Man Admits to Copying DVDs, Nothing Happens

[JMcEntegart]

A Danish man trying to force change in the copyright law last month reported himself for breaching copyright more than a hundred times. Unfortunately for him, things didn't exactly go as he'd planned.

Man Admits to Copying DVDs, Nothing Happens : Read more

 

[Parrdacc]

He did not get a answer because the officials were taken off guard.

"Oh crap, he used our own words against us. Who thought someone out there would be so smart. What do we do now?"

 

[tommysch]

Lets all use civil and more sensible actions, like DDoS attacks on those greedy record labels.

 

[JuiceJones]

Good luck to this guy. It takes action to change stupid laws, and this guy is actually doing something about it. I'd like to see a lot of people join him, line up and the police station, and flood the place with "criminals" who backup their DVDs. Civil disobedience is fun stuff.

 

[kyeana]

[citation][nom]TommySch[/nom]Lets all use civil and more sensible actions, like DDoS attacks on those greedy record labels.[/citation]

Ha, that is too funny. Hats off to you good sir!

 

[Guest]

It's unlikely anything will come of this, barring extraordinary measures, as the establishment would like to keep the ability to charge anyone at a whim.

 

[necronic]

I'll give him credit for taking this kind of risk, although his stated reason of contradictory laws seems bogus to me, those laws seem clear to me. The original law doesn't say anything about making personal copies of copyrighted material, its talking about materials defined as "public". I would think that putting DRM on something is a pretty clear signal that you do not consider this material to be public.

 

[Raid3r]

In the face..powerful stuff here. In fact..it would be great to have this happen on a huge scale so that the situation can no longer be denied..everything stops so us "criminals" can turn ourselves in.

 

[duzcizgi]

12.1 States that you can make copies. - Well, I take it as "identical copies" For solely own use.
75.c States that if you circumvent copyright protection measures, you're eligible for fine and/or jail time.

He told that he broke the DRM on the DVDs to make copies of them, which, he breaks the 75.c and he doesn't fall under the protection of 12.1, as the copies aren't identical anymore. Good luck for him. He should have copied DRM there also.

 

[pooflinger1]

The laws are not contradictory. They would only be so if the first law specifically stated that you were able to break protection schemes in doing so. Arguing that the laws are contradictory is like arguing that it is not against the law the drive on a public road, and therefore it should also not be against the law to drive on a road that is blocked or closed off. There are TONS of laws that make a general point only to be followed up by further laws that deal with more specific cases.

Now, I'm not arguing in favor of the movie industries because I think that the whole way they go about doing business and treating customers is BS. But the way that this individual, and others, are trying to argue their case is weak and, well, stupid.

 

[deathblooms2k1]

[citation][nom]pooflinger1[/nom]The laws are not contradictory. They would only be so if the first law specifically stated that you were able to break protection schemes in doing so. Arguing that the laws are contradictory is like arguing that it is not against the law the drive on a public road, and therefore it should also not be against the law to drive on a road that is blocked or closed off. There are TONS of laws that make a general point only to be followed up by further laws that deal with more specific cases.Now, I'm not arguing in favor of the movie industries because I think that the whole way they go about doing business and treating customers is BS. But the way that this individual, and others, are trying to argue their case is weak and, well, stupid.[/citation]

Agreed. Furthermore bringing this issue to the police department does more harm to the town or city than it does to legislation and the corporations. It costs Police personnel time and subsequently the tax payers money (since their tax's pay for the municipal salary's), meanwhile it garners a little publicity that I'm sure the corporations won't even bat an eye at.

Change has to be reflected by votes by the majority, convince enough people that your argument makes sense and then let the representatives in the area know that their election rides on these ideas. In this case I'm inclined to agree with the poster I quoted, in that the law is pretty clear cut, however that's not to say that I support DRM. Ultimately this person has a problem with DRM, he needs to clearly present his problems with it and then gain public support for those problems. It's easy to cause a ruckus for publicity, but it just seems stupid when it ultimately results in no change.

 

[darkknight22]

He should stab another man, that'll get ya noticed.

 

[tommysch]

[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]actually in the danish laws this might not really be so conflicted , however US law does state that you have the right to back up music /movies / and data for personal use ... while also stating circumventing DRM is illeagal. so it may not be so contradicting in dannish alw , but the US laws are definitely contradictory some one in the US needs to do this.. i'm not exactly sure which law needs to be trashed though... in this day and age teh courts seem to side with the corperations , so if it came to it in US supreme court they'd likely toss out our right to back shit up[/citation]


Doing that in the US would end up with the guy facing a 30 trillion $ fine.

 

[ventond]

Perhaps the keyword here is 'effective'. If he was able to break the encryption it obviously wasn't very effective. Thus no violation.

 

[Maxor127]

Pirate Legos kick ass.

 

[Netherscourge]

I don't think they will go after anyone unless they try to SELL copies of the movies.

 

[Netherscourge]

EDIT - or try to distribute it over the internet.

 

[Guest]

The way this works is that the industry puppet agencies pick the cases with the most favorable facts to file. No way it is going to file suit against someone with a brain and the wherewithal to back up his actions. They will pick on poor uneducated grandmas and starving college students thank you very much.

 

[ckiraly]

man admits reading this article...nothing happens

 

[pooflinger1]

[citation][nom]ventond[/nom]Perhaps the keyword here is 'effective'. If he was able to break the encryption it obviously wasn't very effective. Thus no violation.[/citation]

So if the locks or alarm on your car fail to prevent it from being stolen (obviously the locks and alarm weren't very effective), then the thief who stole your vehicle should not be prosecuted because your locks were not effective?

I think you need to re-think your argument. That logic makes about as much sense as a hardcore gamer buying a mac to play games.

 

[micr0be]

i think they wont backoff from prosecuting him, cos if they do, this can turn into a "he did it u did nothing.. then im doing it too) it will be messy.

 

[gorehound]

I am not buying any movies from Hollywood unless they are used ones.Screw You greedbag indusatires will not get a dime of my money.

Buy Corporate Used !!!
Buy Indies New !!!
Bye Bye Hollywood !!!

 

[datawrecker]

There is no contradiction. It states that he can copy the movies. But, it must be done without breaking DRM. If you can copy the move without bypassing the DRM then all is well.

 

[nishiki]

You miss the point here....the DRM is there to restrict you from doing a copy....so how can you use your right do make a personal copy without removing the DRM... Here is the contradiction....

 

[joex444]

[citation][nom]pooflinger1[/nom]So if the locks or alarm on your car fail to prevent it from being stolen (obviously the locks and alarm weren't very effective), then the thief who stole your vehicle should not be prosecuted because your locks were not effective? I think you need to re-think your argument. That logic makes about as much sense as a hardcore gamer buying a mac to play games.[/citation]

No, I think ventond is right. It is widely accepted that DVD's CSS protection is a meaningless standard. It was broken so long ago and so easily (in fact, there was a contest who could write the least code to crack CSS, something ridiculously small was needed). It would not be very hard for a lawyer to prove to any rational person that CSS is in fact not an effective technology.

Your nonsense about cars and locks is silly. First, its established that one cannot break into cars just for fun. The 75.c statement that you cannot circumvent "effective" technologies is not the same thing. It is specifically for digital mediums, which a lock on a car does not belong.

Plus, suppose breaking into the car were in fact not prosecutable because the lock was clearly insufficient. Or better, suppose someone leaves their car running and you just take it off the street. No breaking of locks, no forced entry just open the handle. No need to hotwire the car, its already on. This is still illegal. What's the digital equivelant of this?