The Betamax Decision

[wulf109]

Didn't the Supreme Court rule that copying for personal use was legal in the Betamax decision? Was it overturned?

[filmboss80]

Depends on what you mean by "personal use." You could record TV shows for time-shifting purposes; and with "fair use" allowances, you can make one (1) back-up copy of a movie that you actually own, for purposes of protecting the original from excessive wear and tear. But that's about it.

[jagabo]

you can make one (1) back-up copy of a movie that you actually own

The betamax decision only addressed time shifting. It specifically avoided the issue of archiving.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc.

A single archive was allowed by the Audio Home Recording Act that applied specifically to some digital media like DAT tapes (and only with SCMS compliant devices) computer game CD-ROMs, and analog copies of analog audio recordings, not movies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Home_Recording_Act

Because DVDs are protected via encryption it is illegal to back them up (well, maybe you can copy them but you can't break the encryption, and since the encryption keys won't be included in the backup it will be useless) in the USA according to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act

[orsetto]

The "I'm allowed to make a backup copy" law doesn't seem to be specifically spelled out anywhere. During the VHS era, various courts (usually outside the USA) promoted this idea, and it has received a heavy push in recent years as various European governments felt increasingly chafed by Hollywood pressure and pushed back. The net result is a contradictory situation where some countries, even the US, supposedly "permit" backup copies for personal use, such as re-purposing for portable devices, but simultaneously disallow circumvention of encryption as jagabo notes. Since everything is encrypted these days. its effectively impossible to act on your alleged "personal use rights" without violating other statutes. This is driving the European Union up the wall and leading to open defiance of Hollywood in recent and upcoming legislative challenges.

Of course none of that will ever apply in North America, we will never see them loosen their death grip in our lifetimes. At least not legally: what consumers actually do privately is another matter (the entire portable video iPod/smartphone/Archos/MP4/AVI/DiVX concept would have been stillborn if consumers had waited for commercial content to be available instead of ripping it themselves).

[MOVIEGEEK]

To add to what orsetto wrote:
The US`Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Fair Use for copyrighted material but hasn't heard a case for making a backup of a DVD, the onus is on the copyright owner to bring a violator to court for damages. While making a copy of a copyrighted DVD may be legal for personal use, breaking CSS encryption is illegal under the DMCA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Law enforcement or copyright owners won't come after you if you make a copy of a audio CD or DVD for personal use but will prosecute if you share with others.