Why Backup?

[ddlooping]

I swear, we must have watched Nemo about 15 times literally, since I bought it 2 weeks ago.

How to feel sick at the sight of a movie you previously liked?
Get a kid.

[SLICK RICK]

How to feel sick at the sight of a movie you previously liked?
Get a kid.

I couldnt agree more.

SLICK RICK

[BobK]

Interesting arguments, I just wonder why it only applys to DVDS?

I've never heard of anyone backing up their VHS collection or their cassette tapes or their LPs or their rare playboy mags. If your collection gets destroyed, wont your home insurance pay for it to be replaced with brand new stock?

If your collection is worth enough then insurance might pay for it. But most people have a deductable (usually from $150-$500). So if 1, or 10, DVDs get damaged your insurance is probably not going to pay for it.

As for backing up VHS- if a tape breaks you can splice it. If a tape has a bad spot you can still watch it even though it might have a few seconds that don't play. Try splicing a broken DVD. Try watching a DVD that freezes at the bad spot.

That's where teaching a child to be responsible comes in. Now I am in NO way questioning your parenting skills, I'm just saying that there are many things in your home that can be broken by the kids that you can't "back up"...

How do you deal with that?

So you're saying that you shouldn't have insurance either? After all, if you aren't going to back up things that you can protect then why should you protect anything?

[Savant]

Bugster wrote:

You CAN backup a DVD. You CAN NOT backup a hot wheels car. If you COULD backup a hot wheels car for a fraction of the price of the original (minus packaging etc), there would be those that would do it.

You're missing my point. We all KNOW you can't backup a hot wheels car, that was my point.

Forget the children aspect, as adults there are MANY things we own that cannot be 'backed up'. You can't back up a computer. (speaking about the MACHINE not the data here) So if you decide to go on a bender and smash it to pieces, YOU are responsible for replacing it. That's called being responsible for one's actions. If you get in an auto accident, you can't just 'grab your backup' and go. That's why you buy insurance.

In life there are consequences to actions. Don't want to lose something? Then either protect it, be careful with it or insure it. Teach kids that things COST MONEY and they need to treat them carefully or they will be deprived of them.

There is no greater incentive to a child to take care of their things than for them to be deprived of those things if they are irresponsible with them.

However, as I said before, while I appreciate the need of a parent to back up a repeatedly watched children's DVD, it only represents a tiny fraction of DVDs that are pirated... err... that are "backed-up".

Regards,

Savant

[BobK]

You're missing my point. We all KNOW you can't backup a hot wheels car, that was my point.

So your point is that if we can't backup everything we own then we shouldn't back up anything.

You can't back up a computer. (speaking about the MACHINE not the data here)

And since you can't back up a computer then you shouldn't back up the data either, right? Or is it okay to back data? (And what do we find on a DVD? Could it be.... data?)

[Gazorgan]

Stop whining about pirating. Go and hammer any SVCD2DVD thread since there is one and only one justification for doing that.

I do backup my computer, the whole thing (fault tolerant parts are great). And I have a backup car. Now granted both aren't 100% identical to the originals, but then my backed up DVD's aren't either.

If I were to go on a bender, I wouldn't smash my computer. I may kick my dog, but I'm sure he's backed himself up somewhere in the neighborhood.....

After Christmas I'm going to take all my kids DVD's away. I'm going to put them on a LAN. Now I don't have to worry about the originals, since they will be safetly put away. Interesting that do do that I have to do exactly the same things I'm doing to back them up in the first place. Couple of used computers and some TV out video cards and I'm done.

My kids know the value of things, but you are asking a lot of an 8 year old to not drop something or to never have sticky fingers....

[SLICK RICK]

So your point is that if we can't backup everything we own then we shouldn't back up anything.

That is what it seems like he is saying to me.

And since you can't back up a computer then you shouldn't back up the data either, right? Or is it okay to back data? (And what do we find on a DVD? Could it be.... data?)

