Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Handhelds Hardware

Ripping DVDs to Handhelds = Fair Use? 228

Posted by CmdrTaco from the i-friggin-hope-so dept.
An anonymous reader sent us a "CNET column highlights DVD to Pocket PC, a US$25 software package that allows users to rip DVDs for viewing on Windows handhelds. The story details the hoops that Amsterdam-based Makayama is jumping through to comply with "fair use" as [narrowly] defined by U.S. law.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ripping DVDs to Handhelds = Fair Use? More

Ripping DVDs to Handhelds = Fair Use?

Comments Filter:

  • Quite fair (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:31AM (#8509947)
    Quite fair, since the movie companies are too lazy to sell the movies in handheld-friendly files. Rip away!

    • There *are* handheld versions available of movies. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Channard ( 693317 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:37AM (#8509992) Journal
      .. they're called books. Though I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea of someone having written a novelisation of Kenneth Brannagh's adaption of Mary Shelly's Frankenstein.
      • Have you ever tried to read a long website on a handheld? Books on handhelds are not a good idea.

        • Good point. (Score:3, Funny)

          by Channard ( 693317 )
          Have you ever tried to read a long website on a handheld? Books on handhelds are not a good idea.

          Also, there are some movies that wouldn't translate too well.. I'm not sure if it would work with visual films such as The Matrix Revolutions. 'Big Deus Ex machina head comes out of f**king nowhere' doesn't quite work in text form.

          Back on topic slightly, it strikes me that one of the cons of having portable movies like this would be taking a film that's banned in one area to another area - who knows what

        • On the contrary, I have been using my Palm M125 as a kind of ebook/mobile webpage viewer ever since I got it. I find if far less tireing on the eyes than my CRT, and it is lighter and smaller than a book.
        • I use my handheld to read because my girlfriend gets pissy if I stay up late. So I go to bed but read. I don't need to turn the lights on, it's backlit--everything works out.
        • I drive a truck. I occasionally (as does anyone who owns a truck) move things for people
          here's a classic-

          my boss- "meet me at the (name of a shop) between 2 and 4:30"
          me-"which-2 or 4:30"
          boss- "I don't know, I'll be there between 2&4:30"

          yea, I keep ENTIRE books on my handheld.. I also read them, and re-read them..

    • Wait a minute ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dlugar ( 124619 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:57AM (#8510198) Homepage
      So if the movie companies did sell low-resolution copies of their movies (fully DRM'd, of course) for handhelds, for say $4 a movie, then it would somehow no longer be fair use to copy our DVDs to our handhelds? It would be illegal to do so (under the DMCA) and we should have to fork out an additional $4, on top of whatever we paid for the DVD, in order to watch it on a Palm or Zaurus?!

      That's bullsh**.

      Dlugar
      • So if the movie companies did sell low-resolution copies of their movies (fully DRM'd, of course) for handhelds, for say $4 a movie, then it would somehow no longer be fair use to copy our DVDs to our handhelds?

        so... because i can buy that cd on casette i can't make a tape of it for home use?

    • Quite fair, since the movie companies are too lazy to sell the movies in handheld-friendly files.

      A 2-mm-thin, 12-cm-diameter, optical disc isn't handheld-friendly?

      Handheld DVD players with integrated LCD screens have been available for a couple of years now. You can even get some models for under $200 at present. It's not a PocketPC, but no, it doesn't have to be.

      I can't play DVDs in my VCR, either, but does that give me free and clear permission to dub all my DVDs to VHS tape?

      • Re:Quite fair (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DrSkwid ( 118965 )

        Can you explain to me the problem with copying my DVD movie to VHS so *I* can watch it in a room with a VCR but no DVD player?

      • Re:Quite fair (Score:5, Informative)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @01:30PM (#8511639)
        Actually you already do have free and clear permission to copy all your legal DVDs to VHS, you have had this right for quite some time.

        The problem is that DVDs are often encoded with Macrovision. So while you do have the right, the content providers aren't required to make it easy.

        It is NOT illegal to own a region free, macrovision filtered, DVD player. I have one myself, and the VHS dubs are generally superior to buying a prerecorded tape (if you use good tape and SP recording instead of cheaping out with longer recording times).

        The argument is and always has been between buying media and buying content. If you have simply purchased media that has something recorded on it already, you can do whatever you want with it. So the industry claims you are not purchasing media, but are purchasing the right to view the content, you just happen to be purchasing that on in given media format.

