I would say if your company has a lawyer and the lawyer says you are breaking the copyright laws, I would listen.

I am not a lawyer, but the fair use law concerns Personal use, such as making a safety copy of software or a CD copy to listen to in your car. Copying video or audio to use in a public forum (such as a convention or meeting) is probably not considered fair use. But as Ted H. says, go to the source or consult a Media lawyer for your particular situation.

Dave T2

I called the Electronic Frontier and they said that ripping DVDs is illegal because they contain anti-circumvention technology (encyrption) which, by the new DMCA law, you are strictly forbidden from cracking -- even if the encryption technology is lousy and easily breakable. As a result, your fair use rights are wiped out.

As VCRs are phased out YOU WILL HAVE NO FAIR USE RIGHTS.

They also said that this type of scheme will be applied to CDs if the media conglomerates succeed in coming up with an encryption system that doesn't cause devices to reject them. If the encryption is too high now many of today's players will reject them, but not in the near future.

They are working feverishly to come up with a CD encryption scheme right now and the CBPTDA, if it is passed, will force CD player manufacturers to go along with it -- or else go to jail. Ditto tech companies that produce CD extraction software.

OOPs! I sent the last message before finishing/correcting it... ignore it. Here's the corrected one:
------------

I called the Electronic Frontier and they said that ripping DVDs is illegal because they contain anti-circumvention technology (encyrption) which, by the new DMCA law, you are strictly forbidden from cracking -- even if the encryption technology is lousy and easily breakable. As a result, your fair use rights are wiped out.

As VCRs are phased out YOU WILL HAVE NO FAIR USE RIGHTS.

They also said that this type of scheme will be applied to CDs if the media conglomerates succeed in coming up with an encryption system that doesn't cause devices to reject them. If the encryption is too high now many of today's players will reject them, but not in the near future.

They are working feverishly to come up with a CD encryption scheme right now and the CBPTDA, if it is passed, will force CD player manufacturers to go along with it -- or else go to jail. Ditto tech companies that produce CD extraction software.

Kinda sadly crazy in a way. Any ecryption can be broken. Anyone who is determined enough will be able to copy anything. The ironic part is that the people who are determined enough are the ones who will mass produce the copies and profit from it, and those of us who currently fall under the "fair use" side of things will be the ones to suffer.

ps. Tanjy, check out the "Edit This Message" function if you need to fix a message you've posted :)

Chienworks, thanks for the editing tip. I just fixed my message. I didn't know you can do that.

My point is that the entertainment industry can come up with any old encryption scheme that can be broken. It's just an excuse to criminalize your behavior and cripple any technology that empowers the consumer/individual. Their goal is not really to control piracy, but to control... period.

So it doesn't matter if they come up with an encryption scheme for CDs that anyone can break. The fact that you DO break it automatically makes you a criminal and it's the perfect way to force tech companies to cease and desist from creating "criminal" tools like CD and DVD software.

I never thought of the entertainment industry as a bully, but I am beginning to...

Another way to view it:

Staff editors in corporate settings are regularly requested to rip copyrighted sounds and images; putting them in a bit of a bind. (Most editors don't have a legal dept. to defer to. )

Having another obstacle to the higer-ups' innapropriate requests might take *some* pressure off.

On one hand, it's probably not worth losing yer job over; on the other hand, it's not worth getting sued either. (Yes, you as an editor can be sued, if you performed the work.)

My .03 Canadian

MPH

<I never thought of the entertainment industry as a bully>

Are you kidding? You would not believe what's going on right now between the entertainment industry and Congress -- and behind closed doors. The more I read about this stuff the more I realize that the tech industry (and consumers as well) had better start paying attention.

Techies are notorious for hating politics and getting involved because they feel that pure brainwork and technological know-how will automatically overpower any government bozo and bureaucrat. And then they get thrown in jail like that 15 year old programmer who cracked the DVD code. Or they get silenced like that prominent computer scientist who won the recording industry's $10,000 challenge to crack their CD encryption code and then tried to discuss his findings at a conference.

As more of these bills get through Congress the more you will see technology companies shutting down.

My .02 (US):

The general way American lawmakers deal with crime is to further restrict the rights of the law-abiding, rather than enforcing current laws and/or finding the holes in the system and filling them.

The day I spend $15 for a CD (which should be cheaper than a cassette at this point) and am told by some suit and spoiled 17 year-old millionaire that I can't rip it to my hard drive for personal use is the last day I'm seen purchasing a CD.