Savant, I have nothing against you but I cant wait to hear what you have to say about BobK's last statement.

SLICK RICK

[Savant]

Gazorgan wrote:

My kids know the value of things, but you are asking a lot of an 8 year old to not drop something or to never have sticky fingers....

Don't get me wrong, I think we all know accidents happen, especially with kids. However, part of life is knowing that if you screw up there is a cost. If there is no cost to a screw up, then there is no deterrant not to do it again... Yuno what I mean?

For example. Let's say it's 20 years in the future, and cars are now made so they 'regenerate' themselves if damaged. Nano bots or whatever. Now, given this the car will never need to be repaired.

The problem is that since there is no risk to getting in an accident (as the car will repair itself) what is the INCENTIVE to drive safely?

I believe that one of the reasons that kids (tweens and teens) today don't care about file trading is because they have no respect for property. Most of them seem very selfish and self-centered. Nothing else seems to matter so long as they get what they want. They want music? "Well screw the people who toiled to make, market and produce it, if I want it I'm going to take it. If they don't like it, that's too bad."

Then they whine when something THEY create gets stolen. The ultimate in hypocrisy.

What always gives me a laugh though are these sites that promote P2P and illegal sharing of music, and they have a copyright notice at the bottom of the page... hehehehehehe

BobK wrote:

So your point is that if we can't backup everything we own then we shouldn't back up anything.

No, not at all. The problem with your statement is that it assumes ownership of things that people really don't own.

And since you can't back up a computer then you shouldn't back up the data either, right? Or is it okay to back data? (And what do we find on a DVD? Could it be.... data?)

A person who buys a CD or DVD (software, music or movie) DOES NOT OWN THE DATA CONTENT OF THAT MEDIA. Many people don't realise that. When you buy a DVD you buy the VIEWING RIGHT to watch that movie, you do not buy the right to copy it as you see fit and give it away to anyone you please. That's a right reserved for the copyright holder. Thus the term COPY right. The entity or person that owns the copyright has the RIGHT to determine how it is COPIED.

People love to ignore copyrights until it is THEIR original content that is being used without their permission.

Regards,

Savant

[BobK]

The problem with your statement is that it assumes ownership of things that people really don't own.

As far as I can tell, you don't understand what is Owned and what rights you have.

A person who buys a CD or DVD (software, music or movie) DOES NOT OWN THE DATA CONTENT OF THAT MEDIA.

Many people don't realise that. When you buy a DVD you buy the VIEWING RIGHT to watch that movie, you do not buy the right to copy it as you see fit and give it away to anyone you please.

I haven't read anyone in this thread saying it's okay to "give it away"- you're the one that keeps throwing in that red herring.

[Savant]

BobK wrote:

As far as I can tell, you don't understand what is Owned and what rights you have.

Are you an individual who believes that if you possess something that you automatically become the owner of that item and any content contained therein?

I haven't read anyone in this thread saying it's okay to "give it away"- you're the one that keeps throwing in that red herring.

Actually, you're missing my point. This all relates back to the original post which calls into question whether people have legal legitimate interests in 'backing up' DVDs. Generalizations notwithstanding, I think my point was relevant.

Nevertheless, it was mentioned that there are cases where this might be beneficial. (and perhaps legal to a limited extent - IE actually buying the DVD and then making a copy AND retaining the original copy)

However, I dispute any assertation that legal backups are the majority of 'backups' being made in this regard. Emperical data would suggest that most people either rent or borrow the movie and make copies, or download the movie and burn copies.

How does one justify 'backing up' that which they do not own, if that is indeed the case?

Regards,

Savant

[lordsmurf]

Savant, you're either an MPAA worker or just very uninformed in regards to this topic and all that is involved. I'll let you decide.

You can bang your "it's illegal, why don't you just get better jobs and spend more money" drum all you want.... but the fact remains... we all have valid reasons for backing up.. whether you or MPAA likes it or not.

I also notice you're in Canada. Your laws and USA laws differ.

