Is this legal...
|
|
tater9104
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. January 2005 @ 10:40 |
Link to this message
|
I was considering offering my services to people who would want to make archival backup copies of preowned dvds and to also convert VHS to Dvd if a person wants me to. Does this violate any copyright laws or anything else, so long as I make sure that we have a signed agreement with each other that the person does own the DVD, agrees to destroy the copy if the original is ever lost, and that they agree not to give the DVD to another. Can I do this for people and make money? I am not selling ripped DVD's, but simply offering a service to backup what is aready bought. What do you guys think?
Somedays you're the pigeon, somedays you're the statue.
|
Advertisement
|
  |
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. January 2005 @ 11:14 |
Link to this message
|
This is just my opinion so take it as that. You would be making money from doing the backups which I think the legal system would look on as piracy. I understand what you are saying and its all in how you look at it. Movie companies don't really want any backups made even if you own them. Thats why them encrypt them. So any income from such a service will be frowned upon by them and the legal system. Just my outlook on how they will view your business.
Jerry
|
Senior Member
|
13. January 2005 @ 11:46 |
Link to this message
|
I concur piracy is looked upon exactly as that, making money.
pokin'around
|
tater9104
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. January 2005 @ 11:53 |
Link to this message
|
So, even though backing up DVD's are legal, my acting as a catalyst of such backing up would be considered illegal?
Somedays you're the pigeon, somedays you're the statue.
|
Member
|
13. January 2005 @ 12:26 |
Link to this message
|
My 2 cents.....
I think that in order for it to not be looked upon as piracy or anything illegal, you couldn't make a profit off it. I think the only thing you could really charge for MAYBE is the cost of the blank disc.
We are the Borg...
Resistance is futile....
DVD's will be assimilated...
Protection is irrelevant.
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. January 2005 @ 12:46 |
Link to this message
|
D'oh [edited by herbsman]
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. January 2005 @ 01:03
|
tater9104
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. January 2005 @ 16:08 |
Link to this message
|
Does anyone really know the law? I mean piracy has a very different connotation than its denotation. I actually read the FBI waring for the first time in my life! I did not see anything that would make this seem illegal. The only problem is that i will have to advertise somewhat, so I really need to know the law. Does anyone know anywhere I could check if you do not know it for yourself?
Somedays you're the pigeon, somedays you're the statue.
|
hijacker
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. January 2005 @ 16:40 |
Link to this message
|
I would think that you could myself.Your backing up an original.Not profiting from the movie just service itself.Hey if a company can edit movies for people making them "G" rated instead of "R" rated then you should be able to back-up someone's movie.You better get some fast as hell burners though or a few of them for fast service.We have plent of these "clean flick companys" where I am at.
|
cmmnsense
Suspended permanently
|
13. January 2005 @ 16:48 |
Link to this message
|
If you have to ask, it probally is illlegal. Even if it isn't really wrong, the gov't will still burn you for it if your unlucky enough to get caught.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. January 2005 @ 17:02 |
Link to this message
|
Here is the link to THE LAW. 3rd or 4th paragraph states about services offered to circumvent copyright protection. From what I read you would be doing things against the law.
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf
Jerry
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. January 2005 @ 01:04
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. January 2005 @ 18:05 |
Link to this message
|
Get a lawyer :-)
Hell if you read that link we are all breaking the Law LOL
My Guides--------->http://webpages.charter.net/bacitup/
Newbies------------>http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/183136
Software ------->http://webpages.charter.net/bacitup/software.htm
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. January 2005 @ 18:10
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. January 2005 @ 18:24 |
Link to this message
|
That is exactly right. However they don't have time to chase down all of us in our homes so they only go after the ones making multiple copies and making money off them. The courts already made it clear you can't sell decrypting software in the USA (example 321 studios). It is also unlawful to download said software (Shrink and Decrypter). So I agree with your statemant that most people are already breaking the law. Will they come after us? I doubt it--excessive time and cost--at least at this time.