        If you've purchased the right to use the content, you should be able to use that content wherever you want - rooms without DVD players, the VHS system in your car, etc.... this certainly applies to handhelds and other computing devices.

        The sticky situation comes in because the DMCA includes those pesky provisions that make it illegal to circumvent copy protection, even when you can prove you are doing for legitimate purposes. It's basically large content providers banding together to find a way to circumvent fair use provisions of copyright law.

        Thank Bill Clinton and Fritz Hollings (D-Disney), and all the other politicians who helped make this possible.

  • I've been ripping movies to my laptop... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:32AM (#8509957)
    ... for a while. Until somebody solves the issue of my DVD drive draining my battery I don't have much choice. I own all the DVDs I watch, I always saw it as simply migrating the media. Maybe I'm going straight to prison.

    • Re:I've been ripping movies to my laptop... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:48AM (#8510111)
      Will everyone stop being so melodramatic? Unless you're selling the stuff it's not a criminal matter. It's a civil one. They're not going to send you to prison! Sheesh!

    • Re:I've been ripping movies to my laptop... (Score:4, Informative)

      by etrnl ( 65328 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:21AM (#8510356) Homepage
      I doubt you would actually be sued for a fair-use case. The people who are making software that allows them to circumvent copy protection are being cracked down on, but I've yet to see anyone who has actually been using their software being implicated yet.

      Take DVD X-Copy for example. Court ruled that they had to stop producing it, but did not go after who bought it.

      The fact is, any case that is brought that is actually fair use, the MPAA will lose. It's only by going against the people upstream that they can really win.

      --etrnl--

  • one more nail in the coffin (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:36AM (#8509981)
    This is going to destroy the movie industry. Before you know it people are going to want to watch the same movie multiple times and only pay once. Think about the poor starving actors sweltering on the city streets this summer while you're sitting around sipping iced tea and watching your pirated movies at the beach this summer you smug fucks.

    • Re:one more nail in the coffin (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 3terrabyte ( 693824 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:54AM (#8510171) Journal
      Actually, if they keep making DVD titles with unskippable previews, then I will make DIVX of every DVD I buy. Or just rent and then rip.

      I'm sick of being forced through commercials of DVD's i already paid for. EVERY time I want to watch it. And I hate the commercials about the soundtrack that show parts of the movie. I DONT want spoilers before I even get a chance to see the movie.

      • Re:one more nail in the coffin (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Total_Wimp ( 564548 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:25AM (#8510394)
        I especially love watching a DVD that's a couple of years old and it has ads for some product that isn't even available anymore. Like a limited release Disney title or a theater release of a long-gone flick. Now you're stuck watching the ad AND YOU CAN'T EVEN BUY THE PRODUCT.

        I think they should stop worrying about gay marriage and start ammending the constitution with some basic consumer protections. Now that's something you'll get a 75% vote for.

        TW
      • I've only ever encountered rentals like that. I don't own a large collection of DVDs, but of the ones I do own, many Disney ones included, you can skip past the previews (just hit the menu button on the Disney DVDs).

        For the others, although inappropriate and annoying, 64x speed gets you through them pretty quickly, and it generally stops on the menu.

        I'm wondering, I know that Blockbuster, for example, will sell previously rented DVDs, but are they different then than the "retail" ones, or have more comp
      • Actually, if they keep making DVD titles with unskippable previews, then I will make DIVX of every DVD I buy.

        Can you name one recent release that does this?

        Or just rent and then rip.

        I don't see how the first justifies the second. There's a difference between owning and copying someone else's...

  • The Zaurus (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gothmolly ( 148874 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:36AM (#8509983)
    Maybe nobody noticed because its not a high profile, PHB-friendly, uber-marketted PDA, but the Linux based Sharp Zaurus could do this for a while as well. Of course this is fair use.

    • zaurus r0xit. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisum@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @12:01PM (#8510662) Homepage Journal
      the zaurus is the under-the-radar linux product of the last 2 years. it freakin' rocks in so many ways, i can't even handle it.

      a complete unix workstation, in your pocket. whatever you can do in linux, you can now do on the sl5500/c860's. its a 64-meg ram workstation with storage (get a nuvo 4gig CF disk, for example), and you've got yourself a computer you won't feel the need to 'upgrade' for at least a few more years. rip dvd's to your CF disk, watch them in landscape mode, set up a private subnet, web server and bittorrent feed over WLAN at your next 2600 meeting, whatever you like.

      pocketized, portable, a complete linux.

      what is it now, 8 different distro's for the zaurus, including pocketworkstation [pocketworkstation.org] and gentoo, and its still going strong? oh, and hey, don't forget the openembedded [openembedded.org] distro-builder kit for pda's ...

      zaurus freakin' rocks. cult linux item.

