Encrypting a DVD so that others cannot copy

[Gazorgan]

My wedding photographer never gave us the negatives and charged about 4x the going rate for prints. Needless to say she's out of business (but her husband stole the negatives for us prior to the divorce)

Take some advice, get your Money up front, because there is basically no way to charge by the copy. Given that copies cost no more than $3 (that includes depreciation on the burner and the computer that drives it, plus media costs), it hard to chage $20 or $30/copy. Some 14 year old will show how easy it is to copy the disk and then you get bad feelings and no repeat business or referals.

Alternately you can do 1980's vintage data writing, with errors all over the disk and make it 'difficult' to do a straight copy.

[Tommyknocker]

Shoot, if I were shooting wedding videos, I would give a discount to every couple that hired me that lets me leave my business card at each table. Advertise and make money at the same time.

[pelsass]

TommyBOY,

No, I think that when I say cheap, I mean cheap. For instance, let's say I charge $10 per copy. Well, in materials ALONE I have about $5. So, that means I am only charging $5 for my time and computer use. I believe that is cheap. However, if this person were to make 6 copies, that means I just lost $60 in business. So, yes, it would be in my best interest to look into copy protection.

I don't know what you do for a living (probably nothing), but some day you will understand basic business and the laws of reality. Probably after you quit "smoking your TOBACCO from a bong" :0

[Turtle49]

Pelsass, Although I may not agree with what your trying to do, I do agree you have the right to do it. I also think you would have happier clients if you didn't.

I did a little search and found this on a FAQ page on http://www.dvd-makers.com

Content Scrambling System (CSS)
Because of the potential for perfect digital copies, paranoid movie studios forced a deeper copy protection requirement into the DVD standard. Content Scrambling System (CSS) is a data encryption and authentication scheme intended to prevent copying video files directly from DVD-Video discs. CSS was developed primarily by Matsushita and Toshiba. Each CSS licensee is given a key from a master set of 400 keys stored on every CSS-encrypted disc. The theory was to allow a license to be revoked by removing its key from future discs. The CSS decryption algorithm exchanges keys with the drive unit to generate an encryption key that is then used to obfuscate the exchange of disc keys and title keys that are needed to decrypt data from the disc. DVD players have CSS circuitry that decrypts the data before it's decoded and displayed, and computer DVD decoder hardware and software must include a CSS decryption module. All DVD-ROM drives have extra firmware to exchange authentication and decryption keys with the CSS module in the computer. As of 2000 DVD-ROM drives are required to support regional management in conjunction with CSS (see 1.10 and 4.1). Makers of equipment used to display DVD-Video (drives, decoder chips, decoder software, display adapters, etc.) must license CSS. There is an annual $15,000 fee for the CSS license, and qualification is a lengthy process, so it's recommended that interested parties apply early. CSS is administered by the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA). Near the end of May 1997, CSS licenses were finally granted for software decoding. The license is extremely restrictive in an attempt to keep the CSS algorithm and keys secret. Of course, nothing that's used on millions of players and drives worldwide could be kept secret for long. In October 1999, the CSS algorithm was cracked and posted on the Internet, triggering endless controversies and legal battles (see 4.8).

This gives you a little more info on your topic.

Here is the Link

This post is not sarcastic or intended as a "Flame"

[pelsass]

Thanks, Turtle!

Appreciate the info.

[Turtle49]

You should take the time to read the FAQ I linked to in my previous post, it refers to four types of encryption. One of them may be cheaper.

[glenrey]

You might discourage some clients from making copies of there own dvd buy having them sign a contract that they will not make copies.
But in the end, once they recieve there copy your services are
pretty much done. So what ever they do with there copy will not matter
to you because you will never know what they will do with it.

[Tommyknocker]

Maybe he will listen to your voice of reason, GlenRey. I have hit the proverbial wall with him. Pity, though.

[Vejita-sama]

Lots bottomline this:

1) Can you do this?

No, if it's on any kind of media I can copy it. The average computer user can type "copy dvd" into goggle and find any number of ways to copy it. InstantCopy, DVD2One and other programs are sold in stores (Best Buy, Fry's, etc). Just accept that it is not possible.

2) Should you do this/is it legal/is it ethical?

That's for you to decide/matter of some debate/most say no

[Gazorgan]

$10/copy is a fair rate. $30/copy isn't a fair rate.

I suspect most people will just get however many copies they wan't because it's easier, has the nice pretty case/lable etc. It's all part of the monsterous wedding budget people go through. I'd guess you average what....8-15 copies/weddings?

