FixVTS and Menushrink stopped

[Abond]

I don't think these programs are forbidden. Nobody can restrict me which programs I can use in my PERSONAL computer. Simply the development was stopped. And what?
I am still getting my backups with DVD Decrypter only (main movie, no menus).

[usually_quiet]

I didn't mean these programs are forbidden for users to possess, though obviously someone doesn't want us to have them. I meant that, in some cases at least, people could be forbidden to host them for download, if "whoever" finds out where they are available.

[BillB]

It is the same as the banning of firearms. Big Bro is stomping down on all our freedoms. Next will be the banning of marshmallows because a "child" might get burned at a campfire. Everything is about profiteering and power. We sheep get scared when this happens, and that is exactly what BB wants. Party now or forever hold your ….DVD!

[dnix71]

If someone is going to write ripping software maybe they should try to be more subtle about it's purpose.

- Fixed problem that occurs when a PGC Cells has the right pointers, but wrong VCID ("When a Stranger Calls" for example).

is included in the readme.txt of the source files of FixVTS. Writing bug fixes to defeat a specific drm feature of a specific movie is sure to piss off someone who invested money to make and distribute that movie.

The downloads are still hosted *somewhere* just like the original dvd decrypter is. Google is your friend.

[VegasBud]

Hopefully to avoid any confusion, neither FixVTS or Menushrink could be classified as ripping software, nor do they defeat drm. That's why this bonehead move is just so...mean (and silly).

[splash1955]

my guess is that this might not be simply about the potential to defeat drm, but more about accusing one of using someone else's code or other owned method. MV has specifically done this in the past. DMCA, or its analogs elsewhere, can be used indirectly to shut down alternated defense claims. think 321.

An individual faced with this could be presented with rather massive damage claims, not by studios or their trade group, but by the holder of rights to the DRM protection scheme. You force them to withdraw the software.

There may be a gag order, but more likely an enforceable agreement which prevents the target individuals from commenting.

the riaa and mpaa have done after dark net distribution of the content itself. the drm scheme holders are the ones that have to go after workarounds.

so if the protection scheme maker can use patent or copyright on elements of the code or processes of the protection scheme, and assert those have been used, only need dmca secondarily to prevent alternative defense. I think that is a good chance that this is possibility in this case.

You then use the gag in a parallel tactic where you then promulgate a chilling effect across websites and blogs with threats. Chilling effects are an extremely useful method of quashing speech because most people are unaware of their speech rights.. many websites seem to be under the misimpression that discussing the case or speculating on it might be illegal or actionable. I have even seen websites whose moderators are so disinrormed as to think they themselves would be party to a gag or disclosure agreement to which they are obviously not a constrained party.