      • Re:zaurus r0xit. (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        zaurus freakin' rocks. cult linux item.

        That's an understatement. The built in keyboard is more convenient to use than handwriting recognition will ever be, plus unlike a stylus, you won't worry accidently losing it. The Opera web browser bodyslams Pocket IE and then beats the shit out of it with a lead pipe. Try Opera for ten minutes and you won't go back to the crappy piece of broken shit that is Pocket IE. Plus, of course, there's the hackability of the Zaurus since it runs Linux.

  • Fair Use? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by physicsboy500 ( 645835 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:36AM (#8509984)
    If you legally own the DVD why would this not be fair use? It's your DVD so you can keep a backup copy of the information and that would be the copy.

    • Re:Fair Use? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by chilled ( 542681 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:41AM (#8510033)
      Whilst I agree with you, I have a sneaking suspicion that the MPAA doesn't. It's still illegal to rip your own CD's to MP3 format in the UK, even though I consider it "fair use". Unfortunately, fair use doesn't mean what Joe Punter (you and I) think it means. It means whatever the copyright holder or pigopolists want it to mean.
      I think there's a direct comparison with ripping MP3's for personal use to be drawn here. If it is fair use to do this in the US, why isn't it for DVD's?

      • There is fair use in the US (Score:5, Insightful)

        by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:49AM (#8510120) Homepage
        Unfortunately because of the DMCA, you can't exercise fair-use rights if the content is protected by any sort of copy protection.

        Its the way the big media monopolies essentially got around fair-use with DMCA.
        • Exactly.

          And with the broadcast bit being slapped on to HDTV, there will come a day very soon where PVR/VCR for TV's will become obsolete.

          Then, the mighty media companies can finally shoot for the big dream: Pay-per-play.

      • Re:Fair Use? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ajs318 ( 655362 ) <sd_resp2@earthsh ... minus herbivore> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:46AM (#8510497)
        It is NOT illegal to rip your own CDs to MP3 in the UK, because it comes under the heading of a "necessary step" in making use of the recording. If you own a CD player, and you have only a cassette player in your car, then transcribing the CD onto cassette is a necessary step in listening to the CD in your car. {Remember that, before the invention of racism, terrorism or paedophilia, a person used to be considered innocent until proven guilty. You can be acquitted on the words of two out of twelve people. I don't believe that there are enough people in the country who have never copied something onto a cassette to listen in a car, for you actually to be able to get more than ten of them on the same jury.} Unfortunately, I've lost the reference {there goes some easy karma}, but the way the law was written meant that it could have been interpreted to mean that the law gave explicit permission for that. The copy would only become infringing if it were used other than in accordance with the necessitating situation, e.g. if you listened to it on a machine that was already capable of playing CDs.

        By extension, it would be similarly legal to transfer movies to a PDA. It is merely a "necessary step" in the watching of this film on that device.

    • Re:Fair Use? (Score:5, Funny)

      by jwriney ( 16598 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:41AM (#8510038) Homepage
      You must be new here. Please report for mandatory DMCA reprogramming doubleplusspeedwise.

      --riney

  • different how? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by irokie ( 697424 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:36AM (#8509985) Homepage
    not trolling, but why is the law here different to the law that allows peopel to rip to their iPod or other personal device?

    • Re:different how? (Score:5, Informative)

      by DarkMagician07 ( 686278 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:42AM (#8510049)
      Because ripping a CD doesn't require that you break any encryption. Because DVD's use CSS for encrypting the data that is on them, you cannot legally break that copy protection under the DMCA. CD's don't have that luxury as there is nothing encrypted on the disc.
      • Because ripping a CD doesn't require that you break any encryption.

        If you make a digital copy, you bypass the Serial Copy Management System. It's far less elaborate than the DVD restrictions, but it's still there, and some devices do enforce the flags.
      • "copy protection"

        You misspelled "playback prevention". There is NOTHING about CSS that prevents copying. Make a disk image of the DVD and you have made a copy. Zeros and Ones, that's all it is.
      • CSS isn't copy protection, it's playback protection.