[rhegedus]

The Movie Industry DOES do it all the time. Can it be cracked...well, clearly it can. However, the AVERAGE Joe is not a member of this site. The average Joe would NOT know how to crack it and therefore, the movie industry successfully protects their movies more often than not.

The 'average Joe' does not have a DVD burner, so what are you worried about?

At the end of the day it's their wedding, not yours. Would you want a fee every time they showed the DVD to friends or lent it out?

If you make the cost of each DVD acceptable, people will be less likely to want to copy it instead of buying a new one. That's what I've done previously and that's what I continue to do.

[jeex]

i think i've devised a way to prevent (not stop) copying of dvd-r's..

the thing i'm thinking is that if you were able to burn 350mb of data at the beggining of the disc that is not accessible from the menu navigation and is never actually read by the dvd player..

and after you've burned the disc you could make a deep scratch in that area of the disc, thus making ripping fail.

i'm sure the disc could still be ripped in file mode.. try ripping, see it fails, see the scratch & give up.

then if they told you it was scratched, you could try it out a dvd player and show them that it does work fine.

if they asked/bought another one, scratch it too.

i havent actually tested the method, and i'm not sure how to go about doing it. but it seems pretty solid, if is possible.

[LanEvo7]

I don't understand why you are making such a big deal over this. Let's just assume that you somehow get CSS into your DVD. So what does that mean? Your customer's don't have to come back to you to make copies. They could easily just go to some other store for whatever reason. Besides there are tons of programs that the local Walmart sells that can make copies of DVDs that are encrypted for less than $20(these are usually a combination of freeware programs with a fancy GUI).

[sacajaweeda]

You'll never beat the free utilities that are available all over the web with the speciffic purpose of making very quick work of defeating whatever you attempt to do to protect your stuff from being "backed up". And if by chance you do develop some amazing new crack-proof encryption to protect your stuff with, you had better sell it fast and enjoy your short-lived victory, as some bored teenager will without a doubt outsmart you and have it defeated and the crack for your new encryption will be plastered all over the web within a week :P

Regards,

[rhegedus]

No, I think that when I say cheap, I mean cheap. For instance, let's say I charge $10 per copy. Well, in materials ALONE I have about $5. So, that means I am only charging $5 for my time and computer use. I believe that is cheap. However, if this person were to make 6 copies, that means I just lost $60 in business. So, yes, it would be in my best interest to look into copy protection.

No you haven't - you've lost $30 since you didn't use any raw materials.

I do, however, think that $10 is a reasonable price per item.

[irongang]

Okay, Tommyknockers, let's follow your thought pattern on the exact same situation, but we'll use a fictional (yet real) scenario:

You're a new movie producing company struggling to be profitable. You come out with your best movie yet, one that might make you profitable. I buy a copy, what I do with it now is NONE of your business. So, if I make copies and sell them or distribute them, it's none of your business. Your company wonders why it is not selling more copies of the movie. You see your movie on the streets everywhere, yet for some reason you are not seeing the revenues. You lose your shirt as a company, all because some loser thought it was there right to copy your life's dreams and make as many copies as they wanted. Hmmmmm....seems fair.

If you guys want to make "backup" copies for your personal protection, more power to ya. I could care less. However, if your goal is to do something that you know if your heart is wrong, well, quit trying to defend yourselves. Deal with it.

This is not the same situation. The only way it would be is if you had hired the crew and paid for the whole production (not just bought a copy). You would then be the owner of the film and entitled to do what you want. You are hired to tape and edit the wedding by your client. Once you have done that the finished product is the property of your client. If they choose to use you to make more copies because it is convenient that its up to them. They have paid for you services already for the production of the DVD and are not obligated to use you for duplication. I worked as a video editor for several years. Are you saying that I own the material that I worked on even though I was hired and paid to do the work by other people? I'm sure they would be surprised to hear this.

[Poppa_Meth]

to use your own examples of photos. If i want copies of my photos am i going back to wal-mart to have them made or am I doing to scan them in or pull them off a Photo-CD i got with them and print my own? Wal-mart in no ways has any legal rights to those photos.

and are you willing to pay the licensing fee to put this copy protection on your discs? would you really expect to make any money that way? also did you have your client sign a contract giving you rights to the media in question? If not I don't see how it could possibly be considered yours to copyright. You were paid for a service. nothing more. I work in a carpet store. If we provide the carpet and install it for someone once its in and paid for the carpet is theirs. we no longer have any rights to it. once you tape that video and are paid for it you no longer have any rights to it either IMO. Of course since this is America there is bound to be some idiotic law that favors people like you. Just try and make it stand up in court though.

