Dvd Backup Law

[newbievamp]

what is the law on dvd backup? iv heard that you can backup your dvds as long as you keep the originals?.is that true? also can you give one away to your friend free of charge or would that be breaking the law?

[Thunder In Paradise]

Um, you can do whatever you want, just don't tell the MPAA, or any other institution that doesn't like DVD copying.

[newbievamp]

i didnt mean that lol.

[Poppa_Meth]

you are allowed one backup for personal use. making a copy for a friend, despite not charging, is illegal.

[dcsos]

Is that even true of a non copy protected title thats authored to be Public Domain footage?
Or is the DCMA including un encrypted discs?

[jimmalenko]

What is legal, What is ethical and Will you get caught are three completely separate issues.

Legal issues vary from state to state, country to country so it probably isn't fair to make one statement because it may not apply everywhere, but it is pretty safe to say that to the letter of the law, copying is illegal.

Ethically really depends on your own beliefs and values. This site is based around the Fair Use theory, which deals with being entitled to make a backup copy of any DVD that you have purchased for your own private use.

Will you get caught ? Most likely not, unless you start selling them for a profit.

Just about every single commercial DVD I have seen has some sort of spiel regarding unauthorized duplication, either on the disc cover or in the movie itself. This pretty much spells out what you can and can't do with it. The interesting part is that most talk about public performance, which indicates to me that in the privacy of your own home you can do what you like. This is a pretty grey area though.

[newbievamp]

my friend wants finding nemo but if i gave it to him free of charge what would the risks be?.sounds dumb i know

[jimmalenko]

I cannot answer that directly because it would be advocating warez which is against the rules of this forum. I think my previous post should answer your question anyway. It is only warez now that you have specified the name of the movie.

[housepig]

my friend wants finding nemo but if i gave it to him free of charge what would the risks be?.sounds dumb i know

in the US at least, the fact that you make no money off the transaction is irrelevant - you don't have the right to distribute the movie, for free or otherwise.

lend him your copy, or buy him one of his own.

[gmatov]

Under fair use, you are permitted to make a backup copy.

BUT, and this is the big BUT, you are not permitted to circumvent the protection encoded on the DVD.

That is the main thing the boy in Holland, I think it was, was tried for, DeCSS, ands he only did it so he could play it on a Linux box, which at that time was not possible.

If he had not done as the rest of the linux world has done, and let it fall under the GPL, he might not have been prosecuted, and I am very glad the lad has been exonerated. I hope the legal bills have been paid by the Community.

Cheers,

George

[richdvd]

the laws in every country differ slightly, so this thread could be argued non-stop

finding nemo

....and next time don't post titles, there is no need too. this thread is about general backups.

[garryheather]

You might set a legal precedence if you were taken to court for piracy and you claimed your friend was keeping a copy as an "off-site backup in case your house burnt down"...

Stranger things have happened.

[proxyx99]

Great idea. I know couple guys who would gladly volunteer to be an "offsite backup place" for a local Blockbuster at no additional charge.

[Mattsensei]

my friend wants finding nemo but if i gave it to him free of charge what would the risks be?.sounds dumb i know

I doubt the 'risks' are all that high. The police in this country have a lot more pressing matters (like fighting terrorism! ) rather than worrying about the not-technically-legal act of a backed-up DVD being circulated. You could probably lend it long-term though.

[newbievamp]

Under fair use, you are permitted to make a backup copy.

BUT, and this is the big BUT, you are not permitted to circumvent the protection encoded on the DVD.

That is the main thing the boy in Holland, I think it was, was tried for, DeCSS, ands he only did it so he could play it on a Linux box, which at that time was not possible.

If he had not done as the rest of the linux world has done, and let it fall under the GPL, he might not have been prosecuted, and I am very glad the lad has been exonerated. I hope the legal bills have been paid by the Community.

Cheers,

George

thats not fair what you said.the dude was only trying to make the dvd work on something else.if the ppl who make the dvds wasnt so tight and if they made there dvds to work on all systems then ppl wouldnt need to do what that dude did.also if the disk where not so highly priced there would be no need for backup because if you damaged your original it wouldnt cost that much to replace.a good slice of the price of dvds are tax.if you go to a wholesaler and buy these new movies in bulk you would see how much the disks realy cost.3 gbp a disk for a new movie but you have to buy 200.[b]

[jarvis1781]

Under fair use, you are permitted to make a backup copy.

BUT, and this is the big BUT, you are not permitted to circumvent the protection encoded on the DVD.

That is the main thing the boy in Holland, I think it was, was tried for, DeCSS, ands he only did it so he could play it on a Linux box, which at that time was not possible.

If he had not done as the rest of the linux world has done, and let it fall under the GPL, he might not have been prosecuted, and I am very glad the lad has been exonerated. I hope the legal bills have been paid by the Community.

Cheers,

George

thats not fair what you said.the dude was only trying to make the dvd work on something else.if the ppl who make the dvds wasnt so tight and if they made there dvds to work on all systems then ppl wouldnt need to do what that dude did.also if the disk where not so highly priced there would be no need for backup because if you damaged your original it wouldnt cost that much to replace.a good slice of the price of dvds are tax.if you go to a wholesaler and buy these new movies in bulk you would see how much the disks realy cost.3 gbp a disk for a new movie but you have to buy 200.[b]

what's not fair about what he said?? maybe you don't understand the word exonerated?