        If you make a disk image of a DVD you own and play the image with a licensed player, you haven't done anything unlawful.

        Players built using DeCSS, obviously, are not licensed.

  • Legal consideration (Score:4, Interesting)

    by andy666 ( 666062 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:39AM (#8510016)
    It will be interesting to see what the effect of the Bankoff-Greengard case will be here. I think the judge in that case would say this is not fair use.

  • I can see the benifits. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Biotech9 ( 704202 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:41AM (#8510034) Homepage
    I do this before a series of long flights which i occasionally must make.
    I mount the full DVDs of a few films with Toast (on OSX), or i rip them if I have a lot of free time.
    Battery life is well extended, I get no hastle of changing discs, I don't have to bring the discs on a journey, and I can skip the opening blurb about not watching the film on an oil rig.

    It would be nice if people could actually use the damn products they HAVE PAID FOR in a free manner. If I buy a film, or an album on vinyl, i should be allowed to make copies for myself, or rip it and watch it on a PDA, or do whatever.

    • Re:I can see the benifits. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by budhaboy ( 717823 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:28AM (#8510409)
      I do it for all of my movies... most especially those that my two year old son watches. Why? 1) I can edit out the constant ads for yet more videos he doesn't need 2) As I've got an internal LAN and share the movies throughout the house I don't have to go looking for a DVD whereever he may be inclined to watch it. 3) I don't have to fight with him about not touching the DVD until after he's washed the peanut butter off his hands 4) I can copy several to my laptop when we roadtrip.

  • Jebus (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:42AM (#8510043) Homepage
    You know....something about this story blurb just made me think. Look at how far we've come. We can now take an EXTREMELY high quality (picture, not content) movie, and place it onto a color computer that can fit in our pocket. Holy Crap. That's all it makes me say. I'm just curious as to what quality these DVD rips are. Perhaps there could be a handheld movie player that you can put divx on?

    • Like this [amazon.com], you mean? There are other similar products too, but the Archos range were the first ones I saw.

    • Re:Jebus (Score:3, Insightful)

      by geoffspear ( 692508 ) *
      Well, conidering the size, resolution, and color depth of most PDA screens, not to mention the available storage on them, I'd think high quality rips would be pretty pointless.

  • Excelent use of the PDA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cr3d3nd0 ( 517274 ) <CredendoNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:42AM (#8510052)
    When I initially puchased my Ipaq, I planned on using it for Organizing my contacts appointments etc (bs I wanted a fancy GBA and I know it) I have found though that the primary uses I have for my Ipaq is for wathing episodes of some of my favorite shows (when ripped properly a movie tends to look pretty decent, at least enough to be able to enjoy an episode or two of my favorite shows at lunch) and suprisingly enough reading. The screen is just the right brightness that I harldy ever read a physical book anymore. The vast majority of books are available somewhere out there in ebook form, and there's nothing like the ability to read at night without a fancy booklight while the wife is asleep. To be honest the only game I've spent any signifigant time playing is Nethack, whose free PPC version is quite enjoyable. Oh and it keeps my bookwork and appoints too... yeah thats it.
  • Wouldn't something like "I own this copy, I can do whatever I want with it, including making confetti out of it. I may not distribute it." pretty much solve any and all copyright issues? (Other than the RIAA wanting you to pay per play, of course) Since when has copyright equalled something akin to MS's EULA where you can only load it once, on a single piece of hardware, to only be used on that one piece of hardware?
    • It would be a very bad idea to define fair use clearly. All we have right now is a test that can be used to find whether or not something is fair use, and the tests have changed over the ages.

      Remember -- fair use as a doctrine dates back well into the 19th century. If it had been clearly defined back then, it would likely not have been extensible to cover the sorts of situations we're in now, e.g. timeshifting, mp3 ripping, etc.

      Besides which, fair use is designed to apply to any situation that's fair base

  • Same old argument, once again (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sremick ( 91371 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:43AM (#8510062)
    Same story, different day. It basically boils down to: what am I actually buying when I buy a CD/DVD/software/etc?

    If I'm buying PHYSICAL PROPERTY, I can do whatever I want with it, including resell it once I'm done with it (something the software companies like to say we can't do). I should also be able to play the music/movie for anyone I wish, and let anyone I wish use the software.

