California ruling. Free speech more important than DeCSS protection! (1 Viewer)

[Julian Lalor]

Mike,
The comparison with PC clones and misusing the Coke formula as described is not correct. What you are talking about in your case is the "clean room" method of coming up with a piece of technology which cannot be traced back to someone else's work, even though it is ostensibly identical (ie you didn't reverse engineer it, you created it independently). Deliberately isung the formula for Coke to produce Pespi2 could result in a number of civil actions by Coke against Pepsi (IP infringement namely and, potentially, passing off).

 

[Thomas Newton]

Fair use is not about replicating the entire contents of a work. That IS theft ...

Not according to the Supreme Court, in Sony vs. Universal Studios, who in declaring timeshifting to be legal Fair Use, clearly had in mind the practice of taping all of the program (not just 1/2 of it).
Not according to Orrin Hatch, who asked Hillary Rosen if making a copy of an album for his wife was Fair Use. She evaded the question, and finally said "No." Hatch then informed her that it would indeed be Fair Use.

 

[Thomas Newton]

quote:
Examine some of the discussions about HD-TV formats. The producers want to include content controls that will restrict copying (to once, or twice, or never). Then they say that the "never" is intended for use on content-on-demand delivery systems and that kind of thing. Okay, sure, that's a legitimate reason, probably covered under your content-on-demand user agreement, yadda yadda. However, one asks, what is to prevent any other signal from being coded with the "never copy" code?
[/quote]
They'd never misuse it!
Just like the studios would never use region coding on DVDs of catalog films. Remember the soothing words about how region coding was "only" for new films that might still be in first run in the theaters overseas?
Just like nobody who ever manufactured a DVD would think of setting the SCMS coding to "NO COPYING" to block the first-generation digital recording that is supposed to be allowed under the AHRA.
Just like the recording industry, having gotten both copy protection (SCMS) and equipment/media tax from the AHRA, would never try the lawsuit game again (Diamond Rio case), break the supposed AHRA bargain (with DVD-Audio copy protection, SACD copy protection, SDMI, defective CDs, etc.), or set its sights on our computers (DMCA, SSSCA?).
Just like King George III would never misuse his ability to quarter soldiers inside people's homes ...
[Edited last by Thomas Newton on November 05, 2001 at 07:54 PM]

 

[Ryan Wright]

If Coke weren't protected, they would cease to exist as a company.

Bzzt! Wrong! You can get the recipe for making a cake anywhere and if done right, it will taste exactly the same as your local bakery. Yet bakeries are still in business. How is that? Using your logic, there should be no bakeries. Even if Coke weren't protected, they would still rake in billions, as most people would rather buy the product than try to make it themselves.
Oh, and another thing: Even if I handed you the recipe for Coke right now, you could never compete with them. Their business agreements, distribution channels, and sheer size would simply overwhelm you. You might be able to break into a few local markets with your Coke copy, but putting Coke out of business?

------------------
-Ryan (http://www.ryanwright.com )
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you do criticize them, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

As someone once said, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

That would be the Enlightenment writer Voltaire, a very wise man indeed. And that argument does indeed hold up... If a classified document falls out of some offical's coat pocket, and someone finds it and publishes it, that perfectly legal. One of the greatest liabilities of a nation is freedom. But if you safegaurd against that by restricting freedoms, what do you have left really worth saving?
------------------
My DVD Collection
My Preorders
My Wishlist
Potter is coming...

 

[Brian Perry]

Once I have purchased a DVD, I own the rights to watch that movie. If I lose the disc, I still own the rights to the movie as I've already paid for it! Thus, all I have lost is the $1 worth of plastic that the content sits on. Since it would be infeasible for the record company to sell me a new disc for only the price of the disc, and it's unreasonable to expect me to pay again for something I already own (the right to watch the movie), I'm allowed to make a backup.

Ryan,
I'm with you on most of your post, but I think you're expanding the Fair Use concept too much. Let's say you had made CD-R copies of all your CDs and they were in your summer home. Someone then breaks into your main house and steals all your original CDs. Would you claim this as a loss to your insurance company?
As far as my comments about Coke ceasing to exist, I didn't mean to imply that a single individual would begin maunfacturing and distributing it -- hence, the reference to "Pepsi2."
------------------
Home Theater Pictures

 

[John Miles]

quote: Someone then breaks into your main house and steals all your original CDs. Would you claim this as a loss to your insurance company?[/quote]
Damn straight. He can't legally sell the CD-R copies, so the entire monetary value of his music collection rests in the original CDs. There would be nothing wrong with claiming the loss.
In fact, he might be obliged to claim the loss. The real ethical dilemma is: is it still OK for him to listen to his CD-R copies?
While format-shifting your music collection is 100% kosher (RIAA vs. Diamond again), it would be dishonest (and probably illegal) to sell all your CDs after copying or ripping them for your own permanent collection. But what would, or should, you do with your previously-legal copies if your original CDs were stolen?

