Forbes Magazine says Madagascar WAS a true RIPGuard disc

[Dv8ted2]

The more angry people become the more likely they are to avenge themselves on big media.

I doubt the average person is very angry about not being able to backup their DVDs. I doubt the average person cares about ripguard. I'd say that the people who really care about this issue and / or involved in backing up their DVDs are less than 1% (maybe more like 1/10 of 1%).

Exactly. The only ones who loudly complain are typically the ones who violate the law on a regular basis. I dare say the majority of those who complain do not even own the original but instead are complaining because their rental is due to be returned and they haven't been able to steal it yet. They'd steal it in the comfort of their homes but don't have enough gumption to walk out of the store without paying for it. It's only OK in their minds because there is nobody potentially watching what they are doing.

The flaw in your logic is when you buy a movie and it freezes about 50 times in a movie.

I have unfortunately bought a few from amazon that way.

The only way I was able to watch it was to run a repair job and make a backup.

How am I stealing?

If anything, I feel ripped off.

[DereX888]

ANYBODY PLEASE SHOW ME AT LEAST ONE LAWCASE WHERE A PERSON HAD BEEN EVER CHARGED AND PROSECUTED FOR COPYING HIS LEGALLY BOUGHT DVD FOR PERSONAL HOME USE.

No need. There are thousands of people who have been served legal notice that their illicit activities can result in $150,000USD Fines for each illegal download or backed up movie in their collection. The MPAA is getting ready to submit another handful as we speak. read a newspaper sometime or ask around. I'm sure there is someone out there who has payed or agreed to pay an inexorbitant amount of money in restitution for their illegal activities of stealing.

The question(s) you need to ask yourself is do you want to pay these fines? Do you want to have the stigma of being labelled a thief? Do you want to risk your life (because the prosecution of these things takes time) because of a movie backup?

It seems harmless now, but just ask those in the past RIAA salvo of lawsuits against individual copyright violators whether their activities would ever result in them being labelled as a thief. I'm quite sure they'd do anything to reverse their previous course of action.

1. RIAA and MPAA are handing out notices to illegal downloaders of copyrighted materials. If you can't see difference between person who paid for his "licence to watch" by buying a DVD, and then copied it for his own use, and a person who never bought any movie and just downloaded its copy off the internet, then you need to go back to your MPAA HQ for more training.

2. I COPIED MOST OF MY LEGALLY BOUGHT DVDs AT HOME FOR MY OWN BACKUP PURPOSES. I ADMIT IT. SUE ME. TELL YOR BOSS.

3. I don't need to ask any RIAA for anything. They got what they well deserved. Any normal company that doesn't change and adapt to new market trends and still tries to push old product down the consumer's throat - usually dies quickly, and so should RIAA. They failed to provide consumers with new medias, and they failed to provide their members - artists - with new markets (mp3s mainly). It took years of illegal mp3s, lawsuits, and medial noise until finally Apple stepped in with its iTunes and showed them at RIAA how it have to be done. You totaly missed here again.
Since MPAA follows the path of RIAA, thats what should happened to them as well, obviously. Their product is even weaker than RIAA had for sale on their "shelves", their product is less and less popular every year too. Any normal company on a free market would go belly up long ago, but clearly RIAA and MPAA are hugely sponsored by studio giants, with corrupted law officials and law makers on their payroll (simple case of passing such moot like DMCA says that), thus they won't die easily, if at all.


BTW - I am replying to clarify things for other readers, not to continue any discussion with ROF - this MPAA official(s) running dog.

[GullyFoyle]

Ever watch Twelve Angry men?

I tried, twice. But it was a late night movie and I feel asleep (both times).
But, even if I had, I wouldn't expect to base my judicial knowledge on some movie or TV show that I watched. Those are self described works of fiction and even if based on actual events, blur the line between fantasy and fact. That's why, when possible, I prefer to read the actual text of a law or transcript of a case.

You're right, the judge didn't explain jury nullification. She read the text of the law that the defendant was charged with and told us to decide if the actions of the defendant violated that law.

