my movie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:02pm

Re:
But what about the moron in a hurry (err Judge)?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Any other use besides the obvious for the DVD jukebox?

I can think of many uses for the screwdriver, but I cannot think of too many uses for the DVD jukebox besides being a great way to store your pirated movies, or to more quickly rip the rental movies that your buddy got last night.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:04pm

Re: Re:
You can call it greed, whatever. You don't want to pay for the movie, that's fine. Be a crook. That's your choice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Suja (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:05pm

Re:
why do i find this seriously believable?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:05pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
So I can at least watch new ads for my movies instead of the ones that came on the disk? Awesome
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:18pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Are you kidding me? A product like this would actually get me to watch my DVDs. They sit on my shelves because I don't care enough to rifle through them to decide on a movie, then take it over to my XBox, power it up and put it in. The only reason I like DVDs is the element of physical ownership. It's the same reason I purchase vinyl records, but mostly listen to their digital counterparts. Having a DVD Jukebox would probably get me to collect DVDs in much greater numbers. Unfortunately, I've learned of it just in time for it to be outlawed. So enjoy your lost revenue as I continue to sit on my hands, Hollywood.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:19pm

I noticed Scribd and docstoc require you to have a login to download, and at least Scribd requires you to pay a monthly fee. I wonder how much of this is due to increased copy protection enforcement. Does anyone know of a free document archive server replacement that lets you freely upload and download documents to and from others?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:19pm

Re:
(or is copyright just destroying the Internet)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What part of it identifies and prevent the copying of rental disks did you miss?

Fuck I really hate discussions with incompetent morons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:28pm

Re: Re: Re:
So you're now confirming that you're ignorant. Thanks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 1:30pm

Re:
Even when I go to Scribd to download something listed on their homepage, like The complete works of Thomas Jefferson I can't. I must login and they ask for a monthly fee after a trial period or something.

All of the document sharing sites seem to be doing this after what happened to Megaupload. It seems like the government is destroying every bit of the Internet. Now there is no where people can freely share documents, it's too expensive thanks to copyright laws. This is ridiculous, there is no one place we can easily archive public domain or permissibly licensed documents anymore.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Al Bert (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:02pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Whether you should or not is immaterial since you have no right to be respected. As a seller of screwdriver licenses, I assume that all screwdriver users are dirty criminals and probably stole the screwdrivers too. That said, it's only right that I treat custo-- criminals with no common respect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Al Bert (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
Jesus christ don't say shit like that out loud. That actually sounds like something they'd do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Al Bert (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:28pm

the start of something big
I imagine this is only the beginning. In the end, I don't think SOPA or snooping legislation will be necessary. All the state has to do is terrorize the private sector and people into giving up their rights voluntarily.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chelleliberty (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:43pm

Re: the start of something big
Indeed. Or, they'll just 'reinterpret' the laws that exist and do whatever they want anyway. Like, y'know, they are already doing.

Without a sea change in the way people view the government, I see little hope of things getting better near-term. Mid- to long- term, however they will screw up like all large bureaucratic organizations, and fall as inevitably and at least as hard as did the Berlin wall...

That could take some time though, so I'm working towards educating people for the sea change. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:53pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I bought some industrial strength drain clog remover and had to sign a waiver saying I promise to be good.

Where? I bought some a couple weeks ago and walked out after paying without signing anything. I'd stay away from the places that treat you like a toddler.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 2:57pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You are right why buy one device for hundreds of dollars when you can get a screwdriver to do the job.

Lets all buy a Raspberry Pi B and make something that is more powerful and can have multiple uses, not just one, although that DVD jukebox could be hacked to be much more the price probably isn't right, it is after all a computers with storage space attached that is all it is.

Brilliant thinking you there, lets ban all one time devices that have one use from the market and make it impossible for yourself to create a walled garden too LoL
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 3:44pm

Re: Re: Re:
Seriously? I'm a crook for thinking that not wanting to eat only hollywood sanctioned popcorn with a film is reasonable? *looks strenuously for "bat-shit insane" button again*

Let's try this ONCE more: We are talking about a product here that does it's level best to FORCE you to BUY a DVD first in order to use it and Hollywood thinks this is a BAD idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 4:09pm

Re:
Yeah instead, like most other things, it's only possible if you use an infringing copy or at least one that hollywood would dearly love to be infringing. As you say, way to go! Bluray as a technology was pretty well obsolete before it "won" the format war with DVD-HD and yet again and again they refuse to sell content in a format that people actually want, then winge again and again about how less people are buying the product. 8-track anyone?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 14 Mar 2012 @ 7:03pm

Re: Re:
And when was the last time you saw an unmodded original XBOX? I saw one yesterday because I went to an old local game store, they only had one because, and I quote, "People bring in old ones all the time, but we can never accept them since they've all been modded".

My friend actually gave me one a couple weeks ago. He found it at the dump and didn't want it (he's an older, technophobe). At least I'm pretty sure it hasn't been modded due to the fact that at least one of the screws is hidden under the labels on the underside and all the labels are still intact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Luke A, 14 Mar 2012 @ 7:42pm

Yo ho ho, back to Handbrake for me....

Seriously, Hollywood needs to get it's head out of it's ass.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 7:49pm

Re: Re: Re:
Did you even read the article? Apparently not, since you're making the assumption that the device can be used for pirating content. It cannot. This was proven in court. So at this point you are just looking like an ignorant ass. Take the trolling elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 7:54pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is an image of a brick wall:

http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/brick_wall.jpg

I you wish, you may try and argue with it instead, as it is abundantly clear that it is both more intelligent than this troll/shill, and probably more open to other ideas.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2012 @ 9:08pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Most people just buy a multi disk player and store them that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 3:19am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Any other use besides the obvious for the DVD jukebox?"