[Savant]

Lordsmurf wrote:

Savant, you're either an MPAA worker <snip> I also notice you're in Canada.

Which would tend to make the possiblility of me working for the MPAA pretty remote now wouldn't it. However, let's dispense with the ad hominem attacks please.

Your laws and USA laws differ.

You're quite right. In Canada it is legal to private copy CD/DVD mateiral for personal use, but a levy is placed on the sale of blank media to make up for the lost revenue by the music/movie industry. The proposed levy for 2004 is supposed to be ~US$2 (converted for your benefit) per DVD, on top of the cost of the media. These tarriffs are still being developed, and have not yet been imposed. Anyone interested in reading more on this can do so here.

In the end Canada has essentially given up on trying to enforce copyright laws on end users, and instead collects cash from them to pay off the music industry. If such a system existed in the US there would likely be no battle ongoing with the RIAA since they would be taking in bilions in levies, and that would offset some of the damage that has been done.

You can bang your "it's illegal, why don't you just get better jobs and spend more money" drum all you want.... but the fact remains... we all have valid reasons for backing up.. whether you or MPAA likes it or not.

I haven't mentioned anyone's job, let's not put words in my mouth please.

Again I will state I am not opposed to people making backups of material they OWN, provided they do not sell or give away the copy or the original.

My opposition is to the wholesale piracy of CDs and DVDs by people who have not paid a penny for the material yet they feel somehow 'entitled' to obtain, use and benefit from it.

Why is making people pay for what they take so offensive to you?

Regards,

Savant

[BobK]

Actually, you're missing my point. This all relates back to the original post which calls into question whether people have legal legitimate interests in 'backing up' DVDs.

And as has been mentioned numerous times- there are legitimate interests in backup up DVDS.

However, I dispute any assertation that legal backups are the majority of 'backups' being made in this regard.

Dispute all you want. Whether or not the majority are being made in this regard has no bearing on whether those that do make legitimate backups falls under your various points.

Emperical data would suggest that most people either rent or borrow the movie and make copies, or download the movie and burn copies.

Emperical data would suggest that most people break traffic laws on regular basis. You're point would suggest that we oulaw cars.

How does one justify 'backing up' that which they do not own, if that is indeed the case?

Feel free to point out anyone in this thread that has attempted to justify that.

[mixman380]

tygrus2000/Savant
I see some of your points. I do believe that if you like the media go buy it don't steal it. At least not from the people who make it, People need to get paid as well

But think about this say that piraters rent/download movies or barrow from a friend, then make a backup copy for them self. This is what you consider stealing right?

Well what if the person’s intent was to never buy the media(movie/videogame) and just keep barrowing it from a friend. Would this be stealing as well? No right? So how can that person be causing the industry to lose money if that person backed up that media and was never going to buy the media in the first place? He could easily barrow the media from his friend until that person’s heart is content.

Also if the pirater where to rent the media how would the industry be losing out there? The rental stores already had paid for it and they would be losing out not the developer or producer? To bad for them they charge to dam much just to rent it in the first place.

Ok downloading is really taking the cake that is complete theft of something you don't own you basically stole it from another person who may or may not even own it them self

But like I said buy if you like it. So that the developer and producers can get paid and release more good media.

Just adding my 2cents..Even though it may not be worth anything. :P

[Savant]

Mixman380, you make some good points. The thing that I think you are focusing too much on is the money. Yes money is an aspect of this issue, but it isn't the be all and end all to copyright.

What if a person wants to make a movie and they put it on DVD. They spend all their own money to make it and they have no plans to sell it commercially. If they lend it to a friend who copies it behind their back (and without their permission) has anything wrong happened? The person who created the movie never intened to sell it so they haven't lost money right? Sure.

The problem is that this isn't about 'moneyright' it's about COPYright. If a person creates something unique (that can be copywrited) then they should be entitled to have the final say on how that item is distributed. If they want to give it away, great. If not, should they not have a RIGHT to say how their product is distributed? Should they not be allowed to say, "Hey, I put time, money and hard work into this, and I want to be compensated for it by those who want my product"...?