My point with Twelve Angry men is each person has their own subjective reality which results in a different interpretation of events and the law.
In the end they enter into a consensus.
They literally go from divergent realities to one uniform agreed upon one.
The process remains the same for juries or boardrooms.

[ROF]

Exactly. The only ones who loudly complain are typically the ones who violate the law on a regular basis. I dare say the majority of those who complain do not even own the original but instead are complaining because their rental is due to be returned and they haven't been able to steal it yet. They'd steal it in the comfort of their homes but don't have enough gumption to walk out of the store without paying for it. It's only OK in their minds because there is nobody potentially watching what they are doing.

The flaw in your logic is when you buy a movie and it freezes about 50 times in a movie.

I have unfortunately bought a few from amazon that way.

The only way I was able to watch it was to run a repair job and make a backup.

How am I stealing?

If anything, I feel ripped off.

You're stealing could be prevented by something called returning a defective product. Amazon will take back DVD in exchange for another copy. If you're feeling ripped off it's because you haven't taken responsible action as a consumer of a defective product. This can and does happen quite often but fortunately you can easily remedy the situation without violating the law.

[ROF]

2. I COPIED MOST OF MY LEGALLY BOUGHT DVDs AT HOME FOR MY OWN BACKUP PURPOSES. I ADMIT IT. SUE ME. TELL YOR BOSS.

Didn't you complain loudly a few pages back that I called people here pirates and should be removed because I did? Sorry, but I don't know how you define a digital pirate but your quoted statement above sure does qualify.

[canadateck]

Where does the Law stand, If taking these illegally "backed up" DVD's over the US/Canada Border? For(vacation).

[Dv8ted2]

Exactly. The only ones who loudly complain are typically the ones who violate the law on a regular basis. I dare say the majority of those who complain do not even own the original but instead are complaining because their rental is due to be returned and they haven't been able to steal it yet. They'd steal it in the comfort of their homes but don't have enough gumption to walk out of the store without paying for it. It's only OK in their minds because there is nobody potentially watching what they are doing.

The flaw in your logic is when you buy a movie and it freezes about 50 times in a movie.

I have unfortunately bought a few from amazon that way.

The only way I was able to watch it was to run a repair job and make a backup.

How am I stealing?

If anything, I feel ripped off.

You're stealing could be prevented by something called returning a defective product. Amazon will take back DVD in exchange for another copy. If you're feeling ripped off it's because you haven't taken responsible action as a consumer of a defective product. This can and does happen quite often but fortunately you can easily remedy the situation without violating the law.

Has it occurred to you that when you bring multiple items back, you get labled as a bad customer?

[gadgetguy]

My point with Twelve Angry men is each person has their own subjective reality which results in a different interpretation of events and the law.
In the end they enter into a consensus.
They literally go from divergent realities to one uniform agreed upon one.
The process remains the same for juries or boardrooms.

Oh, , I get what you're saying now. I don't know why I didn't get it earlier. Must have been my own interpretation of the events...

[DereX888]

2. I COPIED MOST OF MY LEGALLY BOUGHT DVDs AT HOME FOR MY OWN BACKUP PURPOSES. I ADMIT IT. SUE ME. TELL YOR BOSS.

Didn't you complain loudly a few pages back that I called people here pirates and should be removed because I did? Sorry, but I don't know how you define a digital pirate but your quoted statement above sure does qualify.

According to what you said yourself - I've paid for my "licence to watch" by buying all of my DVDs.
According to what Adam said from the law point of view - it is a dead law, or at least the law the has not been proved in the court of law yet.

I am not a pirate, your indirect suggestion (again) is insulting and is clearly againt this boards rules. I demand Moderators should issue you a warning.


BTW - I see ROF must have called for help, and there is more MPAA workers disguised as simple members here

[adam]

These threads get ruined by the same 2 or 3 people everytime. I don't understand why ROF and GullyFoyle have so many bones to pick. What's the point?

I give up. Its apparantly impossible to have a mature discussion about law on videohelp. It might as well just be labeled a taboo subject in general like politics. Honestly, I wish it would.

bye.