[ViRaL1]

I have a question. What makes CSS any less a part of what I as a consumer pay for to do with as I choose in the privacy of my own home than the actual movie itself?

[newbievamp]

no i dindt understand that word sorry.i tought he ment that he deserved to get caught/charged or what not. anyways howmany cups of suga dose it take to get to the moon?

[newbievamp]

jarvis1781
where do you get the pic from iv seen it somewhere b4 n its cool.

[jarvis1781]

she's my girlfriend
Alyssa

[dafreak]

Great idea. I know couple guys who would gladly volunteer to be an "offsite backup place" for a local Blockbuster at no additional charge.

rofl

[housepig]

Under fair use, you are permitted to make a backup copy.

citation?

AFAIK, fair use doesn't cover backing up, only excerpting, and only then under specific circumstances.

[newbievamp]

jarvis1781 hope i havent put my foot in it lol.

[gmatov]

Housepig,

Go back to the cases tried under the cassettes and video cassettes. It was deemed to be fair use to make a personal copy.

Don't take my first statement and make a case you want to argue. Read the disclaimer after it. It has been deemed illegal under DMCA to circumvent the encryption. As, for instance, 321 removing the ripper and still selling the rest of the package, legally.

Like saying "You can have all the chickens you want, but break the lock on my henhouse door, I'll see your ass in court."

Do you understand this message, or would you prefer to take a sentence you can criticize out of context? And, might I add, "Again?"?

Cheers,

George

[jaxxboss]

So basically it is legal to make a back up of a movie as long as you do not break the encryption.

[housepig]

Housepig,

Go back to the cases tried under the cassettes and video cassettes. It was deemed to be fair use to make a personal copy.

Don't take my first statement and make a case you want to argue. Read the disclaimer after it. It has been deemed illegal under DMCA to circumvent the encryption. As, for instance, 321 removing the ripper and still selling the rest of the package, legally.

Do you understand this message, or would you prefer to take a sentence you can criticize out of context? And, might I add, "Again?"?

I am taking the first statement - I didn't say anything about the DMCA argument, because that's pretty inarguable - if you break encryption, you are violating the DMCA.

I'm arguing the first statement because I don't agree that Fair Use applies - the case you are citing, if it's the Betamax / Sony case, applies to time shifting, not making backup copies. And if you read the Betamax case, it also specifies that once you watch your time-shifted copy, you are to erase it, not keep a permanent library.

Yeah, I get your message. So what have I taken out of context now?

@jaxxboss - if you copy it without breaking encryption, you are safe from the DMCA, yes. (which you could do by pointing a videocamera at your tv while playing the movie - the copy would suck, but you didn't break encryption). that doesn't mean it's legal to back up the movie.

[gmatov]

No, not Sony/Betamax, this predates that. As per the publishers, you were illegally producing a copy of a 4 track, or whatever , mini-cassette, and., prior to that, an 8 track was not allowed to be duped, per "them".

Now, with "perfect" copies of digital media, they are even more antsy. It even takes less time, at least in the old days, it took you an hour to copy an hour of VHS tape, or a music cassette. Now, you pop in z blank CD, a new one every 3 minutes, give or take.

They fought like hell against the digital tape format, and I believe this is where the ruling finally came down that there was such a thing as "fair use".

Cheers,

George

[proxyx99]

@jaxxboss - if you copy it without breaking encryption, you are safe from the DMCA, yes. (which you could do by pointing a videocamera at your tv while playing the movie - the copy would suck, but you didn't break encryption). that doesn't mean it's legal to back up the movie.

I'm having trouble understanding the logic here. You say "you are safe but it may be illegal". That makes no sense.
I'd rather say that making copies is in general illegal with the exception of a copy for "personal use", provided you keep the original.
I'd compare it to murder which is illegal but if committed in self-defence it remains illegal but may carry no punishment due to "special circumstances". "Personal use" is a special circumstance for otherwise illegal copying. Since it would be very difficult to prove a criminal act in these very private circumstances this law applies more to software companies making tools for copying etc. and distributors of copied material (they are more visible). I doubt if anyone will pursue these "crimes", though it is quite possible that in course of one investigation such activity may be detected and serve as nice leverage (additional charge).

[housepig]

@jaxxboss - if you copy it without breaking encryption, you are safe from the DMCA, yes. (which you could do by pointing a videocamera at your tv while playing the movie - the copy would suck, but you didn't break encryption). that doesn't mean it's legal to back up the movie.

I'm having trouble understanding the logic here. You say "you are safe but it may be illegal". That makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense - you wouldn't be breaking encryption, so the DMCA would not apply. But the DMCA is not the only law that applies, copyright law still applies, and you are infringing on copyright when you make a copy. The only exception I have been able to find in the copyright law only applies to libraries making archival copies, and they can only do that on rare items that would be prohibitively expensive or difficult to replace - which doesn't apply to 99% of dvds.

Whether or not Fair Use would cover a personal backup has not been tested in court, and when I look at some of the precedents for Fair Use, I don't know that it would be allowed.

@gmatov - now I'm confused. If we aren't talking about the Betamax case, what are you referring to? the Home Taping provision in the copyright law? the fight against DAT?

[Duchess]

Now that DL drives are on the way, if you copied a DVD on a bit-for-bit basis, regardless of what the actual content is you would have a copy that would work and you won't have decrypted it.

How long before some software house latches on to that I wonder?