Pirating is pirating. But if we transposed ourt current legal thinking to the days of the Buchaneers, the pirate ships would still be in full-force -- it's the legitimate vessels that would be docked by the law.

Like it was stated previously, those who are on the "wrong" side will continue to break the law and profit from it. The rest of us will continue to lose more and more of our "fair usage" rights.

Of course, you might start to see smaller production houses releasing "non-restricted" CDs and DVDs. Wouldn't that be interesting?

Tanjv,

> My point is that the entertainment industry can come up with any old encryption scheme that can be broken. It's just an excuse to criminalize your behavior and cripple any technology that empowers the consumer/individual. Their goal is not really to control piracy, but to control... period. <

The deadbolt on my front door is not the best door lock that is available. I have seen some door locks available in hardware stores that put ours to shame. But regardless of how "wimpy" our door lock is, anyone who breaks that lock and enters is guilty of "breaking and entering". So, in effect our door lock is merely "symbolic" and I agree with that, even though it may, in your words, merely "criminalize" the behavior of anyone who breaks that lock and enters.

> So it doesn't matter if they come up with an encryption scheme for CDs that anyone can break. The fact that you DO break it automatically makes you a criminal and it's the perfect way to force tech companies to cease and desist from creating "criminal" tools like CD and DVD software. <

I don't think it should be my responsibility to put some humongous "unbreakable" lock on my front door. Nor should commercial discs be required to use an "unbreakable" encryption scheme.

"Fair use" of copyrighted materials has always been a grey area, but I think most interpretations would restrict it to your own personal use in a non-profit context. The instance you first cited, in which you were asked to copy the DVD material for incorporation in a company internal presentation, would be very difficult to justify as "fair use". I think your company legal staff was right to be alarmed by what you were doing.

Almost every book and magazine is protected by copyright law, and yet it is fairly common for an author of another work to ask the copyright holder for permission to quote parts of a book or reproduce a photograph or parts of an artwork, with the agreement that due credits will be included. Many books and magazines cite such credits and permissions. And there might be an agreed upon fee. Discretion requires that the permissions should be gotten in writing, to avoid any later litigation.

I think this approach would also be worth trying for movies and music. (Although asking for permission to "crack" a DVD would have a predictable denial, there might be an alternative available access to the material in question. They might give you free samples, or at least, inexpensive ones. TV commercials regularly show excerpts from DVDs and upcoming movies.) The "crawlers" at the end of many movies cite such permissions and credits. Vegas Video certainly gives you the tools for incorporating such credits in your productions. Incidentally, everything we say here in these forums is the copyrighted property of Sonic Foundry, as you can verify by clicking on the "Terms & Conditions" link below.

-- Burton --

Seeker,

1. You cannot compare the flow of information and ideas to physical entities breaking through your bolted door. Quoting someone's work for discussion purposes or making a copy for personal use or convenience (like going to the gym) is NOT the same as breaking down someone's door and stealing property. That's why we have fair use laws.

Without fair use we might as well shut down our schools and libraries, outlaw xerox machines, disable cut & paste functions on a computer, arrest anyone who does a parody or music sampling, and close down every discussion forum on the Internet because it is filled with excerpts and quotes. We would also criminalize hyperlinking (which is the essence of the DeCSS lawsuit) and prohibit making backup copies of anything. These are just some of the the examples of what happens when you eliminate fair use.

And my whole point is that fair use IS about to be eliminated as we migrate to digital because the act of copying, regardless of how you use that copy, is being criminalized thanks to the DMCA. And my experience is a perfect example. From my readings about this subject, using clips for internal business presentations is considered fair use and in my particular instance it definitely was. The purpose of my extracting those video clips was to educate interns and employees as part of a college credit program.


2. <Discretion requires that the permissions should be gotten in writing, to avoid any later litigation.>

Fair use does not require asking permission in many instances. Can you imagine if you had to get permission every time you wanted to cut and paste? Here are some rules of thumb according to the University of Maryland at http://www.umuc.edu/library/copy.html . They listed the guidelines:

"Q. WHEN SHOULD YOU GET PERMISSION?

A. When you intend to use the project for commercial or noneducational purposes.
When you intend to duplicate the project beyond the two copies allowed by the guidelines
When you plan to distribute the project beyond the scope of the guidelines [and they elaborate on the guidelines]."

But guess what? Pretty soon you won't be able to may ANY copies... if the media companies get their way.

Just to illustrate how nuts some laws are,Taniy technically broke the law in his last post. Hope there isn't a knock on his door where he gets dragged away in leg irons. What horrible crime did Taniy commit in front of us?