[GullyFoyle]

My point with Twelve Angry men is each person has their own subjective reality which results in a different interpretation of events and the law.
In the end they enter into a consensus.
They literally go from divergent realities to one uniform agreed upon one.
The process remains the same for juries or boardrooms.

Oh, , I get what you're saying now. I don't know why I didn't get it earlier. Must have been my own interpretation of the events...

Reality kind of works that way. What the general consensus is goes unless the better template appears. For a fun time read some quantum physics. Ever changing realities there.
I get all my legal expertise from Matlock.

[DereX888]

These threads get ruined by the same 2 or 3 people everytime. I don't understand why ROF and GullyFoyle have so many bones to pick. What's the point?

I give up. Its apparantly impossible to have a mature discussion about law on videohelp. It might as well just be labeled a taboo subject in general like politics. Honestly, I wish it would.

bye.

no!
I'm sure we would love to have your help in writing some primer of a 'mature letter' to our local Congressman regarding consumer's right to make backup copy of a legally bought DVDs!

Please disregard them.
Its their tactic - to never discuss too demanding questions and to try kill quickly any not easy for them subjects!
Giving up is exactly what they want.

[ROF]

BTW - I see ROF must have called for help, and there is more MPAA workers disguised as simple members here

Whose calling who names or directing derogatory or inflammatory statements towards others and should be informed that their activities are not wanted or necessary to having a discussion about ripguards. You've made me laugh so hard I need to pee and have a cigarette.

[GullyFoyle]

These threads get ruined by the same 2 or 3 people everytime. I don't understand why ROF and GullyFoyle have so many bones to pick. What's the point?

I give up. Its apparantly impossible to have a mature discussion about law on videohelp. It might as well just be labeled a taboo subject in general like politics. Honestly, I wish it would.

bye.

Again you always interpret from the corporations.
I can't see why you are upset.
It is glaringly obvious from your posts.
Sure you aren't as rabid as Rof.
But still on the corporate side.
Maybe if some EFF or consumer rights attorney would post to debate you you could understand why people ( not just me) question your position.

[ROF]

no!
I'm sure we would love to have your help in writing some primer of a 'mature letter' to our local Congressman regarding consumer's right to make backup copy of a legally bought DVDs!

You need someone else to express your thoughts for you? You've taken plagarism and copying to a whole new level now.

[RottenFoxBreath]

2. I COPIED MOST OF MY LEGALLY BOUGHT DVDs AT HOME FOR MY OWN BACKUP PURPOSES. I ADMIT IT. SUE ME. TELL YOR BOSS.

Didn't you complain loudly a few pages back that I called people here pirates and should be removed because I did? Sorry, but I don't know how you define a digital pirate but your quoted statement above sure does qualify.

im sure the law couldnt give a flying fart about his statement/private business.
its not for financial gain so i guess he wont be doing 5 years in jail for it.
i do the same thing. not lack of parental attention/control or educative isight on the proper way for a 4 year old to handle a dvd,just that accidents do happen,and some kids dvds are pretty dear.

[ROF]

Maybe if some EFF or consumer rights attorney would post to debate you you could understand why people ( not just me) question your position.

You can question it all you want, the fact remains that the law is written and it does say that in the United States it is illegal to backup your DVDs. You may think it's a stupid law. I think seatbelt laws are stupid. I think smoking areas should be allowed in restaurants and bars, but guess what? If I violate either of those laws I can expect that at some point I will get caught. Even in the privacy of my own car. You can expect the same under this subject. I won't say I told you so either when or if it occurs.

[Rich86]

ROF says . . . .
"It seems harmless now, but just ask those in the past RIAA salvo of lawsuits against individual copyright violators whether their activities would ever result in them being labelled as a thief. I'm quite sure they'd do anything to reverse their previous course of action. "

and of course these actions have solved the problem, right? all those folks and their kids who got sued are now dedicated customers and the revenue stream the riaa says is missing has magically appeared. if that is the case - why do they continue to whine?

the concept of winning back your customers and sales by abusing said customers is just a bit flawed . . ask Sony . . .

