DVD Makers Say That You Don't Really Own The DVDs You Bought... Thanks To Copyright

from the ownership-sure-is-a-funny-thing dept

So, we already wrote about some of the crazy filings from John Deere and GM claiming that when you buy a vehicle from them, you don't really own it, thanks to the software inside, which those companies argue they still really own. This was part of the opposition to requests for exemption from Section 1201 of the DMCA. Once again, Section 1201 is the anti-circumvention clause, that says you can't break DRM even if it's for non-infringing purposes. But... every three years, the Librarian of Congress is allowed to "exempt" certain classes of items from Section 1201. the responses above concerned locking down automotive software, but there are some other crazy ones as well.

For example, the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA) and the Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator (AACS LA) are so worried about an exemption for certain kinds of DVDs that it ran to the Copyright Office to claim that you simply don't own the DVDs you buy, and they'd really appreciate it if people stopped thinking they actually bought the DVD that, you know, they bought:

When consumers buy a DVD or Blu-ray disc, they are not purchasing the motion picture itself, rather they are purchasing access to the motion picture which affords only the right to access the work according to the format’s particular specifications (i.e., through the use of a DVD player), or the Blu-ray Disc format specifications (i.e., through the use of a Blu-ray format player). Consumers are able to purchase the copy at its retail price because it is distributed on a specific medium that will play back on only a licensed player.

Notice that even this statement is self-contradictory. The first sentence says they are not purchasing any content, but merely a "right to access." And yet, the very next sentence talks about the "purchase [of] the copy." So which is it? Are people purchasing a copy of the movie? Or are they merely licensing access to the content on the plastic?

This is a problem with Section 1201, showing how its expansive nature is fundamentally changing the concept of ownership in ways many people haven't even begun to understand yet.

Filed Under: 1201, anti-circumvention, dmca 1201, dvds, ownership, triennial review
Companies: aacs la, dvd cca

Decade-Long Courtroom Battle Between Movie Studios And High-End DVD Jukebox Manufacturer Ends In A Draw

from the Right-of-First-Sale-still-being-carved-into-uselessness dept

A decade's worth of legal battling is over and it hardly looks like a vindication for innovation or the Right of First Sale. Kaleidescape, a company marketing high-end DVD and Blu-Ray "jukeboxes" has reached an undisclosed settlement with the body representing Hollywood, DVD CCA (Copy Control Association).

Yesterday, the Superior Court of California, Santa Clara, noted a "voluntary dismissal" of the case. Kaleidescape CEO Cheena Srinivasan tells CE Pro that both parties have agreed not to comment at this time.

Court notices indicate that Kaleidescape requested a dismissal of the case on May 12 and that the next day a joint notice of settlement was filed. The court took three days to review the parties' stipulations and determined on May 19th, "Case complete."

The case ends a long and complicated test of the rights of both content creators and the studios who market that content … as well as the consumers who "own" copies of the content and the manufacturers who unlock it.

This may have concluded the "test" but there are no proven results. Since 2004, the movie industry has pushed to make Kaleidescape's offerings illegal. The fear of piracy has informed DVD CCA's every move. When the industry is concerned that a $4-10,000 item will be used mostly for infringement, it's drowning in its own paranoia. A big box store desktop computer with a $50 piece of software will do the same thing -- and that's if the would-pirates even bother to pay for the DVD-ripping program in the first place.

The industry wants to sell plastic discs but it doesn't want consumers to have much choice in how they use them after they've paid for them. Kaleidescape's jukeboxes would rip lossless DVDs and Blu-Rays directly to the internal drive and allow instant playback (including skipping the long stream of anti-piracy PSAs the studios still seem to feel obliged to insert into every paid-for movie) of the consumer's library.

Of course, it also bricked this latest offering by requiring the user to insert Blu-Ray discs before allowing "instant" playback (earlier in the legal battle, DVDs were also included in the requirement), thus removing a great deal of the convenience someone just paid over $4,000 for.

One of the sticking points for the CCA over the years was the anti-piracy DRM that comes standard on every DVD and Blu-Ray, but even Kaleidescape's lack of circumvention somehow posed a problem.

That group argues that the license that governs CSS – required of all manufacturers who make DVD players – expressly prohibits the manufacturers from allowing users to copy DVDs, even if they own those DVDs.

Kaleidescape has always maintained that the DVD CCA contracts express no such prohibitions. In any case, Kaleidescape servers make bit-for-bit copies so that the digital rights management (DRM) provisions of CSS are preserved.

Even with the DRM intact, the studios' presumption that Kaleidescape was manufacturing piracy boxes dragged the company into court and kept it there for ten years. What has just transpired doesn't really sound like a victory for the company. There may be more stipulations added to the legal framework surrounding Kaleidescape's jukeboxes that make them even more useless than they are currently. Or maybe future development is predicted on the company entering into contracts with the studios to push their lackluster digital offerings.

But whatever it is, it's hardly seems like a victory for the Right of First Sale. If the CCA's arguments are still being entertained, even owning a physical copy makes you (and Kaleidascape) subject to restrictive license agreements -- meaning it's highly unlikely bit-for-bit copying will ever be approved for those willing to shell out what Kaleidescape is asking for its equipment.

Filed Under: copyright, dvd jukebox, kaleidescape
Companies: dvd cca, kaleidescape