Here it is:

"...outlaw xerox machines, ..."

He violated trademark laws saying xerox like that! Xerox is a protected trademark. You can't use it as he did, because everytime someone does it diminishes its uniqueness which was the purpose of the company "protecting" Xerox as a trademark. Shame on you! You should have said photocopy machine.

Just think, what would happen if everyone went around ordering a 'coke' instead of a Coca-Cola? Oh my God... we already do!

Of course this is just meant to be humor. But do take a few minutes to read the checkout the following. Rather interesting:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm

BillyBoy,

The scary thing is that the media conglomerates are actively (and successfully) using this ridiculous law to outlaw reverse engineering, file conversions and extractions, file transfers over the Internet and yes, hyperlinking to information they don't approve of.

The DeCSS case was actually about hyperlinking. The judge ruled that the recording industry by law can force any website (http://www.2600.com in particular) to remove all links to another site that posts the DVD encryption code. And the kid programmer who cracked the code was recently indicted and faces two years in prison. The media decided to publicize this case to the max as a way to threaten others from exchanging this type of information/data on the Internet.

A lawyer in the case put it this way:
"The way we understand it, the data is the content of the DVD, what you are breaking is the encryption and what you are getting access to is the data on the disk."

But hey, isn't that what I did when I extracted DVD clips for that presentation?

Once the industry succeeds in putting an even semi-effective encryption onto music CDs then the CD extraction function in Sonic Foundry's products will be useless, and any attempts to make it useful would be illegal.

It is indeed sad. I wonder if having our current Attoney General running around the Capital draping sculptures because nude busts "bother" him has anything to do with such extreme ultra right-wing wacko thinking. Well, over time when the pendulum swings too far in one direction, sooner or later it goes back too far the other way.

In my opinion Ashcroft is a total nut case. Just checking his bio page on the official Dept. of Justice Dept web site this guy sure loves to toot his own horn.

The first sentence on a Bio page? Geez! 'Calling him "a man of great integrity, a man of great judgment and a man who knows the law," President George W. Bush announced his decision to nominate John Ashcroft to serve as Attorney General of the United States on December 22, 2000.'

Talk about out of control ego stroking!

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/ashcroftbio.html

Tanjy,

> That's why we have fair use laws. <

We don't have any "fair use" laws. We have copyright laws.

> And my whole point is that fair use IS about to be eliminated... <

Not so. Fair use is not about to be eliminated, it is about to be enforced. Your title for this thread asks if extracting a DVD is breaking the law. You can answer your own question by playing the DVD that you were RIPing. The opening screen has an FBI warning that says, and I quote, "Any use or exhibition of this video other than non-commercial home viewing is prohibited." The FBI screen goes on to define the crime as, "...a felony with a maximum penalty of up to 5 years in prison and/or a $250,000 fine.". There follows an international copyright law screen, with corresponding prohibitions.

"Fair use" is defined for your DVD in no uncertain terms as "non-commercial home viewing". That means in the home, and you don't charge anybody anything to view it. The penalty for violating that "fair use" can be as high as 5 years in prison and $250,000 fine. As I said before, your legal staff was correct to be concerned.

-- Burton --

What we do have on the books is fair use under copyright laws. For sure a gray area of the law.

Thankfully we don't live in a police state or have thought or ethics police or goon squads peeking through your window checking if you're making a "illegal" copy of a video. At least not yet.

The FBI can not and does not determine who may have committed a crime. It may arrest (which is little more than detain) people suspected of breaking federal laws, but only under strict guidelines set forth in the Constitution. Thankfully, we still have courts, all citizens have a right to due process, and anyone charged with a "crime" is presumed innocent until PROVEN guity in a court of law.

Source: U. S. Constitution Articles IV, V and VI.

Has the DMCA bill been passed yet? Haven't been following.

Even if it has, bad law and this is a classic example of Congress over reaching, most likely as a reward to special interest groups making huge campaign contributions to both parties. Sooner or later bad law gets tested in the courts and the Supreme Court if it gets that far likely will rule some or all of it unconsitutional as they have with a lot of crap passed by Congress lately.

I wouldn't give a bag of wet dog poop for the typical corporate legal staff. Need I remind anyone of Arthur Andersen, the infamous huge accounting firm (just convicted) who's legal council ordered paper shreading on a massive scale. LOL!

Seeker,

<We don't have any "fair use" laws. We have copyright laws.>

Fair use is a provision of the copyright law and as such it is a part of the law... if you want to split hairs.