[Edited last by John Miles on November 06, 2001 at 08:22 PM]

 

[John_Berger]

Don't you just love these paranoid people who think that the only reasons to copy a CD or DVD are illegal reasons?
That's quite an accusation, don't you think?

------------------
The Letterbox and Widescreen Advocacy Page
A Member of the Artists Rights Foundation
http://www.widescreen.org

 

[Matt Perkins]

Don't you just love these paranoid people who think that the only reasons to copy a CD or DVD are illegal reasons?
Right on, John.
In light of that ethic, I have to point anyone interested to this article .
Spoiler:Yes, it's completely fake ... but it doesn't sound too far away from the company line, does it?!

 

[Samuel Des]

Delete.
Edit - The original post was a link to some kind of (obvious) scam. Didn't mean to offend.

[Edited last by Samuel Des on November 07, 2001 at 11:59 AM]

 

[Matt Perkins]

Oh jeez, Samuel ... what did you have to go and post that for?? We were having a nice conversation, and now here comes "the lock."

 

[Ryan Wright]

quote: Let's say you had made CD-R copies of all your CDs and they were in your summer home. Someone then breaks into your main house and steals all your original CDs. Would you claim this as a loss to your insurance company?[/quote]
Yep. Those are my originals. If they stole my copies, I wouldn't, unless we were talking so many discs that the costs of blanks would be more than my deductable. Then I'd likely submit a claim for the amount of money needed to buy new blanks. However, I don't copy my discs onto blanks, I turn them into MP3s and keep them on my server. When I want to listen to some music in my car, I burn a compilation CD of various artists. I don't own a single CD that doesn't have at least a few worthless songs, and rarely want to listen to the same artist song after song anyway.
quote: But what would, or should, you do with your previously-legal copies if your original CDs were stolen? [/quote]
Enjoy them. You still own the rights to that music. Essentially, the thief has not only stolen from you, they've also stolen from the record company. It gets even trickier, though: What happens when the insurance company reimburses you for the loss? Are you obligated to use that money to re-purchase the same CDs, or can you listen to your copies and buy different discs? I can argue both sides of this issue, but I don't know which one is right:
(a) You already own the rights to your CDs, so why should you have to purchase new ones? Your copies are still legal for you to use whether you buy the same discs again or not, and why should the industry get paid again for the same thing (the right for you to listen to that music)? Might as well buy all new CDs and double the size of your collection.
(b) If you sell the originals, you are not allowed to keep your backups, so why should this be any different? Essentially you've "sold" the lost CDs to your insurance company, so you should be obligated to purchase those discs again or destroy your copies.
I'm not sure which way I'd go in this scenerio, neither am I sure which way is legal. I suppose if it ever happened I'd have to decide at that time...
------------------
-Ryan ( http://www.ryanwright.com )
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you do criticize them, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
[Edited last by Ryan Wright on November 07, 2001 at 03:13 PM]

 

[Ryan Spaight]

The stolen originals conundrum is a very interesting one. My take (IANAL) is that you can't claim an item as stolen and still possess and use it -- that's insurance fraud. If you claim a loss for the cost of the licenses and not just the media, then you are in effect admitting you no longer possess the licenses, so you should no longer use the backups. If you file no claim or a claim for the just the cost of media, then you're clear.
On the larger issue, I'm at a similar loss as Jeff to envision how to effectively prevent mass Napster-style piracy while at the same time protecting fair use. If you can make a copy in the Internet age, you can make a copy for everyone. If you can't make a copy, perfectly legitimate uses are severely restricted. (Witness the "copy protected" CDs now appearing that don't work in CD-ROM or DVD transports.)
I wish everyone would just act ethically and not spoil things for everyone else, but that'll never happen, will it?
Ryan

 

[John_Berger]

Sam, that is a great article! I had to do the reading equivalent of a double-take before I realized that it was a joke! The sad part is that the RIAA is so anal-retentive on matters like this that I would not be surprised if they considered something as ridiculous as a "waiting time" on CD writers in the past.

------------------
The Letterbox and Widescreen Advocacy Page
A Member of the Artists Rights Foundation
http://www.widescreen.org