[OT] legality of DVD backup

[Richmond]

On 11/08/2010 08:58 PM, David Bovill wrote:
> In most countries this is what you would call legally defensible under faire
> use or the equivalent in your jurisdiction. There is no case I know of where
> someone has been prosecuted for copyright infringement by making a backup
> copy for personal use, given that they own a legal copy in another medium.
> However there is nothing to stop a copyright holder taking you to court, in
> which case it would be down to you to make a faire use or equivalent defence
> - and you could then have the privilege of being (as far as I know), the
> first person to loose such a case :)
>
> In the real world, you are extremely unlikely to be taken to court over this
> issue, as the industry has plenty to do taking clear cut cases of
> downloading pirated DVD's to court, and the last thing they want is to loose
> a faire use case and so set a precedent.
>
> A related issue is the obtaining and use of the software to actually do the
> decryption (which is why it can be hard to get a copy from a mainstream site
> - as Macrovision does its best to take action against distributers). A good
> account here is taken from the wikipedia
> article<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Decrypter>
> :
>
> Under United States' Federal law, making a backup copy of a
> DVD-Video<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Video>or an audio

Oddly enough, I JUST opened a Terminal emulator in Ubuntu 10.10 and typed:

sudo apt-get install k9copy

not all that hidden . . .  :)

>> CD<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Book_%28audio_CD_standard%29>  by a
>> consumer is legal under fair use<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use>protection. However, this provision of United States law conflicts with the Digital
>> Millennium Copyright Act<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act>prohibition of so-called "circumvention measures" of copy
>> protections<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_protection>.
>>
>> In the noted "321" case, Federal District Judge Susan Illston of the Northern
>> District of California<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California>
>> ,[5]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Decrypter#cite_note-4>  ruled that
>> the backup copies made with software such as DVD Decrypter are in fact legal
>> but that distribution of the software used to make them is illegal. As of
>> the date of this revision, neither the US Supreme Court<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Supreme_Court>nor the US
>> Congress<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Congress>  has taken definitive
>> action on the matter.
>>
> As ever - non of the above is legal advice, and I am not a lawyer.

Well;  have a book in my shelves called "The MicroBiblion" published in 
London in 1625 when
copyright had not even been heard of; now, from time to time, I have 
found it apposite to copy
fairly large chunks of this book elsewhere (admittedly not for profit); 
as I own a copy of the MicroBiblion
I cannot see any real problems there: the author got his money, as did 
the printer and the publisher.

Why there should be any difference between that and my copying parts of 
a DVD elsewhere for my convenience (and NOT for profit) I just DO NOT KNOW.
> On 8 November 2010 18:40, stephen barncard
> <stephenREVOLUTION2 at barncard.com>wrote:
>
>> What you described is 'fair use' in the US. It means 'backup copy for
>> personal use'.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution