Judge Rules Against RealDVD
A federal judge has ruled in favor of the six major movie studios suing RealNetworks over its RealDVD software.
RealNetworks was faced with legal action for the software the same day it was launched, on September 30 last year. While the company said that it was just trying to come up with a legal way for users to back up their movies to their hard drives, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel yesterday declared the program violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the terms of the DVD CSS license because RealNetworks actively worked to circumvent the CSS license, which is there to prevent casual users from the unauthorized copying of copyrighted materials recorded on DVD-Video/Audio Discs.
Patel issued a preliminary injunction preventing RealNetworks from selling the RealDVD software. The preliminary injunction replaces a temporary injunction that has been in place ever since major studios (including Paramount, Sony, Universal Studios and Walt Disney) filed suit last September.
Patel last year extended the temporary injunction because she was unsure as to whether the technology was a violation or not. "I am extending the temporary restraining order because I’m not satisfied in the fact that this technology is not in violation," Patel said following the three-hour hearing. "There are serious questions about copyright violations. There are questions about violations of the (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), and violations of these companies’ agreement."
The ruling is unfortunate as it seems RealNetworks is genuine in its efforts to offer paying customers a way to watch movies they have paid for without the need for the DVD. That said, however genuine the company's efforts seem, RealNetworks did violate federal law. Who do you think is right in this instance? Let us know in the comments below.
Check out the full story here.

Causal users? Hmm, you mean "dumb fuxking" users.
Sorry but I crac ... err I mean every single Disc that I own I "removed" the Stupid ass CSS on it and burn it on another DVD so yeah I can watch it anywhere I want. Movie studios cant tell me what I can/can't watch on.
Causal users? Hmm, you mean "dumb fuxking" users.
Sorry but I crac ... err I mean every single Disc that I own I "removed" the Stupid ass CSS on it and burn it on another DVD so yeah I can watch it anywhere I want. Movie studios cant tell me what I can/can't watch on.
Bias judge make over this case.
1) Enough to pay his prostitute
2) Enough to retire right away
3) Enough to put back the world economy in business....
I guess the answer is all of the above
The point of the DMCA is to protect the rights of the people that make a digital product. If you work around those protections, it is EXPLICITLY STATED in the DMCA that is illegal. It is RealMedia that is whining they tried to break the law and got a nice F-you from the people they tried to swindle. They may say they are trying to help the consumer but they just wanted a piece of the pirate pie.
All of you that think the RIAA is in the wrong here you maybe step up and write your congressmen/women and say the law is unjust. If you are too lazy to do that, shut up and follow the law. There are a bunch of whining pirates on this site and I for one think you need to either try to change it (legally) or back down.
RealDVD retains CSS and adds a second layer of security to make sure the DVD isn't pirated, but only used on the computer where the DVD was ripped. In other words, it's far harder to pirate using RealDVD than when using free products such as DeCSS. But hey, don't let that stop you claim they are trying to get part of the pirate "profits."
They created what should be a legitimate use of DVDs: a non-transferable copy on your hard drive, so you don't have to get the disc out.
But yeah, technically they violated DMCA. So do all free software DVD players. The law is f*cking dumb. Their software does nothing to increase piracy, just the opposite.
-Dan
Its illegal to produce and distribute any means of circumventing security like DRM.
Its legal to make a backup copy of any software or movie you buy.
DVDs and the such have DRM. So to exercise you legal right to make a copy of a DRMd DVD you need to break the law.
A few of the comments on /. are very good at pointing this out and with sources *shock*.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/08/12/1220211/Judge-Rules-Against-RealDVD
I think they should do the ultimate FU to all of the studios and "leak" the software to the world. If the courts are going to make it where they cannot make an honest dollar exactly like Kaleidescape (for them I should say something like 10,000 dollars) then cut your loss and shoot the finger.
Here is a read of the law as it pertains to an individual (at least my read from it. Yes, I am an attorney. No, you may not rely on this, the law in this area is too uncertain to be sure of anything).
An individual who owns DVDs could otherwise copy the contents under fair use, assuming there was no copy protection. This is made clear by the proliferation of iPods and people being encouraged to rip their unprotected CD collections. I see no reason why video works would have more protection than audio works.
1201(a) of the DMCA is clear that it is unlawful for anyone (except those listed in (1)(A)(B)) to circumvent access protection, or manufacture, traffic, etc. in a product that circumvents access protection. Access, however, is not copying (under the law); it is playing the DVD. See the opinion at page 38 lines 10-12 and 21-22.
1201(b) prohibits manufacturing, importing, providing, making available to the public, or trafficking something that circumvents the copyright holder's rights, which includes copying. This is different from (a) in that the actual circumvention is not prohibited.
What does this mean? It would seem to mean that an individual owner of a DVD could copy the disk by circumventing the protection. How? Well if you write your own software, you would be manufacturing, so that is out. If you buy software, then you are trafficking, so no go there. But if you downloaded something that is free (like DVD Shrink) from a domestic server (to avoid importing), then it would seem that you are not violating the law. This is supported by:
"Since copying may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances,section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying." Page 38, line 20-22, quoting the US Copyright summary.
"The fact that Congress elected to leave technologically unsophisticated persons who wish to make fair use of encrypted copyrighted works without the technical means of doing so is a matter for Congress." Page 39, line 24-26, quoting Reimerdes, an other case.
This copy, however, would have to leave all the copyright protections intact, else you would be circumventing the access protections. This means you could not run an image file off your computer. Such an act would require unauthorized access. The image would have to be burned to a disc and accessed through an authorized player.
The whole access vs. copying thing would also seem to apply to the analog hole, like if you play a DVD in a player, and then record the analog out. The player allows for lawful access, so no 1201(a) violation, and as discussed above, there is no violation for the actual circumvention of copy protection.
Of course, I could be totally wrong.
we didn't always have these lame laws and artists and musicians did just fine. that they somehow now believe they need special laws is more of an indication of greed some people think is only limited to consumers...
When the only solution is the patchwork quilt of various court decisions there is no real solution. More and more people learn to disrespect the unrealistic law by finding alternative copying modes. Lawyers stay busy while some people continue to copy disks while others increase their anger at the DVD/movie companies that exacerbate the situation.
The DVD/movie companies need to develop a business model that accepts reality and encourages the public to support the industry, rather than disrespect it.
I don't have a solution, so I am just hot air, but I do know that the more difficult and convoluted the system the less likely it will be a success. Perhaps the music industry model is an appropriate paradigm. In the mean time we just watch these skirmishes make bad law and waste money. What folly.
JAF