Speaking of the Rules....

[ZAPPER]

DON'T PANIC, DON'T FREAK OUT OVER IT!

Soon this will all be a moot point. In time technology will make making your own back ups impractical. There may be massive data banks with any pro or Hollywood film ever made at our disposal for small fees per veiw or more likely a subscription. Yes I can hear the arguements that we can't do this right now. But technology is growing by leaps and bounds and I can only guess at what great things are to come of it. Just search the data base for the film that you want to see and burst flash it to your super duper 3-D holo ultra audio/visual device and enjoy! Why would you want to have a hard copy on hand taking up space? Remember that we put men on the moon with a slide ruler.(Hey kiddies do you know what a slide ruler is?)

Back to the present. As far as the law goes. Laws are mainly to keep people from getting hurt. Don't kill, it hurts the victom and it hurts the victoms family and friends. Don't distribute copyrighted material. It hurts the holder of the copyright.(You can hang me for this but it is the truth, even if it is such a small amount that no body will ever notice, it is not allowed to distribute.) If you own, fair and square, an orginal copy of anything, what you do with it on your property is your business. As soon as a copy leaves your possession to another, you are hurting the copyright holder and become accountable for your actions however benign you may think it. No Judge or Jury in America will punish you for making personal or household use copies of a ******* $5.00 kids movie. As long as you can stand in front of him chest out and shoulders back and say in all honesty that it is for my and my familys' use only in my home.

Baldrick: It looks like some people would throw you to the sharks if you ever got in trouble because of this site and let you sink or swim on your own. I have not given any money to this site(I realize that I should and in time I will) If you ever find the need for legal aid because of this site, Please make it known I will do all that I can.

[jimmalenko]

Baldrick: It looks like some people would throw you to the sharks if you ever got in trouble because of this site and let you sink or swim on your own.

I guess that's the inherent risk of running a forum.

[andkiich]

Isn't it about time for the "who farted" reply?

This just seems to me to be a troll who had nothing better to do then to step on an ants nest.

Let this thing die in pieces.

[ZAPPER]

Unless there is more money in running a forum than I know about. I think that Baldrick is safe.

I also agree that this was trolling, I just don't think that it is nice to come out and tell someone to shut the **** up. (I like them to have to work at figuring out that that is what I am saying between the lines)

A fart is only good if I have had pickeled eggs and PBR

[Supreme2k]

It's "I Farted", ya dang n00b! :P

[NamPla]

Who here has old VHS tapes of movies from TV, or cassette tapes of your friend's LP or something?

It's all strictly illegal, but overlooked by the authorities.

Why do they sell blank VHS, tapes, DVD-Rs, etc? Or VCRS & DVD recorders for that matter?

I think the real naughtiness lies in bootlegging, say, "Lord of the Rings" or some garbage, & selling them.

Anything else is harmless & no authority is going to come down on you.

What I do in my own home is nobody's business. If I start peddling stuff out my door, I run a risk. Like if I started pimping my Thai girlfriends out the door, or something, ha...

[Supreme2k]

Well, what you do in your own home is your business, until you come spouting off on these boards, making it everyone else's business.

[NamPla]

Well, what you do in your own home is your business, until you come spouting off on these boards, making it everyone else's business.

That';s true.

[tygrus2000]

I wasn't aiming to challenge the law. My goal was to challenge the rule of this forum that states free use is acceptable. If a legal case to back it up cannot be provided, whether one exists or not, the assumption isn't automatically that it is ok. Its now an interpretation, and now subject to the personal discretion of this forum, just like the advertising rule is.

the message that is sent is simple:

advertise = ban
copy dvd = ok

And dont call it backup - thats the biggest cop out on what it really is.

[Supreme2k]

Call it a cop-out only if you don't have kids. If I had a way to backup the rugs in my house, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[proxyx99]

Tygrus2000, there's more to this forum then just DVD copying (video manipulation in general, which DVD's also belong to).

[Cobra]

tygrus2000,

I copied all my DVDs to DivX format so I could take them all to university with me. It saved me a lot of space as I kept them on a spindle, instead of a big rack - space was a a premium where I lived. It saved me money as I did not have to insure a load of DVDs. It saved me worry - theft is rife, and DVD-Rs hold little value to me if I have the originals.

This is one situation where I have excercised fair and legitimate use. We are all allowed to do it. If we were not, VideoHelp would not exist.

If you have a problem with the rules, write to any mod or Baldrick explaining what you want changed and why and it may be considered. This is not the way to go about it.

Regards,

Cobra

[ZAPPER]

Hey: Keep in mind that this the house of Baldrick. His house his rules. His perogitive on what he will allow or not. For most it is pretty clear for some it is not. When we talk about the "grey" we do it as wink wink as a matter of good manners toward our host (kind of like take your shoes off and don't put your feet on the table) This site deals with the "grey" quite a bit and talking about any of it is not illegal and just fine with everyone here as long as you don't push the house rules to far.