[ROF]

i do the same thing. not lack of parental attention/control or educative isight on the proper way for a 4 year old to handle a dvd,just that accidents do happen,and some kids dvds are pretty dear.

Do you give your four year old a steak knife at the dinner table? How about your two year old a glass cup? Why? Don't you think the same should apply here? What are you teaching your children if you think a law is stupid that it's OK to go ahead and violate it? I hope they don't follow your example when their teenage friend hands them a heroin filled needle.

[DereX888]

Maybe if some EFF or consumer rights attorney would post to debate you you could understand why people ( not just me) question your position.

You can question it all you want, the fact remains that the law is written and it does say that in the United States it is illegal to backup your DVDs. You may think it's a stupid law. I think seatbelt laws are stupid. I think smoking areas should be allowed in restaurants and bars, but guess what? If I violate either of those laws I can expect that at some point I will get caught. Even in the privacy of my own car. You can expect the same under this subject. I won't say I told you so either when or if it occurs.

The law in Virginia about wife-beating is also written and still a valid law, but same as your DVD copyright laws you try to protect - they are DEAD because no one even tries to enforce it.
Alas seatbel laws are enforced everyday, smoking laws are enforced everyday, etc etc.
You miss and miss and miss (again). Go back to MPAA HQ for more training!

[BobK]

These threads get ruined by the same 2 or 3 people everytime. I don't understand why ROF and GullyFoyle have so many bones to pick. What's the point?

I give up. Its apparantly impossible to have a mature discussion about law on videohelp. It might as well just be labeled a taboo subject in general like politics. Honestly, I wish it would.

bye.

Again you always interpret from the corporations.
I can't see why you are upset.

I'd say he's upset (and with some reason) because all I've ever seen him do is post what the law says and how it's been interpreted by the courts (if it's been in court). Whether or not the law favors the corporations has nothing to do with what Adam thinks or with the way he might like the law to be.

If posts what the law says and how the courts have read that law, it's really counterproductive to make accusations about him, what he thinks, or anything else.

If you go to a lawyer for advice, would you want him to tell you what the law says and what the courts have said about it? Or do you prefer that he just be on your side and tell you what you want to hear- then find out later you're going to jail because he didn't tell you how things really are?

[gadgetguy]

not lack of parental attention/control or educative isight on the proper way for a 4 year old to handle a dvd,just that accidents do happen,and some kids dvds are pretty dear.

I want to clarify... my agreement about the parental guidance comments has nothing to do with whether I agree with backing up or not, only that I think blaming the kids is a weak excuse. Accidents do indeed happen to people of all ages. If there are repeated problems with "the kids" then I believe the problem is with the parents, not the kids.

[DereX888]

i do the same thing. not lack of parental attention/control or educative isight on the proper way for a 4 year old to handle a dvd,just that accidents do happen,and some kids dvds are pretty dear.

Do you give your four year old a steak knife at the dinner table? How about your two year old a glass cup? Why? Don't you think the same should apply here? What are you teaching your children if you think a law is stupid that it's OK to go ahead and violate it? I hope they don't follow your example when their teenage friend hands them a heroin filled needle.

The law does not forbif giving DVD to a 4 year old. Actually since it is not covered by law, how dare you to ask such questions? Its none of your business how someone else raise his children if he doesnt do anything against the law!
You missed again. Go back to MPAA HQ for better training!

[billolmesdahl]

I hope they don't follow your example when their teenage friend hands them a heroin filled needle.

I have lurked in these forums for years, enjoying the information and the chat and never been compelled to write before. The above quote may be the single stupidest thing I've ever read on this or any other board.

I bow before you ROF and applaud you. You are the finest performance artist/comedian I have ever had the privellege to watch. I honestly look forward to your wacky antics in future threads.

[DereX888]

These threads get ruined by the same 2 or 3 people everytime. I don't understand why ROF and GullyFoyle have so many bones to pick. What's the point?

I give up. Its apparantly impossible to have a mature discussion about law on videohelp. It might as well just be labeled a taboo subject in general like politics. Honestly, I wish it would.

bye.