I think they should have that right. That's what it all comes down to for me.

Regards,

Savant

[BobK]

n the end Canada has essentially given up on trying to enforce copyright laws on end users, and instead collects cash from them to pay off the music industry.

I'll bet you're happy to know that the music industry collects some cash when you create your own music or video and puts it on a blank DVD. Personally I see no reason why the movie industry should get a cut when I use a blank DVD to make a video of my kids.

If such a system existed in the US there would likely be no battle ongoing with the RIAA since they would be taking in bilions in levies

A very large percentage of that billions would be money they're not entitled to. How do you justify that?

[proggy]

If it weren't for copyright laws, you would be able to purchase a cheap "backup" of your matchbox cars. The law is there to prevent you or other companies from copying things, period.

I am one of the few who actually backup home movies. I do not feel like buying a DV camcorder. I have a feeling this will end up as the "many" (copiers) who ruin it for the "few" (backup'ers).

I am not saying I agree with the copyright laws though. I think they do need to be modified for special circumstances. If something is out of print, it is a shame to lose it forever or die trying to find an original copy since anything else is illegal.

[housepig]

Savant -

I can see your points, I would just like to see some of the "empirical evidence" you keep referring to in support of your "more people here are bootleggers than not" stance.

[mixman380]

Savant,
True that it would be bad for that person that created that movie and to have their friend bootleg it behind their back. Then you really need to tell that friend f*ck you for stealing my sh*t.

But if you’re not distributing it or selling it then what would be the problem if you back it up for your own personal reason? Especially if you own it.

Money is what it’s all about, this is why the movie/game/music industries are complaining about. They say they are losing money but they are not. You still have to rent it to back it up, your friend has to buy it in order for you to back it up. You have to buy a cd/dvd burner plus the media to back it up too. In all in all every one is making money except the end user unless you’re those people who sell it. Then those people should have to pay for copy right infringement. Not the average person who backs up there friends or their own media.

But like I said if you like it dam it buy it...

[Savant]

BobK wrote:

I'll bet you're happy to know that the music industry collects some cash when you create your own music or video and puts it on a blank DVD.

Yes I am. If you don't reward innovation and creativity then you stifle it. I figure that it's a small price to pay so that I can legally (and without guilt) make copies of various materials. If there was a copy protection in place that actually WORKED and protected the content, then we wouldn't need this. However, certain individuals (hackers) don't respect the rights of others, and thus we are where we are today.

A very large percentage of that billions would be money they're not entitled to. How do you justify that?

I disagree. Thats where process comes into play. They don't just pick values out of the air. Through a detailed process they determine (estimate) how much material is likely to be copied in a given period, and they use sales figures to estimate how much blank media will be sold. Using the two they come up with a fair levy.

Perhaps Canada is different in that we tend to be more respectful of the rights of all and not just the individual. For example, in our "charter of rights & freedoms" (equivalent to the U.S. Constitution) we are guaranteed free movement, but not ABSOLUTE free movement. Free movement is only limited by what is considered reasonable in a free and just society.

In other words, the freedom to swing your arms ends when you strike your neighbours nose. In the US you are free to swing your arm as you please, but if you strike someone in the nose the person can srike back. In Canada we say instead that you shouldn't swing your arm if there is a chance you will hit your neighbours nose. Canada has had a longstanding respect for the rights of others, which is why we decided not to join the war in Iraq. However, I digress.

In the end I believe the right of the copyright holder supercedes the right of the user. If a copyright holder doesn't want to have his material stolen and given away for free then I think they should have the right to say so and have recourse to prevent it.

Regards,

Savant

[lordsmurf]

Copyright laws are ENTIRELY about money, and anybody not seeing that is merely fooling themselves.