Jerry
|
Senior Member
|
13. January 2005 @ 20:28 |
Link to this message
|
Ok it seems there are alot of differing opinions but let me break it down to you 1) you have already raised a flag by asking if something is legal. 2) making any copy of copyrighted material is illegal except when it comes to the fair use act. 3) you have already stated yourself the illegal use of such copy/ripping software. 4) there is a very big difference in being busted for your own use and being busted making a profit. 5) it would be very time consuming and the wear and tear on your pc and its drives would be enormous. 6) you mentioned companies that make an (R) movie into a (PG) they have licsenced permission to do this in most cased if not they are breaking the law. Last thoughts yes we are all technically breaking the law however I would not have been ignorant enough to ask on a popular forum if it was legal I would have just done it between known accuintances and word of mouth. WEW !!!!
pokin'around
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
13. January 2005 @ 21:37 |
Link to this message
|
Jerry has it right, as things stand now, copying DVD movies is against the copyright act. The court battle isn't over; and we, along with many others, are claiming fair use rights. But until government and the courts start to agree with us, we are going against the wishes of the court and the movie industry.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
If you believe fair use under the law gives you the right to record copyrighted material, you had best think again. The above links will take you to some interesting reading. The top is the shortest, so read it first. That will answer the question for anyone in doubt. And as they say, if you don't understand it, call a lawyer. These are the laws in the books from which the precedents were taken, before the new copyright laws came into effect, and the new laws are even more strict.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. January 2005 @ 01:05
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
13. January 2005 @ 22:08 |
Link to this message
|
Highlights of the Millenium Copyright Act.
Quote: Highlights Generally:
· Makes it a crime to circumvent anti-piracy measures built into most commercial software.
· Outlaws the manufacture, sale, or distribution of code-cracking devices used to illegally copy software.
· Does permit the cracking of copyright protection devices, however, to conduct encryption research, assess product interoperability, and test computer security systems.
· Provides exemptions from anti-circumvention provisions for nonprofit libraries, archives, and educational institutions under certain circumstances.
· In general, limits Internet service providers from copyright infringement liability for simply transmitting information over the Internet.
· Service providers, however, are expected to remove material from users' web sites that appears to constitute copyright infringement.
· Limits liability of nonprofit institutions of higher education -- when they serve as online service providers and under certain circumstances -- for copyright infringement by faculty members or graduate students.
· Requires that "webcasters" pay licensing fees to record companies.
· Requires that the Register of Copyrights, after consultation with relevant parties, submit to Congress recommendations regarding how to promote distance education through digital technologies while "maintaining an appropriate balance between the rights of copyright owners and the needs of users."
· States explicitly that "[n]othing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use..."
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/dmca1.htm
Now that you've seen the highlights of the act, you may get an idea of the leverage the movie and music industry have.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. January 2005 @ 01:06
|
billwebso
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
14. January 2005 @ 05:00 |
Link to this message
|
Just offer to back-up home movies to DVD. There is a big enough market out there for you to make a little cash. I know I have a box of VHS home movies that I really don't like to take the time to back up. It's very time consuming. I would think there would be better money there anyway.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. January 2005 @ 13:32 |
Link to this message
|
We can debate this until doomsday. The fact is that if they wanted to really spend the time and money most of us would be paying fines or spending time in court(or jail). I at times bend a few rules, but only for myself and family. I never have, nor intend to try to profit from any knowledge or equipment I have for burning dvd backups. If everyone would keep that frame of mind we wouldn't hear as much from DMCA. But you have people with rooms full of burning equipment selling dvd movies for 1/2 or 1/4 the price of the original. If it was my business I would try to stop it too. Again just my opinion.
Jerry
|
Member
|
14. January 2005 @ 15:38 |
Link to this message
|
I got thinking about this over the course of the day today, and I have thought a little differently from what I originally posted.
Ok, (excluding the DMCA which IMO is just a corrupt tool of the MPAA...) we all know that under the Fair Rights Use clause of the Copyright act we are SUPPOSED to be able to make ONE backup copy of a movie that we OWN and have possession of, correct?
Upon rereading the original post I got thinking. If he is making a backup of a disc owned by someone else, and then gives that person back BOTH the original AND the backup, while at the same time NOT keeping a copy of the ISO for himself, how can he be violating Fair Rights Use since he is only charging a person for the SERVICE of backing up a dvd that the person owns, rather than selling a burnt copy of the original to someone else, which WOULD constitute piracy??? Based on that I can't see how he'd be violating Fair Rights Use. The person he is burning the disc for is simply exercising their right to Fair Rights Use, Tater is only providing the means to do it, and charging a fee to do it for them.
Now throw in DMCA and that's a whole different can of worms....
I find Mr. Valenti's (MPAA) analogy that "giving someone a decryption program is like giving them the keys to your house."
I find his argument flawed in this sense: Do not most people make a duplicate key of their house so in case anything ever happens to the original key you can still get in??? I personally have several dup keys of my house key for this very reason, and I think that the exact same thinking applies to archival backups of DVD. A DVD is a kind of key. It opens the movie. Same way your house key opens your house. Is it not then prudent to have a SPARE KEY??? Last time I checked the keymaker at my local hardware store charges you to make a dup but he's not breaking any laws.... hmmm...