    If I'm buying a LICENSE, then I should be able to use my one LICENSE however I wish, independent of the media. If I'm getting a license to listen to the song, I should be able to transfer that song to another device so I can listen to it there too. I've paid the license... I'm allowed to listen. Same applies to movies.

    Companies are trying to have it both ways, and refuse to pick which one it really is.

    Note that one of the big issues the RIAA had was that digital media could be copied EXACTLY. They didn't have a problem with CD->tape apparently because the copy was degraded. Well guess what? When I make an MP3/OGG file, that's lossy compression... therefore the copy is also "degraded". Same goes if you mega-compress a DVD to fit on a 320x480 screen and a tiny 512MB SD card (I'm a Palm T3 owner).

    I can understand that if I pay $5 for the VHS version, I might not be entitled to a license for the $30 SuperBit DVD version as well... but if I buy the DVD I sure as hell can make a VHS copy if I want to watch it at a friend's house who doesn't have a DVD player, or if I need to distill it down to fit on my PDA so I can watch it on the plane. Bite me, MPAA.

    • but if I buy the DVD I sure as hell can make a VHS copy if I want to watch it at a friend's house who doesn't have a DVD player

      If that's true, then why the MacroVision?

      • I consider MacroVision to be contrary to copyright fair-use just like a lot of the other crap the MPAA pulls. It's not an issue for me, though... I use my TV as an S-video -> composite convertor (it has line-out) vs connecting my DVD player directly to my VCR, and it happens to do away with MacroVision in the process. :) No special box needed.

        If I really bothered with tapes much I might consider getting a VCR with S-Video in and then a MacroVision mod for my DVD player. Actually I was thinking about tha
        • I consider MacroVision to be contrary to copyright fair-use just like a lot of the other crap the MPAA pulls.
          Macrovision is illegal in Germany, because it prevents people from exercizing their fair-use rights.
        • I consider MacroVision to be contrary to copyright fair-use

          No you don't. Your apathy towards MacroVision is only because it's so easy to circumvent! :)

          Also, you should check out DVDr Help [dvdrhelp.com] to find out if your DVD is on their list. It contains a comprehensive user-supported list of just about every DVD player out there, and what mods are needed to make the DVD region free. Most of the time, it only requires a sequence of buttons on the remote. Gotta love those engineers!

    • Re:Same old argument, once again (Score:5, Funny)

      by uradu ( 10768 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:05AM (#8510313)
      > Companies are trying to have it both ways, and refuse to pick which one it really is.

      Yeah, they'd like to specify very narrowly how your license is used. You can listen to:
      - this song only
      - on this CD only
      - in your Barbie CD player only
      - while wearing your bunny jammies only
      - and only in your bedroom

      If you want to listen to it in you pinstripe suit, in your car, on the way to work, you BETTER be buying another license, you dirty rotten scumbag of a thief!!!
    • Actually, while the first encode degrades the audio, the RIAA's beef is that each copy of that encoded file can be duplicated exactly. CD->tape->tape is generally going to be crap. CD->MP3->copy MP3 to another device usually means that the audio has only gone through one degradation.

  • Decent Program (Score:3, Informative)

    by j_kenpo ( 571930 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:44AM (#8510069)
    Ive used this program, and its decent. I have issues every now and then when ripping with it not recognizing the titles or it wont open the DVD, so Id have to either start playing the DVD to get it to work, or rip with an external program and use the programs conversion features. I own these DVD's and use this for when I travel to watch movies on my IPaq and in the hotel room that overcharges for movies, I think its fair use.

  • The Big Hurdle (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) * <jhummel&johnhummel,net> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:49AM (#8510126) Homepage
    It's not the technology, of course - it's folks like the MPAA and RIAA. And who can blame them? If I buy a DVD, I'm doing it to get a copy of the movie and the other value-added parts.

    If I compress that video down to 250 MB, how much easier is that for me to spread around the Internet using Bittorrent or Kazaa or whatever?

    Now, I can't claim any naivity here, and I'm not going to. I download movies over the Internet, in the form of fan subbed animes that haven't made it to the states. Let's me know if I'm going to spend $20 on a DVD only to discover I don't like it. Sure, it takes about a full 24 hours to get around 1-2 hours of video (shrink down to 45-90 minutes when you're done with credits that appear at the beginning and end of every anime episode).

    But what if that file shrinks to 128 MB? "Great!" goes the MPAA. "Now they're spreading it even faster!"