[johns0]

Why are you so concerned about these so called people doing illegal backups of dvd`s,lets talk about the common criminal who breaks in your house and steals all your dvd`s,are you going to start ranting about illegal stealing of dvd`s?There is all types of laws being broken,illegal dvd copying is just one of them,no need to be concerned with the people here who do proper backups.

[BobK]

BobK wrote:
Quote:
I'll bet you're happy to know that the music industry collects some cash when you create your own music or video and puts it on a blank DVD.

"Yes I am. If you don't reward innovation and creativity then you stifle it."

I see. So if I write a song, compose the music, play it in my garage on my own instruments and record it. Then I want to buy a blank CD or DVD to put my work on, you think that for some unknown reason a bunch of business men are entitled to a cut of the money I pay for that blank CD.

Based on that reasoning (which is yours), it seems to me that I should be entitled to a cut from blank CDs that they music industry uses. After all, I contribute as much to their work as they contribute to my song, recorded by me on my instruments in my gagage.


"However, certain individuals (hackers) don't respect the rights of others, and thus we are where we are today. "

There are many individuals that don't respect the rights of others when they drive. Let's ban cars.

"I disagree. Thats where process comes into play. They don't just pick values out of the air."

That's where your wrong. They *do* pick values out of the air. Then they hire expensive experts to rationalize those numbers.

"Through a detailed process they determine (estimate) how much material is likely to be copied in a given period"

We can only hope that 'detailed process' is more accurate than your cliams in this thread.

"Free movement is only limited by what is considered reasonable in a free and just society."

That's where the problems start. Who gets to decide what the limits are?

"In the US you are free to swing your arm as you please, but if you strike someone in the nose the person can srike back."

That's not true, but it's probably as accurate as many of the other claims you've made. At least we've established that you're not an expert in US law.

"In the end I believe the right of the copyright holder supercedes the right of the user. If a copyright holder doesn't want to have his material stolen and given away for free then I think they should have the right to say so and have recourse to prevent it."

And if I'm the copyright holder for music or video that I've created, you think that some businessman has a right to make a profit off it when I buy blank media to store it.

In addition to the many other points you keep missing here, you have to remember that this site is not limited to Canada and/or the US. It can be accessed from anywhere in the world.

Which raises the question- if this site is so bad, what are you doing here in the first place?

[MackemX]

I may kick my dog, but I'm sure he's backed himself up somewhere in the neighborhood.....

that is the funniest thing I have read in ages ....

makes you think though, why have kids? ain't they just backups? Is my DNA copyrighted?

[Savant]

LordSmurf wrote:

Copyright laws are ENTIRELY about money, and anybody not seeing that is merely fooling themselves.

Please understand that while I respect you, I'll have to disagree with you here. Look at the patent office and the patents that people hold. How many of those patents do you think ACTUALLY get made into something that makes money? Current estimates put the mark at 10%, and some people say even that is generous.

The fact a person can or can't make money from something they hold the patent (or copyright) to should not impact their ability to protect their RIGHT to have that copyright (or patent). If a backroom band records a CD but it bombs, does the fact that they never made any money make the copyright any less enforcable?

While copyrights do involve money, they don't HAVE to involve money.


BobK wrote:

I see. So if I write a song, compose the music, play it in my garage on my own instruments and record it. Then I want to buy a blank CD or DVD to put my work on, you think that for some unknown reason a bunch of business men are entitled to a cut of the money I pay for that blank CD.

Yes, and I also pay a cut from my taxes to pay for the medical care of others, the cash going into doctor's and hospital pockets. I don't gripe about it since I know that when the time comes I will be able to benefit. While you may not benefit on the example you mentioned, should you decide to copy something later you can rest assured the few pennies you had to shell out earlier are now going to benefit those in the music industry who otherwise would have profited from a direct sale.

That's where your wrong. They *do* pick values out of the air. Then they hire expensive experts to rationalize those numbers.

Sorry, I'm not into conspiracy theories. I've seen the process and there is EXTENSIVE consltation. The numbers change until a reasonable result is made. I tend to think that it is fair since BOTH sides tend to want more.