Watching the hundreds of DVDs I already legally own in a convenient manner. But I suppose it's too complex for you to work out that the people you're attacking are legal customers... yet again...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 3:34am

Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
"I don't have any evidence, but I think within 50 years people will be able to make great movies on a shoestring budget and market them easily over the internet with a system that pays enough to create new content without ANY RIAA or MPAA involved."

They already can. Those movies don't make enough money to challenge Avatar, however, so are often ignored by the industry.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 5:44am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Most people in your fantasy world? Seen any unicorns lately?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 5:56am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, but he sees plenty of windmills to tilt at, and does so regularly.

I'd like to point him toward a resource that would show him where that reference comes from, but he's presumably of the ilk who also believes that the public domain is somehow stealing...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 6:04am

Solution:

1- http://www.newegg.com/Store/Category.aspx?Category=3&name=Barebone-Mini-Computers
2- http://www.havetheknowhow.com/Configure-the-server.html
3- http://www.doom9.org/
4- ???????
5- Profit

Notice that 2 was obtained by googling "building a linux media server" without "" and 3 is a site I've used before but you can always google your way on ripping DVD's for free.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 7:42am

Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
They already can. Those movies don't make enough money to challenge Avatar, however, so are often ignored by the industry.
Which is a shame. I'm trying to think of any film with an Avatar-like budget which I'd actually consider "good" rather than just mindlessly entertaining and I'm coming up short. I've nothing against mindlessly entertaining, I'd just like a little more non-mindless too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 8:19am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
"I'm trying to think of any film with an Avatar-like budget which I'd actually consider "good" rather than just mindlessly entertaining"

In terms of a Hollywood movie with a bit of a brain, I was quite impressed with Rise Of The Planet of The Apes ($93 million budget) last year, although I'll admit my initial expectations were low. But even that made only half the gross of Transformers 3, as mindless as they come...

That's kind of the problem. Hollywood is obsessed with numbers, and even something like Girl With the Dragon Tattoo somehow costs $90 million (the original Swedish movie cost just $13 million). By the time you get to Avatar numbers, where virtually every shot has CGI and special effects techniques were being developed specifically for the film, you're going to get movies aimed squarely at the lowest common denominator - i.e. mostly mindless.

There's plenty of decent lower budgeted and independent movies out there to find, it's just that you'd never know it from the amount of money spent by the majors to push their latest blockbuster - and even that backfires (e.g. John Carter looks to be a massive flop). Lower budgeted movies get to both experiment a bit more and treat their audience like thinking adults, on top of not needing to make obscene amounts of money just to break even.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 9:55am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hollywood's remaining life
That's kind of the problem. Hollywood is obsessed with numbers, and even something like Girl With the Dragon Tattoo somehow costs $90 million (the original Swedish movie cost just $13 million).

And I'd pick the "low budget" original over the Hollywood remake in a heartbeat. Same with Nikita vs Assassin and a hoard of others. It sometimes seems that everything Hollywood touches turns to braindead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 15 Mar 2012 @ 11:04am

When your only tool is a noose, every problem starts to look like a pirate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 15 Mar 2012 @ 12:23pm

Not just greed but avarice...
Mere greed doesn't adequately describe this sort of situation. It's like a Eugene Crabs of petty self-harming greed. Is avarice a good enough description of that or is even that term insufficient to describe this kind of self-defeating stupidity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 15 Mar 2012 @ 12:31pm

Re: Hollywood's remaining life
No. I think the Hollywood version of Dragon Tatoo is put together better. I don't think it's worth the massive difference in production costs. I think it just reflects the nexus of talent that exists in a particular location.

I think the price difference mainly represents just how full of themselves Hollywood is and the fact that they are off in their own fantasy land detached from reality and practical considerations.

We need another Nexus. Current tech may make it possible. Although they may need to "flee from Edison" first.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Cowherd, 15 Mar 2012 @ 12:34pm

Think of it as saving ignorant customers from an obvious scam. After all, no properly informed customer would pay through the nose for what would otherwise be a bog-standard media server, except you can't do anything with it that the manufacturer doesn't approve of.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 15 Mar 2012 @ 12:34pm

Re: Kaleidescape
Without the distortions to copyright bought and paid for by Hollywood, Kaledescape would have been free to completely ignore the DVD and BD encryption cartels.

This "contract dispute" would be irrelevant.

This device is a very expensive way to work around the fact that cheaper and more effective tools are blatantly illegal and would be chased off the market.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 16 Mar 2012 @ 6:35am

Re:
When your only employees are lawyers every problem starts to look like a lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TJM1 (profile), 19 Mar 2012 @ 6:06am

ReDigi and flexible file-sharing DRM
I might understand Hollywood IF it were a single, obscure indie ebook author seeking commerical success, but this is just spray and pray tactics. Another victim is ReDigi. Capital Records file suit against the music file-sharing tech company. ReDigi's system is clever and creates an entire secondary market for music files, but that's not good enough for big music. I consult for File Secure Pro. We protect PDF files with flexible drm. Since the Megauploads and SOPA/PIPA issues hit critical mass, my Google alerts box has exploded with complex IP battles. Google's senior counsel, William Patry is skeptical about a copyrighted digital creative market, but his primary role is policy at Google! The first-sale doctrine could be modified, but apparently all the middlemen need to pay their mortgages.
[ link to this | view in thread ]