    Personally, I wouldn't mind a Video iPod, though I'm not sure how often I'd use it. Maybe for plane flights or travel with the kids - would make life easier then using my wife's iBook and handing it to the kids in the back seat so they can watch Blue's Clues. 4 year olds just don't know how to treat a laptop gently. A 4 GB video iPod could hold quite a few movies, and with my daughter old enough to manipulate Link around a screen without him running into the walls all the time, and savvy enough with the mouse to run the DVD movies on the laptop herself, she could use a video iPod with no troubles.

    But again, back to the issue: shrinking a 90 minute 4 GB DVD movie into a 125 MB file for a 12-15 cm wide screen without making the MPAA go nuts.

    Fair use? I'd say "yeah". After all, if I can compress a legally bought CD to an MP3, there should be no reason why I can't do the same with a video.

    So that leaves us with the "how". Perhaps it will be something like the iTunes music store, only with movies: You enter the DVD into your computer, and there's a file right there.

    Yes, MPAA - you supply the files, or files(s) for those of us who want subtitles. At 125 each, you could easily include 2 versions for anime fans, and 1 version for the majority of the "english only" movies.

    You authorize your computer to play the file and up to 3 others. "Oh, no - DRM! Agh!" I know, but hey, we can compromise a little here, right? Just like iTunes: up to 3 computers can play the file, and unlimited handhelds. If you just want to drag-n-drop the file into your portable video iPod or whatever without "licensing" it over the Internet, that just means you can't watch it on your machine.

    Unlimited handheld use should be the rule, so if I've got 5 iPods (one for each member of the family, though the last one doesn't spawn from my wife's womb until July, but I'm getting ready), everybody can have a copy of the movie.

    Sure, there's the chance that the movie file will be transmitted over the Internet anyway, but if you come up with the codec to view the files (by "you" I mean "MPAA"), then you can charge a small free (say, $1 per video iPod or whatever) as part of the patent cost. Either way, for every iPod sold, you get a buck, so who cares if the files are flying around like crazy? People will either have to license the file (which they can't do past 3 computers, or they have to buy a DVD), or buy a "video iPod" which still makes you the buck.

    That's how the MPAA protects its property, and lets us do what they want. If they really want to be cool, they'll release a utility to let us retro-shrink our current DVD movies as well to the same kind of file.

    I'm sure there will be some who will scream "ALL DRM EBIL - KILL HIM", and others going "ALL INTERNET USERS ARE EVIL - SLAY HIM FOR BEING A HERITIC", but I think this is a compromise that might work.

    Of course, this is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
  • Why would anyone want to watch a full length movie on a small 2x3 inch screen is beyond me.?

    For those who, want to watch it during flights, read a book or something, Or try talking to your fellow passengers, you may make a friend or two.

    Have we been so hooked on popcorn entertainment, that we need it 24x7 , in our lives ?

  • 21 comments into the story .. and not one asking (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bake ( 2609 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:52AM (#8510152) Homepage
    ... why on earth a Dutch company has to jump through hoops with a product they sell because said product is on a legally gray area in one country.

  • Doesn't matter what you rip it to. (Score:3, Informative)

    by DroopyStonx ( 683090 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:54AM (#8510167)
    As long as I purchased it, ripping a DVD, whether to handheld or other device, is fair use.

    I'll do what *I* want with *MY* property, and that includes making backups.
    • As long as it does not violate the EULA. It is true that you purchased it, but "fair use" in this case does not include burning copies and selling them to your one thousand closest friends. When you think about it, this is the same concept behind Linux: You are allowed to make unlimited copies, install it on unlimited numbers of computers, and even look at the source code because WE GIVE YOU PERMISSION, not because you happen to hold a copy in your hands (never mind how the copy got there).

  • PocketMVP & MythTV (Score:2, Informative)

    by JeffVolc ( 89846 )
    I regularly convert shows from MythTV to Divx for watching on my Dell Axim with PocketMVP. I can fit an hour long show (40 mins after commercial cut) into 70M. I can put 3 shows on a 256M CF card.

    Whenever I travel I always take at least 3 or 4 shows with me as well as a number of ebooks from Baan or BlackMask.com.

    It takes about 15 minutes to convert a show for the handheld.