We can only hope that 'detailed process' is more accurate than your cliams in this thread.

Don't take my word for it, in Canada the 'detailed process' is fully disclosed and public involvement is ENCOURAGED and welcomed.

Proposed tariffs
Hearings/Evidence and witnesses
Decisions
Certified tariffs

It's all there. How much more 'detailed' do you want it?

That's not true, but it's probably as accurate as many of the other claims you've made. At least we've established that you're not an expert in US law.

Oh please, this isn't about law it's about PRINCIPLES. I thought you would have realised this by now.

Which raises the question- if this site is so bad, what are you doing here in the first place?

Is it raining straw men in here or what?

Perhaps you should speak for yourself and not for others. I have never once suggested in any way that this site is 'bad'. Only YOU have made that claim in this thread, not me.

Attack the words, not the writer. Ad hominem attacks benefit no one.

Regards,

Savant

[holistic]

Savant -
I can see your points, I would just like to see some of the "empirical evidence" you keep referring to in support of your "more people here are bootleggers than not" stance.

I really didn't want go get drawn into this.........but, since you asked housepig.


empirical evidence
Just take a quick view of most posts ...... then really look

- how do i convert name.avi into DVD with out loosing quality
Haven't see a DVD yet released in divx, Xvid ...etc have you?
- how do i make blah blah in Scenarist/Maestro
RTFM - o thats right it didn't come with the download.
- how do i 'back up' my DVD's with Maestro and CCE
you gotta be F'n kidding me - $10,000 worth of software - just to .. 'back up' DVD's - yeah right . DVDShrink will do the job and it's free.

kudos Savant keep up the fight. Sorry I can't be bothered.

][

[lordsmurf]

Name one copyright dispute that wasn't about money. And don't forget that a lawsuit is, again, based SOLELY about monetary gain.

[vitualis]

Savant, unfortunately, you have the losing argument though you have argued well.

A lot of your points make sense, but your regular human doesn't have to make sense.

The fact is, a lot of people "back up" DVDs that they own. That is a fair of use their DVD. You are asking the question if they "rationally need to". That is somewhat beside the point.

For example, I "back up" all my audio CDs that I own as well. I don't recall ever having an original CD fail or become damaged (or any of my backups either) but that doesn't stop me from immediately copying a new CD I buy to a CD-R and putting the original away...

Is it "logical" or "rational"? Probably not. But it gives me peace of mind and that is as valid a reason as any.

Regards.

[PJGS]

The problem is that this isn't about 'moneyright' it's about COPYright. Savant

Yeah, tell RIAA that. U pay 15€ for an audio CD but just a tiny fraction goes to the artist, the industry grabs most of it.
I can buy CD-R's for 0.50€. How much does a record house pay for the production of 1 million CD's that will be sold on the market?
I paid 15€ for a CD. Why can't I play it on my PC?. Is that right?


Similar thing happens to DVD's. Is there a good reason to make a DVD cost twice what a VHS costs?
Producing a DVD is twice more expensive than vhs?
Do artits get paid for each DVD copy that is sold to the public?
If the production of DVD's is so expensive why I can buy a magazine with a cover DVD full of stuff for just 9€?
Why does a DVD movie cost 28€ when it is released and 6 months later the same mavie costs half the price?

[Vejita-sama]

First off the time and number of programs necessary isn't seen as a negative because for most people this is a hobby. And like most hobbiests we want to REALLY understand the nature of subject. That means IFOEdit, re-encoding with CCE/TMPGenc, IFOUpdate, several hours re-constructing the matrix menu by hand, etc. etc.

As for why backup. There are several reasons but here's a common one:

A. $50 DVD player
B. $15 finding nemo DVD
C. $0.75 P&S sandwitch
D. A + B + C + kids

Also some hobbiest like to add the deleted extra scences back into the original movie. Yeah it's a pain, but the PROCESS is fun, hell I'm not even sure they watch the final product before starting on the next project