Again you always interpret from the corporations.
I can't see why you are upset.

I'd say he's upset (and with some reason) because all I've ever seen him do is post what the law says and how it's been interpreted by the courts (if it's been in court). Whether or not the law favors the corporations has nothing to do with what Adam thinks or with the way he might like the law to be.

If posts what the law says and how the courts have read that law, it's really counterproductive to make accusations about him, what he thinks, or anything else.

If you go to a lawyer for advice, would you want him to tell you what the law says and what the courts have said about it? Or do you prefer that he just be on your side and tell you what you want to hear- then find out later you're going to jail because he didn't tell you how things really are?

I agree.
Adam may appear to be on the 'corporations side' (I know, its silly term, but we all know what it means in this discussion) but it is only because the written laws favor the corporations, its not his fault.
What is his personal opinion? Ask him. But be warned that he may murky the answer in usual lawyer's way, that you will know even less than before you asked

[DereX888]

I hope they don't follow your example when their teenage friend hands them a heroin filled needle.

I have lurked in these forums for years, enjoying the information and the chat and never been compelled to write before. The above quote may be the single stupidest thing I've ever read on this or any other board.

I bow before you ROF and applaud you. You are the finest performance artist/comedian I have ever had the privellege to watch. I honestly look forward to your wacky antics in future threads.

You are mistaken.
He is probably very smart person. he only act stupid when he can't truthfuly answer or argue because it would undermine the cause he is here for - to protect MPAA's interests (or big corporations/studios actually).
Its their usual tactic I've seen on many boards.
It basically look like this:
Argue according to letter of law. If someone outsmart you - make him look stupid. If it doesnt work - flood the thread with idiocies until everyone else gives up.

[mbellot]

I get all my legal expertise from Matlock.

Not me, Lionel Hutz all the way.


Too bad he's dead now.

[adam]

What is his personal opinion? Ask him. But be warned that he may murky the answer in usual lawyer's way, that you will know even less than before you asked

I've given my personal opinion about copying DVDs for personal use many many times on this board over the years. I don't see anything morally wrong with it, I do it all the time, and I help others do it by answering their questions if I can. But I don't see what any of this has to do with this thread or with copyright law. How I feel about a particular act has no bearing on the legality of it.

Instead I simply try to give my legal opinion, which is just an educated guess as to what a court of law would do if presented with this issue.

[dvdguy4]

I too backup my dvds and I dont know if anyone else has noticed lately VideoHelp has turned more into copyright help than video. A year ago ther really wasnt any of this crap going on. We all pretty much got along and helped with each others problem. Now this site is all about who knows more about copyrights. The site is going to hell. Need to get a grip with this crap. People are gonna back up their movies like it or not.
Im not for it or against it. As for Adam , he's the lawyer. I think Id believe him more than anyone else when it comes down to the copyright issuse.
Its too funny how this thread was about rip guard then it turns into this shit . Years ago we werent talking about copyright infringment, we were talking about how can someone help me with this .

[Guy_Fawkes]

I don't understand why Adam gets blasted so hard for trying to explain what the laws as it currently written. From what I can see he comes down neither in favor or against it. I heard he is lawyer and that's fine its his job to interpet law. It's the job of the Courts to Judge the law and its application.

This will give lawyers a guideline as to the future interpertations. This case has never be ajuducated in Court. The 321 cases was settled before it arrived at the Supreme Court. There is no case law on the topic of individuals making a single copy.

ROF i think i understand he likes to debate and get a rise out of people. Does he believe what he post I don't know. I've discovered several post where he admists to coping movies and a lack of understanding of the DMCA.

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1294419&highlight=#1294419

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1307137&highlight=#1307137

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1315057&highlight=#1315057

Maybe he had a Vision and changed. But that's all good too.

I am a member of the EFF and have been involved in a court case with the Studios. They were settled and a settlement is not a judgement, its a way out usually for economic reasons.

As far as the comparisons to muder, auto theft, and now distribution of heroin they make me laugh. As long as he can get a rise out you he will continue to make they silly comparisons.