  • Free Movies for Linux PDAs (Score:4, Informative)

    by wehe ( 135130 ) <wehe&tuxmobil,org> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:59AM (#8510226) Homepage Journal
    Here are some links to free movies for PDAs [tuxmobil.org], especially Linux PDAs, like the SHARP Zaurus Linux PDAs [tuxmobil.org]. There are also tips and tricks how to resize and convert movies to fit to PDAs.
  • You insensitive clods! I am a stuntman and have children to feed!
    -m
  • The movie industry is another industry that needs to pull its head out of its ass like the music industry. Give the consumer what they fucking want. I understand their desire to want to protect their copyrights, patents, trade secrets and what not. But too many companies are forgetting that without a consumer they don't have squat. Too many consumers as well have to play the droll roll of mindless consumption addict without really thinking. Would it be so hard for the movie makers to put a compressed Qu

  • Ripping One on One (Score:5, Informative)

    by cOdEgUru ( 181536 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:21AM (#8510360) Homepage Journal
    Dont know how many here knows what happens behind the scenes when you rip any Disc (and if I am talking out of my ass, please correct me).

    Every CSS encrypted disc contains the key, which when the DVD Player encounters encrypted content, looks for and finds to decrypt the content at runtime.

    Now when we rip the DVD to make a copy (for piracy or for fair use), the tool uses the key to decrypt the media and dumps the decrypted media to our hard drive, but not the key. Then we go ahead and burn it to any standard DVD+/-R Disc. Understand that any standard DVD-R/DVD+R disc you buy from the store is similar to the DVD that came with the original movie, except for one - the part where the encrypted key will reside cannot be burned on to. Which means, if you were to try and make a One to One copy of the movie disc, you will be able to write the encrypted media on to the new Disc, but the DVD writer would not be able to write the key on to the new Disc, since that part is not writeable (dont know why, but thats how it is).

    So essentially, we are not making a one to one copy of the movie. We decrypt the media and write the decrypted media on to the second disc and throws away the CSS key. Now our DVD Player finds decrypted media and has no need for a key, so merrily goes along and plays the content.

    I am all for Fair Use, and I hate RIAA more than I hate MPAA (because of the prices). But when we rip a DVD for Fair use and claim that its a One to One copy, thats not necessarily true (or hold up in court) since they can always argue that the Key is not copied over as well as the media is decrypted as well. IANAL, but wouldnt that hold merit in the legal system?

  • Encryption in the commission of a crime? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ssclift ( 97988 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:56AM (#8510614)

    In many states there are fairly heavy penalties for using encryption in the commission of a crime. My question is: if a portable copy is within rights to fair use (as may be eventually decided in the courts), but the "locking" mechanism restricts my fair use rights, has a crime been committed? If so, what are the penalties for encryption having been used in the commission of that crime?

    A colleague suggested that one... it might be an interesting avenue to pursue.

  • Don't need a commercial app (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Threed ( 886 ) <nowhere AT atall DOT com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @12:03PM (#8510678)
    Except to make it easy. Following a few guides on doom9, I was able to cobble together a procedure for creating avis of DVDs that would fit into a CF carc for play on PocketMVP on an iPaq.

    It goes a something like this: dvddecryptor to rip, then dvd2avi + xvid to get a "manageable" file. Then virtualdub, converting to divx, shrinking the size, letterboxing, decimating the frame rate, and converting the audio to mp3. (How much of that software is "illegal"?)

    Yeah, there's more steps to the procedure but its free and it works. That is, until my iPaq crapped out and died. The 3670 had all kinds of problems. I sent it in for repair 5 times and it never did work right. I eventually gave it away. That sucked, because it was great for wardriving and I also had SSH running on it for when I really really needed a portable shell prompt.

  • Nof if you have to decrypt (Score:3, Informative)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @12:07PM (#8510715) Homepage Journal
    At least here in the US, regardess of the right of fair use, if you have to decrypt during your ripping, then you violate the law..

    Thanks to our clueless congress, fair use is easily circumvented by the companies.
  • Cmdr Taco isn't asking if it's fair use to rip DVDs to handhelds. He's assigning fair use to it: #include int main() { char fairUse[] = "Ripping DVDs to Handhelds" return 0; }
  • Of course its fair use.... it just happens violate DMCA though... =)

    • Re:Of Course!!! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mark-t ( 151149 )
      But what's interesting is that the text of the DMCA _specifically_ makes an exclusion for fair use, so if this is fair use, then by the very wording of the DMCA, it doesn't violate the DMCA.
  • I've almost done this. DVDibbler [sourceforge.net] (free, OS X) to take Toy Story from DVD to DivX'd AVI, then through Windows Media Encoder [microsoft.com] (free (except your soul) from MS) on Windows to make a ~150 MB AVI for PocketPC. But, the only PocketPC I have access to is a friend's 200 MHz iPaq that won't play it back--won't go full-screen (320x240, sideways) and won't play sound. (I encoded the movie twice, with both available PocketPC settings in WME.)