Mr Valenti would, if he could, ban all copying, backup or otherwise. He would rather you buy a brand new copy of it. (money hungry bastards...)
Using his own "house key" analogy, if the disc is the key, and the movie is the house, if I can't make a backup of the key, and my key gets broken lost or damaged, SHOULD I HAVE TO BUY A NEW HOUSE??!!! What an insulting and arrogant prick Mr Valenti is. Sorry it ticks me off.
We are the Borg...
Resistance is futile....
DVD's will be assimilated...
Protection is irrelevant.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. January 2005 @ 15:58
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. January 2005 @ 15:54 |
Link to this message
|
Here is another way to look at the same thing. I give someone the original of a dvd to copy for me. He makes 11 copies, gives me back the original and 1 copy and sells 10. If anyone advertises that type of service they will be asking for trouble. Tater9104 may be honest enough to make just 1 copy but there are others that will cause all the problems.
Jerry
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. January 2005 @ 15:55
|
Member
|
14. January 2005 @ 16:02 |
Link to this message
|
Quote: Here is another way to look at the same thing. I give someone the original of a dvd to copy for me. He makes 11 copies, gives me back the original and 1 copy and sells 10. If anyone advertises that type of service they will be asking for trouble. Tater9104 may be honest enough to make just 1 copy but there are others that will cause all the problems.
I whole heartedly agree. And it is THOSE people who cause the problems, not the people such as Tater. Only problem is the MPAA doesn't distinguish between the two.
We are the Borg...
Resistance is futile....
DVD's will be assimilated...
Protection is irrelevant.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. January 2005 @ 16:03
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
14. January 2005 @ 17:35 |
Link to this message
|
Weirdo007
Jerry has the right spin on the situation. Until the laws are changed, recording retail DVD movies is an illegal practice. There are some exclusions, but I didn't see any referring to individuals. The case against 321 Studios (MGM v 321 Studios) was the first real test case and the entertainment industry won. That entered into the DMCRA more so than Fair Use.
People keep saying Fair Use. I fear many haven't read the Fair Use part of the copyright law. What we think of fair use and Fair Use as stated in the law are different and the law is vague to some degree.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107Quote: § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use38
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include ?
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Like most legal documents there is a lot of cross referencing. But where in the law does it state a person has the right to copy a DVD for their personal use? The statement on the DVDs says it is illegal and the courts agree.
One can argue until they are blue in the face. I think the courts are wrong and the laws need to be clarified. The individual should have the right to make a backup copy of a legally purchased item to protect their investment. As long as the copy is retained for personal use the original purchaser retains the right and if ownership of the original is lost or forfeited, so goes the right to a copy. A person should have the right as long as the use of the copy in no way affects the sale of the copyrighted material. That is what most of us see as fair. But until the courts agree with us and the laws are on the books, the process of recording DVDs is illegal.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. January 2005 @ 17:44
|
Mgjkav
Newbie
|
15. January 2005 @ 17:12 |
Link to this message
|
If their are legal implecations in doing what tater9104
is sujesting, then, should'nt their be more severe implecations for the owner of the Dvd.?
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
15. January 2005 @ 17:17 |
Link to this message
|
No because the owner in this case would not be making the money off the backup.
Jerry
|
Mgjkav
Newbie
|
15. January 2005 @ 17:21 |
Link to this message
|
Yes, but he is giving it to someone to do somting illegal. If i give my car to a bank rober so he can get away. Am I not responsible for aiding and abetting.
|
Advertisement
|
  |
|
RemyK313
Member
|
16. January 2005 @ 00:46 |
Link to this message
|
Regardless of technicalities, if he runs a website that could potentially threaten a large company, he's going to run into trouble.
It's that simple. Who really wants lawyers knocking at their front doors trying to drag them to court? I remember this one movie from an oooooold issue of Playstation Underground magazine. It showed these two FBI agents knocking on this guy's apartment door. He was running a net business from a one-bedroom apartment. He tried to say "But this is legal, all I do is provide backups for people who have legal copies." The agents didn't really care, they just let him talk while they handcuffed him and took him away.
Another example I can cite are the threats against popular bittorrent trackers. Even though they track the torrents, and don't actually host any content, they're constantly under scrutiny, and even though there are no clear laws in most countries regarding torrents, many popular sites have gone down *cough suprnova cough*
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is that it doesn't really matter if it's legal or not, it's gonna piss some company off and you're going to be looking down the shit end of a legal battle.
EDIT : Err, I derailed a bit from the original post, sorry.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. January 2005 @ 00:48
|