<"Fair use" is defined for your DVD in no uncertain terms>

It is not up to the media companies to define or redefine "fair use" but that's exactly what they're trying to do and why there is such an uproar over it.

<Fair use is not about to be eliminated, it is about to be enforced.>

I disagree and so do many other people. Fair use and free speech in general are in BIG trouble unless the DMCA is severely amended or repealed altogether. I strongly suggest you check out examples of how they're in trouble. For starters try the Electronic Frontier Foundation at www.eff.org which is active and prominent in this issue. Read this white paper by them called "Unintended Consequences" and the section, "Fair Use Under Siege." It is written by a senior intellectual property attorney:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_consequences.html

They have a lot of lawyers on staff so I think they know what they're talking about.

BillyBoy,

<Has the DMCA bill been passed yet?>

Yes. In 1998, behind closed doors, and with little public knowledge or participation. We are starting to see the fallout.

<Even if it has, bad law and this is a classic example>

There are members of Congress who agree with you and are trying to get it repealed or rewritten. One of them is Rep. Rick Boucher who wrote an article for CNET about what a horrible law this is:
http://news.com.com/2010-1078-825335.html

<Sooner or later bad law gets tested in the courts>

That's exactly what's happening right now. There's a small software company called 321 Studios that created a program called DVD Copy Plus. It lets you make backup copies of your DVDs. The movie industry was about to sue them and put them out of business, so they decided to sue first. This just happened about a month ago. If they win it could be a landmark case.

Here's the article: "Upstart seeks court OK for DVD copying"
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-889455.html

We're getting way off topic for this fourm, but what the heck

Following will give more details then you want on federal copyright law:

main page: http://uscode.house.gov/usc.htm

copyright:

http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t17t20+2+70++%28Fair%20Use%20of%20media%20and%20copyright%29%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

Specifically (note disclaimer) USC Title 17 Chapter One Section 107 update 5/22/02
Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use suggests doing what the original poster wants IS protected under fair use.

disclaimer: I'm NO attorney. Thank God! You probably can find a dozen other sections that apply and a dozen other ones that say the exact opposite.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/htm_hl?DB=uscode17&STEMMER=en&WORDS=fair+us+&COLOUR=Red&STYLE=s&URL=/uscode/17/107.html#muscat_highlighter_first_match

Confused?

Now read following which is more on point and covers Sec. 1201. - Circumvention of copyright protection systems

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/htm_hl?DB=uscode17&STEMMER=en&WORDS=fair+us+&COLOUR=Red&STYLE=s&URL=/uscode/17/1201.html#muscat_highlighter_first_match

My head is spinning again. <wink>

Tanjy,

This has been an interesting discussion, with a lot of relevant links and viewpoints posted. A lot of people seem to think if you don't like a law, it is OK to break it. I am not one of those people.

Perhaps our current copyright law, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998, will be modified or repealed or found unconstitutional, but until that happens, it remains "the law."

Just out of curiosity, what do you now think is the answer to your original question, "Is extracting a CD or DVD breaking the law?"?

-- Burton --

This is all about money for old rope, when I replaced some of my tapes/records for CD's I do not remember getting an exhange deal with a much reduced cost. The CD is much cheaper to manafature yet is stll very expensive.

If things were were fair and there was an easy way to get permission or pay for copies online, people would use it and all would be well in "record producing" land again

I have a licence for weddings that allows me to copy music to tape, but guess what it works out dearer then if I purchased the CD and then destroyed the disk.

Just a last thought, what other companies get free advertising plastered all over radio and TV everyday and even have shows advertising there wares for free, while the likes of us have to pay to get it.

my pennies worth

The point I was trying to make in posting the last couple links was the complexity of laws and the ridicilious number of them. In isn't lost on me either that the majority of people elected to Congress are/were attoneys. In this sue happy country (US) too many people benefit from laws created by and for SPECIAL INTERESTS. It seems to be with increasing frequency that Joe Average is the one getting screwed.

My view regarding the issue of extracting the contents of a CD or DVD for PERSONAL use is more a ethical issue than a legal one. I have ZERO symphathy towards the handful of greedy corporations that have for decades ripped off little known recording artists. So I do indeed chuckle to myself when each new encryption scheme is quickly defeated. Isn't it refreshing that Sony probably blew millions developing their latest encryption method and it is easily beaten by a lowly magic marker? I think so.

And Seeker your "A lot of people seem to think if you don't like a law, it is OK to break it. I am not one of those people." is self-serving, insulting and not appreciated by me and I'm guessing others as well.