    So, my two questions: 1) How much CPU do you need (speed & model) to pla

    • Re:2 questions (Score:2, Interesting)

      by kyoko21 ( 198413 )
      To help answer your question, I have done this before, though I did this with Caddy Shack :-)

      What I had done was to use flaskmpeg [flaskmpeg.net] to convert my DVD to divx. Of course you will have to DeCSS your VOB files first. The divx file that I had at the end was a divx 3.11 file that was around 450MB. I had shrunk the movie down to I think 640x480 and the audio I had used was just the divx audio, I think 44khz stereo at 128kbps. Originally when I had ripped the DVD I did not do this with the intention to rip into

  • you bought 'content PLUS PACKAGING' (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @01:01PM (#8511295)
    when you bought a dvd.

    meaning, your license is on 2 dimensions. you are allowed to view it (any number of times, actually) BUT you are only allowed to view it if it was played back on a properly licensed (vendor) decoder AND you play back the original disc on said decoder.

    its a 2dimension thing.

    we are not really used to that. cd's never had that. we were always allowed to downcopy (like from cd to cassette) and lately, even direct rip cd to uncompressed .wav 44.1/16 files. playback was never limited to actually using the single copy of the media that you bought. you bought the right to legally view/hear the content - there was nothing specific about 'licensed vendors' and such.

    of course the RIAA wants to change the rules now and limit your rights. but on video dvd, you NEVER HAD RIGHTS TO BEGIN WITH. I'm wondering about that - perhaps its because the audio cd (regular old redbook audio cd) came out way before there was consumer ability to digitally copy the content. it was never believed that people would be able to buy recorders for $20 and media for $0.20 and do a bit for bit copy in under 5 minutes. so they didn't NEED to source-lock the playback. but in the dvd birth era, cd recorders are common and dvd recorders weren't too far off in the future. so I think they knew that shortly they'd have to contend with their content being copied off the source-media. that's why all the encryption and stuff was part of dvd but not audio cd.

    it does suck. 'content playback' is content playback, in my book (and most other reasonable consumers). but the content VENDORS are the ones who are now realizing that technology is going to drastically change their business model - and they are not going willingly into that good night. not without a fight.

    so until 'the fight' is over, expect a lot of grief and inconvenience while the two sides try to figure out where natural stability lies (where to draw the line between what the producers want and the consumers are willing to pay for and deal with).

    • Re:you bought 'content PLUS PACKAGING' (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Overzeetop ( 214511 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @03:25PM (#8513007) Journal
      Interesting...I bought a consumer product. Paid cash and got a physical object. Looks like a sale, not a contract to me. Sure, it's covered under copyright. I didn't buy bits or encryption - that's not whats advertised - I bought a movie. I'm not interested in the paper or ink when I buy a book, I'm buying the story.

      I've always had those rights. Content providers have found ways to tie up the delivery system - control it from top to bottom they thought - in order to limit access to those rights. Now, we're "finding out" about those new limitations. The providers are giving us your line - "you never had those rights" - like they have the power to dictate copyright law. (okay, aside from the congressmen they own) Bzzzt. Sorry. Thankyouforplaying. They've made an effort with DVD, and you can bet they'll have learned lessons which thy will apply to the HD-(media) rollout.

      Books are a worn-out analogy, nonetheless, here I go. I'd be pretty pissed if my paperback ink became transparent outside of a narrow temperature range, say 60F to 80F. Sure, it would be fine for 95% of my reading, but would I really want a book that couldn't be read at the beach, or at the busstop in the winter? Of course not. If Doubleday tried to pull that, we'd photocopy the book in the office, then take the temperature-independent print on vacation.

      Whether I buy bits or celluloid or pages, the medium is still just a delivery mechanism. The copyright - the product - is about the content, and copyright laws have undergone fairly little in the way of consumer rights in recent history (extensions "for all eternity" not withstanding).

Slashdot Top Deals

Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries

Close