Why no selling? Hmmm. I haven't read the official reason anywhere so I will take a half assed guess at it. Maybe this site would get over whelmed with ads for all kinds of crap. It is hard enough now to search for somthing. What happens after an item sells? The sales post is still there because this site wasn't designed to advertise and sell things and remove adds after they are no longer current. What about unhappy customers? Shit some days it looks like the Jerry Springer show. People here get mad about free advice. Just think if someone was unhappy with something that they paid for. The list could go on.( Can you see any reasons for not allowing advertisements?)

The guy that was selling text books got a slap on the wrist and is back because we got a kind host. The people that talk about the "grey" without using their manners get a slap on the wrist too.

[gitreel]

Tygrus,

If you have such a problem with the rules, then don't visit this forum.
And, btw, copying a dvd is different than copying an entire book.

[maek]

Call it a cop-out only if you don't have kids. If I had a way to backup the rugs in my house, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

I'd have to agree with this one. Fortunately, my home has vaulted ceilings so my DVD's are out of reach...so no need to backup for me. However, if my daughter could access those "protective cases" you mention, then I would be buying DVD's weekly just to protect them from scratches.

Obviously you don't have children or, if you do, you're performing some questionably "legal" practices of your own by keeping them chained up.

I use this site to author my own home movies and occasionally make copies of THOSE. While not all people are honorable, don't you DARE question what I do on this site or what this site advocates because not everyone uses it for the reasons you mention.

Remember, a gun is a gun, but it's only a murder weapon when somebody uses it. This amounts to blaming Wal-Mart for murder because they sell guns. Get real.

[tygrus2000]

I dont have a problem with this site. I support it in everyway. As you can see I have been here a long time, a lot longer than most. What I dont agree with is people chastising a member that makes a mistake and gets an immediate ban without warning and then go spouting the rules like like they were the bible.

I just pointed out a weakness in the AUP rule that cannot be explained away. Everyone has posted a rebuttle - nobody has referenced even the slightest shred of legal evidence.

Instead of claiming that FREE USE is the law, why not just put in the rules "well, we really dont know and until some court makes a decision, we're gonna go with this"

And copying a dvd is no different than copying a book, or a tape, or an image. You are just making that claim to support what you want the law to be, not what it is.

[adam]

Instead of claiming that FREE USE is the law, why not just put in the rules "well, we really dont know and until some court makes a decision, we're gonna go with this"

That is EXACTLY what I said in my post, and what I have stated countless other times in responding to this issue. The supposed right to backup a DVD would come under the Fair Use provisions of copyright law and under no other existing law. If its not Fair Use, its nothing until new legislation is passed. And Fair Use is considered a RETROACTIVE provision. If in 5 years someone is prosecuted for backing up a DVD and it is ruled by a high court that backing up a DVD is in fact a Fair Use protected right, then that means that all of the copying we have done up until that point will be deemed to have been legal at the time it was done. We are currently operating under the assumption that a future case will make our current acts officially justifiable legally, since we believe that our current acts are already justifiable morally. And that's the way it is. And by the way I am only speaking from the standpoint of an American bound by US laws. This forum has no such limitation.

I don't even know where the servers are located but I know Baldrick doesn't live in the States and I know all of our forum browsers don't live in the states either. The site provides information on, among many other things, backing up DVDs which may or may not be illegal in any given country. If a Canadian citizen reads a DVD backup guide and uses it to backup their DVD it is completely legal in their country. If an America does that same act, it is illegal, but as I already explained there are Fair Use arguments against that. What is so hypocritical, immoral, or illegal about providing general information and expecting our forum members to use it responsibly under the laws of their country? If we made a point to only offer help in areas that were 100% legal, in every single country, under every single context, then there'd be nothing to talk about and that goes for every other forum on the internet.

I think this is a very valid question you raise and I actually agree with most of what you've said. I don't really see much difference between copying a book you own and copying a DVD you own either. My problem with your post is that this has been asked and answered literally about 30 or so times in the past.

[gitreel]

How can you two compare a piece of plastic to paper and sometimes leather?



They are unrelated.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

In either case, you paid for the goods.

What you do with either in the privacy of your home is your business.

Tygrus - I owe you an apology.

I just get bent out of shape when people upset the apple cart and then try to press their agenda.

[LNielsen76]

I think it boils down to whether or not a profit is made in the distribution of material or services that aid in the backing up of copyrighted material. The copyright exists to make sure that any profit on the creative content go to the owner of the copyright, not to programmers who sell software or entrepenuers who offer services for the backing up of said copyrighted material. Oh yeah...and no sharing! If you didn't buy into the copyright you certainly can't have part in it. Sharing your material gives creative content to persons who have not bought into the copyright. Now when I say "bought in" I don't mean that the owner now has privileges to profit from its distribution, I mean that the owner purchases the privilege of backing it up.

[tygrus2000]

Gitreel, I have no agenda to push on here. I only wish to challenge assumptions because that is my free thinking nature.....and to tell you the truth, I personally feel that the site has "tightened" up in the last few months.

