Comments

riredale wrote on 3/12/2014, 6:59 PM
Won't change anything. The software will pop up somewhere else. The Feds will be forever playing a game of Whack-a-mole. DVDfab just happened to be a big juicy target.
NormanPCN wrote on 3/12/2014, 9:05 PM
Not that anyone on here would use such a product...

I have used DVDFab before.
I ripped some of my DVDs and compressed them in Handbrake. I would get an average 2.35 aspect movie down to around 0.5GB and I could fit a bunch of those on a laptop to watch on planes and in hotel rooms.

I know that was against my license but I was going to watch what I bought how I wanted. My laptop DVD player scratched a bunch of discs from light typical turbulence and the laptop moving around. I had to replace a couple of friends DVDs.

I know someone who ripped a hundreds of their DVDs to harddisk and accessed them via media PC to play on the TV.
TheHappyFriar wrote on 3/12/2014, 9:47 PM
Remember when to make $$ the studios would have a movie in theaters for months, maybe a year, and AFTER that, again, maybe months or a year it would be available in the video rental place, then months, maybe a year, it would be available to buy in VHS? I'm buying Frozen less then 5 MONTHS from the theater release date now.

Perhaps if they want to extract more $$ from the consumer they shouldn't release DVD/BD's months after the movie release. What ever happened to the right of first sale & the right to copy for personal use? That's right, it went out the window with the DCMA. :)

EDIT: I don't bother ripping commercial disk any more. If I want a scene it's on Youtube, so I just save that video to my hard drive. :)
rs170a wrote on 3/12/2014, 10:42 PM
Norman, I faced a similar situation in that I had young kids who loved to watch their favourite DVDs but I had no desire to keep replacing them due to normal kid-inflicted wear and tear. I used DVD Shrink (it worked great in those days) to make backup DVDs that I had no problems letting the kids handle as they saw fit. If they destroyed one, I made another copy.
I've never understood the "Hollywood" mentality of not legally allowing us to make a backup copy for personal use :(

Mike
PeterDuke wrote on 3/13/2014, 1:38 AM
I won't miss DVDFab. I paid for a year's subscription to DVDFab Player (you can't buy a licence outright) in order to play BD ISO files with full menu support, but it wouldn't work for me.

It may have been a conflict with other sofware, because later I could not get WinDVD Pro to play copy protected BDs. Corel said that it was probably a software conflict, but gave no other help. After much fiddling around I eventually bit the bullet and installed a clean copy of Win 7, then WinDVD pro, and then everything else. WinDVD Pro now works. I haven't tried DVDFab Player since.
PeterDuke wrote on 3/13/2014, 1:45 AM
"I've never understood the "Hollywood" mentality of not legally allowing us to make a backup copy for personal use "

I guess they think that to stop you from making illegal copies, they have to stop you from being able to make any copy, whether legal or illegal. It is easier and cheaper to step on a few companies such as DVDFab than verify whether millions of copies of videos are legal or illegal, and then prosecute individuals as appropriate.
_Lenny_ wrote on 3/13/2014, 6:10 AM
It's a shame as there are legitimate reasons to use such software.

Just a few days ago I used DVD shrink to resize a made in DVD Architect that was reported as too large to fit on a disc. DVDA was taking too long to recompress it, so I let DVD Shrink do the job. Two minutes later, job done.

I agree that we should be permitted to make copies of commercial disks for personal use. Naturally, as a content creator, I do not condone copyright infringement that disadvantages the creator.
Geoff_Wood wrote on 3/13/2014, 6:51 AM
Glad I'm not in the 'States'.

I paid for DVD-FAB and feel I have a legitimate use for it.

geoff
Chienworks wrote on 3/13/2014, 8:21 AM
"Naturally, as a content creator, I do not condone copyright infringement that disadvantages the creator."

I'm not even a content creator, but i feel the same way.
Gary James wrote on 3/13/2014, 9:10 AM
I don't see how this court has any jurisdiction over DVDFab. The Federal Court system in the U.S. is made up of regional district courts (circuit courts) and above them all is the U.S. Supreme Court. This ruling was issued by the New York 2nd district court, so it's scope of jurisdiction is limited to just that region of the U.S.

If anything, all this ruling should be able to do is limit sales and financial transactions of DVDFab within the 2nd Federal Court district. DVDFab being a Chinese company is immune from any U.S. Court ruling. And certainly Internet providers and domain registrars outside the U.S. or even outside the 2nd district have no legal responsibility to uphold this ruling. If this case ever goes to SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States), and they uphold the the 2nd district courts ruling, then it becomes the law of the land for the entire country.

NormanPCN wrote on 3/13/2014, 11:05 AM
Federal courts issue rulings on Federal law, which is law for the entire US. The fact that this was in 2nd district is just the location where someone filed their suit. If you lose your federal suit, you can appeal to the supreme court.

the ruling can affect business ops in the US and force blockage of certain domains. I think this is why the http://en.dvdfab.jp/ address still works according to the article. The original suit probably did not list this domain to be blocked in the US. I am sure that will change.
wwjd wrote on 3/13/2014, 11:18 AM
It's MY DVD, I bought it, I own the physical version, I'll do whatever the heck I want with it, short of illegal things like giving away copies, or posting it for others. I'll make copies for laptop viewing, android table, or backups. Plenty of rip programs out there.
COME GET ME NSA/FPI/CIA/PDQ/OMG! :D
riredale wrote on 3/13/2014, 1:12 PM
Duly noted.

Sincerely, your friends at the NSA.
vtxrocketeer wrote on 3/13/2014, 1:26 PM
Good heavens, if you're going to opine on U.S. jurisprudence, get it right. Do you understand what a preliminary injunction is? Did you read the court's order?
wwjd wrote on 3/13/2014, 2:15 PM
I understand "Lawyers" have an unbreakable monopoly and wreck everything humane in life.
PeterDuke wrote on 3/13/2014, 5:43 PM
Alaskans must sigh yet again. In the map of United States District Courts it apparently shrunk in the wash. According to a post card I have, it is normally 1/5 the area of the contiguous states and 2.3 times that of Texas.