[iooi]

Not read all the posts in this thread (could do with a yawn emoticon)
but to the first poster rather than protecting the disk. Why not as part of the package have say up to 10 copies X$ 20 copies Y$ etc.... You get the profit of producing the disks for them to give away and there will be less chance of them doing what all of us do in backing up our own copies of films we have bought and paid for.
As to protecting them i guess you could put a few scratches on the disks as ths seems to be one thing that can stop you from ripping a disk... but they will still play.

[irongang]

$10/copy is a fair rate. $30/copy isn't a fair rate.

I suspect most people will just get however many copies they wan't because it's easier, has the nice pretty case/lable etc. It's all part of the monsterous wedding budget people go through. I'd guess you average what....8-15 copies/weddings?

But what is or isn't a fair rate isn't the issue here. The issue is what the videographer has been hired to do. Has he been hired to tape the wedding and create a video for distibution or has he been hired to be the exclusive distributor of the video. I'm assuming the you didn't tape, edit and produce the video for free with the agreement that you'd recoup your costs by selling the copies, right. You were paid for the production and now you're tryting to extort more money by setting it up so your client HAS to buy copies from you.

If your clients are happy with your work and feel that they're not getting screwed on the duplication costs I'm sure they'll use you for the duplication. If they feel that they're being taken advantage of they will likely take their DVD (which they have paid you to make) and you'll never see them again, which is their right. You are in a business that relies on good word of mouth and antagonizing your custiomers will not help you in the long run.

The only way that I can see your view of this being valid is if it is stated in the contract that even though you have been paid by your clients to produce the video you retain all ownership rights to it. I can't see anyone agreeing to this - you'll not likely get any clients with a stipulation like this unless they don't notice it. Again, that kind of trickery will not get you a lot of recommedations from satisfied clients.

If you're wondering about my background, I used to work for a very large worldwide company in their video production department. Sometimes a client, whether internal (someone from within the company) or extenal, would use us to make a video but someone local to them to make the copies even though we had full duplication facilites on site and reasonable rates (as little as $2 a copy if you bought enough copies). Was it annoying? Yes - but they paid for the production and they owned the master even though we physically had it in our library. If we had tried to hold the master hostage because "we made it" heads would have rolled.

[ktnwin]

This is quite a long and interesting discussion.
IN SUMMARY:
1) if Hollywood cannot, then you cannot.
2) try the scratch disc idea - it won't do any good (rip in file mode)
3) average folks do not know how to copy - most people will get from the video producer anyway (with nice labels, coverm, etc..) as long as you don't charge them unfairly (10$/disc is very fair).

[andkiich]

Irongang makes some very good points, and without knowing the stipulations of the contract and the agreements made between the parties, all suggestions relating to the "validity" of ownership can only be conjecture.

Irongang resonates my thoughts on this exactly. For the most part people would expect that you would be a "video photographer" and/or "director", certainly not the owner of the material being shot.

[Nelson37]

To attempt to claim a copyright on a video record of someone else's wedding is not only legally unsupportable, it is professionally absurd. To charge a fair rate to make copies, no problem. To deny your customers that freedom is just plain stupid. You will only anger your customers to make a few bucks, when you make at least ten (or 50) times that on the initial production. You are SELLING the video production (that means this is the part you want to do a whole bunch of), the friggin COPIES are a mere service, its PEANUTS. (that means this is the part you do when you have nothing else to do, and if you find yourself doing a whole lot more of this than the former you are doing something wrong)

I can hear my old man yelling "you are stumbling over a dollar to pick up a dime, goddammit!"

Now if you were creating your own content, or did in fact have some reason to retain copyright, then the best you can do is make it difficult.

[disturbed1]

You could do what I do. Charge a rate for the project, then tell them Upfront how much each additonal copy will be. All projects are cataloged and stored for upto one year. I charge a small fee for "lifetime" storage. So reprints/copies can be made at any time.

After the first copy, each one is $7.50/each. Includes Alpha Pack case with Glossy insert and Taiyo Yuden thermal Print DVD. I don't look to make a mint from the copies, it's the creative work that goes into the original project. If they need 20 or so copies, I drop the price to $5 each. The average Joe can't run to Staples and buy the supplies needed to make a copy at that price.

If you treat your customers fair, give them a quality product at a reasonable price, they always come back.

Don't follow the current trend of business models most people seem to use. I'd rather make $5,000 off one person over years of service, rather than a one time $500.

[8trackkid]

To pelsass,
Instead of getting emotional and insulting the other members, think about it from the business concept known as opportunity cost.

What does it cost you when your customers feel ripped off that you charged them $1000's to video their wedding but won't give them an additional copy if they request? $2 in materials vs. $1000's for a potential new client referral?