Thats no critisism of the mods or anything, I just remember the days when this forum was more of a free wheeling exchange of technical ideas, now we have threads turning people in when they step over the line a bit. And some of this stems from Pyrate too. He seems like a humble chap and was oblivious. That being said, I see other threads of new member pushing their own ebay auction on here. I hate advertising as much as the next guy, but I want the mods to make rational informed choices on this site and not just apply discipline without consideration.

[adam]

LNielsen76 copyright law is not intended simply to ensure that copyright holders get paid for their works. Its intended to provide incentive to create by vesting in the creator the element of control. I can tell you right now that more than half of all copyrights currently registered with the US Copyright Office are on works which have never made a dime and probably never will. Many of the works are worth a fortune, but the copyright holder has chosen not to release it for personal reasons. Profit is of course a motivating factor but copyright law is really about control, regardless of how much money is at stake. The law is clear, a copyright holder shall have exclusive copy rights. It doesn't matter whether you are at home or on the street corner, whether it has no monetary effect on their product or divests them of house and home, unless they expressly grant you the right to copy then you can't do it period, unless you fall under one of the very limited legal exceptions, ie: (pc software backups or Fair Use.)

Gitreel, I don't see why the physical medium makes a difference. Either way that is the product you bought. You didn't buy LOTR, you bought paper bound in leather. You didn't buy Two Towers you bought a piece of plastic (the DVD). The fact that a DVD is so much easier to copy then a book doesn't make the act of copying it intrinsically different. And yes what you do with IT (the plastic) in the privacy of your home is your business. But the intellectual property contained on the disk is not yours and to make an additional copy of it without express permission from the copyright holder is an infringement of their legally protected copyright.

Again, copyright is pretty darn clear. You can't copy it without express permission...period. Money is irrellevant and the privacy of the act is irrellevant. The problem is that "reasonable and prudent people" often feel that this is unfair, and that's really the main standard that the Fair Use Exceptions turn on. So even though backups of DVDs and other movie formats are clearly illegal under copyright law, the question is whether a legal exception should be made. I say yes.

[gitreel]

@adam,

It was ok b4 the dmca and will be again.

The congresspeople are discussing the dmcra, which will restore rights back to customers.

Until then, I use civil disobedience.

[adam]

Until then, I use civil disobedience.

So do I, but the DMCA has only allowed another Federal statute from which copyright holders can seek damages, and provided other means of obtaining information leading to possible infringement. Copying a DVD was still just as illegal in the US prior to the passing of the DMCA.

But like you said these things are currently being reviewed by Congress. They are not just analyzing the DMCA but also considering new legislation entirely, with one camp fighting for backup rights and protection of time-shifting rights, and the other camp seeking world domination. This could all be a moot issue in the States very shortly.

[tygrus2000]

The law has almost always favorued corporate interests in such instances, mainly because all politicians are beholden to special interest groups (i.e.$).

What makes you think they will side with the individual this time.

[ZAPPER]

Tygrus: This is getting old. I like a good thoughtful argument as much as the next guy, but it is time to let go or change directions.

I admire your loyality towards Pyrate. But he wasn't killed or anything and I haven't heard him complaining. What he got, as I have said before was a slap on the wrist, a wake up call that is all. Others have been carded or banned before and have had the same appeal process to go through if they wanted. Some may have been forgiven and maybe some not. As for catching every infraction on this site, it is like the poor traffic cop on the side of the highway he can't ticket every speeder that goes by.

The same is kind of true with coping copyrighted material, they can't catch everyone who does it. And just like speeding, you may know or not know that you are doing it. And some think that the reward of doing it is worth the risk of getting caught. Keep in mind that we are talking about copying movies here, entertainment, fantasies, they are not real, we don't need them to stay alive. No country that is civilized enough to have running water is going to put you against a wall and shoot you for making a copy of Scooby Doo.

As for the law that says that you can make a personal copy, I don't know if it has been written yet. But what about the law that says we can breathe or can eat? Sometimes it is just a given and sometimes we have to fight for it.

[gitreel]

The law has almost always favorued corporate interests in such instances, mainly because all politicians are beholden to special interest groups (i.e.$).

What makes you think they will side with the individual this time.

The fact that we could copy our own videotapes legally, and pretty soon we will legally be able to back up our dvd's in the US.

[sacajaweeda]

All this chatter lately made me go and have another look at the AUP.

I would challenge someone to post a COMPLETELY CLEAR legal reference from a high court or supreme court that has supported the FREE USE policy in this forum and has written it into LAW and LAW BOOKS by CONGRESS or other government body. While, I am in agreement with being able to record or timeshift your tv shows, but the rest is unfounded. In fact there is more evidence to the contrary out there. (Did you know you cant photocopy a book you own, or photograph your own art or even public art or legally take a picture inside a company building)

Until then, this is an interpretation only and all of us are in violation. I like how everybody just gives this one a little wink wink, nudge nudge, but the dude who accidently advertises his text books is banned and has to grovel for his membership back.

[indolikaa]

I second the motion.

[Shocker Milwaukee]

I farted.

[Pop's]

???????????