Qeustion re: the legality of ripping

[axlish]

I am a moderator on a large forum and we are trying to decide on a few rules regarding the legality of ripping DVD's.

(all of these questions are under the assumption that said person owns the DVD)
1. Is it legal to rip a DVD to your hard drive
2. Is it legal to convert to MP$ and put on your Ipod or comparable device.

I'm sure there are more questions, but if anyone can help with the legalities of all of this, and more, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

[yoda313]

Basically my personal take on it is if you bought it its yours to do with as you please. Provided you don't "share" it of course. That would be the only restriction I put on myself.

[jagabo]

And all that really matters in a court of law is one's personal take.

[Steve Stepoway]

And all that really matters in a court of law is one's personal take.

Absolutely. Laws? We don't got no laws. We don't need no stinkin laws!

Right up to the point the US Marshals show up at your door.

Yes, axlish, I think you do need to know what the laws say, and not pay too much attention to people's "personal take" on that kind of question. What people do in the privacy of their own homes probably doesn't matter too much (until DRM is common, of course), but running a public forum is another matter.

Steve

[rumplestiltskin]

The common sense rule is to treat the video/music like a book. One person may read the book at any one time. Of course, with music and video, many people may view/listen at one time but only in one place. Assuming you own the music or video, you may play it for family and friends. You may even loan your CD or DVD to a friend so he or she listen or watch but in all cases, it's ONE copy that is playing at any one time.

But what if you made a copy of the CD or DVD or have ripped it to your iPod or computer? Well, the same common sense rule should apply. One copy of the media playing at any one time, just like a book.

Of course, the MPAA and RIAA may disagree but I think common sense self-regulation is reasonable.

[smitbret]

That makes the most sense of anything I've ever heard or read. Really.
-Brett

[jagabo]

I believe Adam, who posts here from time to time, is an intellectual property laywer in the USA. His posts are probably the only ones with any legal authority.
Here's an example:

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=1377235#1377235

His other posts in that thread (and many others) are worth reading too. He often gives links to the specific laws he discusses.

[Steve Stepoway]

The "like a book" license makes a lot of sense, and has been around at least since Borland first came to notice with Turbo Pascal. That's how their license was written: you could put the S/W on as many machines as you wanted, as long as there was no possibility that it could be in use on 2 machines at the same time (your work desktop, home machine, and a laptop, for example, as long as you were the only person who could use them.)

Unfortunately, since we've got the MPAA and RIAA bribing congress to do their bidding (I'm sorry, I meant to say "giving congresspersons perfectly legal and appropriate campaign contributions because of the wonderful work they are doing for the whole world"), common sense isn't likely to enter into the question. Absolutely check out some of the things Adam has had to say on the subject. You need to know how to protect yourself. The US Federal courts are notoriously humorless.

Steve

[thecoalman]

1. Is it legal to rip a DVD to your hard drive

No, to do so you need to bybass the protection which itself is illegal.

2. Is it legal to convert to MP$ and put on your Ipod or comparable device.

Not sure where ipods fit in the mix but you can make copies of your music CD's.

Both answers are for the US.
.

[rumplestiltskin]

I used to sell Apple hardware and Apple (& third-party) software to the K12 market. The policy used by the vendors at that time was the "like a book" model.

However, there were instances where the "network versions" of software would be installed on quite a few machines. In some cases there were three labs with the same software but, because the teacher who taught using that software could only be in one lab at a time, it made sense to treat the licensing as the quantity of computers in the largest of the three labs. Again, common sense rules that were documented in a binder so, if any of the "software police" showed up and asked, the -written- policy could be displayed so there was no question that everything was on the "up'n'up".

Others in this thread have opined that the lawyers need to be consulted; I do not disagree. However, we never had any trouble from the vendors because we always consulted with them and documented all telecons - even received formal letters of approval. In our situation, the lawyers were not necessary because reasonable people having a reasonable conversation could come to a reasonable agreement. Of course, lawyers are necessary when people aren't being reasonable.

[adam]

rumplestiltskin I think that your "like a book" analogy really only applies to computer software, which is what it seems you were dealing with at Apple. Computer software is the only type of media that expressly allows a single archival copy, except if the software is used in conjunction with a machine in which case you are allowed one copy for each machine. This sounds about like the policy you were used to, and if the original poster is talking about computer software stored on a DVD than yes it is legal to copy the DVD to the hard drive to make an archival copy. This is all under 17 USCS 117 btw.

As for other types of works, its not that simple. Musical works are allowed to be copied generally (not limited to single copy) for personal use provided that you only do so using a "digital audio recording device" and on "digital audio recording media." This means you can only use very specific devices like Dat recorders and only use Music CDRs, and it also means that the original work must be purely a musical work. So you can't just take the soundtrack off a movie, that is still considered an audio/visual work even if all you want is the audio. So I would say that you could play a music DVD on your receiver and record on a Dat recorder to a Music CDR, but no you could not rip it to your hard drive. In RIAA v. Napster the Supreme Court ruled that computers are not "digital audio recording devices," for purposes of the musical works exception. This is covered in 17 USCS 1008 btw.

Now my guess is that the original poster is talking about DVD Videos in which case the simple answer is no, you can never copy the entire DVD to your hard drive. There is no exception made for archiving audio/visual works and the Copyright Office has expressly declined to create such an exception on three separate occasions. This means that the only way it could be permissible under current law is if it fell into the Fair Use exception but that basically never applies to a complete copy so I do not see how it could possibly be considered Fair Use. Now that doesn't mean you can't still take Fair Use samples from a DVD. If you sampled a short segment for educational or testing purposes that is fine and would fall within Fair Use. But copying the entire disc or even the entire movie (minus extras, etc..) just would not pass the Fair Use test.

Someone brought up copy protection on DVDs also. The DMCA does make it a violation of the act to bypass CSS encryption found on DVDs, but the DMCA also has a savings clause that says that it does not effect any rights provided by Fair Use or any other provision of Title 17. So if you are engaging in Fair Use copying from a DVD than its not a violation of the DMCA to bypass encryption in the process....UNLESS the statute allowing you to make the copies says otherwise. This is actually the case with educational Fair Use copying. Section 107 says that you cannot bypass encryption even for educational purposes. But if you were sampling to mas is what applies ke a Fair Use parody for example, then you could bypass encryption.

All of this is assuming that US law applies and that the copyright is still valid. Unless you qualify as a library or archive, there is simply no exception that allows you to copy an entire audio/visual for any purpose. So the answer to both of your questions is no.

Now with all that said, these are the rules for the direct infringer. If you are running a website than you most likely will not be involved directly in the infringement so you can only be held liable for contributory copyright infringement which basically allows more latitude on your part. Things that can get you into trouble would be hosting, linking, or otherwise directing your users to infringing content or tools such as DVD rippers. As for general talk in the forums about "ripping a DVD" I don't see why you couldn't safely do this provided there is no indication that the work is copyrighted. You should not stick your head in the sand. If you see infringing content you should diligently remove it. But a "don't ask, don't tell" policy can protect you.