Your reasoning is like the fast-food restaurant that wants to charge you for every refill, for every condiment, for icewater, instead of just raising your prices. They may save a few bucks now but lose big in the long run when their customers know they're not appreciated.

I know that I spent over $3000 for all the video work in our wedding, but the guy took so much time and effort to make sure that it was what we wanted that he has received three other referrals for weddings from us alone! This guy took the time to make sure that we liked everything from the music, to the menu, to the way he made a real slick slide show at the end of the second disc.

I understand that you have the right to do something, its just can you
afford to alienate your customers like this?

[duhmez]

Legally you will not have excusive copyright and distribution rights to this wedding, unless it was in the contract you made with them.

Under contract law, any legal judgement would be in favor of the person who did NOT draw up the contract.

In the absense of an actual contract, just a verbal agreement to film wedding and produce dvd's for it, they would retain the copyright to the film, as this is what the customer would legitimately assume to be the case.

This is if it ever went to court. No judge would say you have exclusive copy and distribution rights, unless the contract spoecifically said so. Good luck getitng them to sign off on that.

best sugestion I have, make them dual layer. It'll cost some $$ but probably less than css would imageine (15000 yikes!)
and this way it won't look like you are trying to scam your customers, cause it won't be encrupted it'll just be too big is all....... not your fault!

[Fluffbutt]

I'm going to play a bit of 'devils advocate' here.

I'm an ex wedding photographer (too many backyarders starting up here!!), and I see it this way.

The client (bride and groom, always, regardless of who pays the bill) are entitled to whatever they paid for in the original billing (wedding album, 150 pix, dvd, cdr, etc).

The copyright of the images belongs to the photographer - it was his technique/expertise that enabled them to recieve such good pix.

Copyright on cdr's, dvd, also belongs to the photographer - they may own the actual physical dvd, but the images thereon are his copyright.

Having said that, there is no way to stop them copying the dvd if they know how to, and want to (you might consider a tiny (c) photographer in the bottom right of every frame/every x numbered frame?).

Just go go over it - it you hire a photographer, the copyright of the images is HIS. The physical image is yours, that's what you pay for (along with the job expertise itself).

I charged $600 AU (about umm $400? US) for 150 pix in an album (story of the day style), and then charged them a print price + SMALL markup for reprints.

If your charges are reasonable, you're being fair. If you charge $125 for a 5x7 inch piccy (that's what some do here), you're a money grabbing arse.

<edit> mind you - that copyright law is valid here in Australia - you wierdos (LOL, joke) in Usa may be different...</edit>

[Brainiac]

Hi all

Just my 2 cents

According to Video Maker magazine, whoever shoots the video of an event owns the copyright. Again, according to Video Maker magazine.

The photographer/videographer who did my wedding 8 years ago sold us all the negatives, pictures AND the copyright for $99.00. He did this to eliminate the cost of storing the masters, negatives and prints we did not order originally. So I can copy the wedding to my heart's content.

Brainiac

[freestyler]

To answer your original question, you would need to have the disc replicated at a facility, authored accordingly and actually pay for CSS encryption. It's not cheap and probably not feasible for your business unless you're doing J Lo's weddings. When a disc is replicated, low runs are a no-go and you can't encrypt general media.

How about putting a disclaimer at the beginning of your disc, followed by a screen that contains ordering information?

[smeg]

There used to be a way of copy protecting CDs, it involved using a dummy file that once burning started you jacked up the size and caused the disk to actually produce errors, caused by insufficient space on the disk. If any-one tried to coopy the disk it came up saying it couldn't be copied.
I don't know if this principle can be carried over but I know when I've burned one or two back-ups the disk has had errors on it, still played fine but I was unable to copy the copy!

[Will Hay]

Moviegeek,

Thanks for such a helpful and friendly response. It's ashame when I join a new site that should be full of knowlegeable people who are willing to help others out with a legitimate question, and instead, I get attacked by a bunch of people (not you) who are so defensive of their "rights" to copy copyrighted materials for "backup" that they have to get rude.

Not great for a newbie.

No, in some cases you seem to have suffered every arsehole on the site responding to your post I'm afraid.
Trust me, it's not always like this, you just got very, very, very unlucky
I'm sure I'm only echoing comments already made (I had to stop reading) but you can't, you don't have the funds.
I suggest you offer extra copies for a reduced rate at the time of the first issue of the initial disk and if you sell some great, if you don't live with it.
If you hadn't built your full costs on the basis of the first disk then you're an idiot (but you already know this).
Someone mentioned not everyone had DVD burners and the one's that do may own some form of ripper so get over it
Merry Christmas.
Will