Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

No I'm not. The conversation started with bhampton quoting alchav's post and calling him "bad alchav". bhampton specically highlighted alchav saying that he was "backing up the Movie and selling the original".

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=38349

Wendell also made a similar point.

Anthony P also made a similar point.

If you go back a few pages both Wendell and Anthony have quite a few posts on the topic.

Wendell, Brian, and Anthony never accused anyone of anything and you know it. Speak for yourself and only for yourself!

Anthony offered a peculiar (and wrong) definition of piracy while Wendell discussed a hypothetical situation involving a home being searched and the copying of RENTAL discs. Brian's comment was about settling for an inferior experience; he never accuses him of anything.

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

If you had files of movies that you didn't own on your computer or on burned discs there would be no way to prove where you got them. I think we call agree that downloading DVD and Blu-ray rips off the internet is illegal (regardless of whether the original discs had copy protection or not) and you would have no way of proving that the "back-ups" you had were made from legitimately purchased disc.

Having "back-ups" of movies you no longer own is therefore effectively illegal.

I see you already responded to a similar point:



By this logic no one could ever be charged with having an illegal copy because it would be impossible to tell if a copy is legal or illegal.

So you're arguing that the digital backups I made of all my CD's are illegal? And you're belaboring the point over several pages of this thread? Whether it is or not it's not going to stop myself or others from doing it, especially since the tools to do so can be legally bought.

I'm not sure why you're choosing this hill to to make a stand on but it may be time to stop tilting at windmills.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Ender14

So you're arguing that the digital backups I made of all my CD's are illegal?

If you don't have the CDs anymore then they aren't backups and they are illegal.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Wendell discussed a hypothetical situation involving a home being searched and the copying of RENTAL discs.

How could anyone prove the difference between a copy of a rented disc and a copy of a purchased disc?

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Ender14

So you're arguing that the digital backups I made of all my CD's are illegal? And you're belaboring the point over several pages of this thread? Whether it is or not it's not going to stop myself or others from doing it, especially since the tools to do so can be legally bought.

I'm not sure why you're choosing this hill to to make a stand on but it may be time to stop tilting at windmills.

Gawd help you if you no longer have ALL of the original CDs OR if you made multiple copies for use on more than one device.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Oh for Pete's sake a defendant never has to prove their innocence! The burden of proof always lies with the prosecutor or plaintiff.

That's true. But if copies of discs you no longer owned were legal then there would be no such thing as illegal copies because it would be impossible to prove that any copy was ever made illegally.

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

If you don't have the CDs anymore then they aren't backups and they are illegal.

I do have the CD's. I ripped them so I could box up my CD's and store them. But regardless you are stating the act itself is illegal. If so, why is there legal software sold to consumers that perform those very tasks? Your argument is faulty.

But I'm not joining the fray on this. Just pointing out that many people do it, they are never arrested and software to perform these tasks is sold legally. It may be time to just let this go.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

How could anyone prove the difference between a copy of a rented disc and a copy of a purchased disc?

It's called a receipt. I have most of mine dating back to 2004. Even if I no longer had the disc, I can prove that I bought it.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Ender14

I do have the CD's. I ripped them so I could box up my CD's and store them. But regardless you are stating the act itself is illegal. If so, why is there legal software sold to consumers that perform those very tasks? Your argument is faulty.

Ripping CDs is legal. It doesn't break any copy-protection. I have never argued that ripping CDs is illegal.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

It's called a receipt. I have most of mine dating back to 2004.

So you're basically saying that it's a crime to throw out your receipts.

Originally Posted by Vilya

Even if I no longer had the disc, I can prove that I bought it.

But even if you never owned the disc, how could anyone prove that?

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

Ripping CDs is legal. It doesn't break any copy-protection. I have never argued that ripping CDs is illegal.

The RIAA would disagree with you:

Beyond that, there’s no legal “right” to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:

-The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own
-The copy is just for your personal use. It’s not a personal use – in fact, it’s illegal – to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying.
-The owners of copyrighted music have the right to use protection technology to allow or prevent copying.

Remember, it’s never okay to sell or make commercial use of a copy that you make.

https://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/about-piracy/

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

So you're basically saying that it's a crime to throw out your receipts.

But even if you never owned the disc, how could anyone prove that?

I said no such thing.

I said that I had most of my receipts dating back to 2004. I could show them if I ever wanted to, but I am under no obligation to keep them. Or to show them.

I can't prove that I never owned most somethings. You can't prove that you never owned a pink sequined mini-skirt. I can't prove that I never owned an Alphorn.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I said that I had most of my receipts dating back to 2004. I could show them if I ever wanted to, but I am under no obligation to keep them. Or to show them

Bill buys a disc creates a copy and then sells the disc. He keeps his receipt from the purchase.
Frank buys a disc creates a copy and then sells the disc. He does not keep the receipt from the purchase.
Steven downloads a rip from a someone else's disc over the internet.

Police search the houses of all 3 people and discover the copies. According to you Bill and Frank are both law abiding and Steven is not. But under the law only Bill can prove that he is law abiding so both Frank and Steven would be charged with possessing an illegal copy.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

Ripping CDs is legal. It doesn't break any copy-protection. I have never argued that ripping CDs is illegal.

It still potentially violates copyright law. Most music is copyrighted.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Ender14

The RIAA would disagree with you

It doesn't sound like they would:

However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:

-The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own
-The copy is just for your personal use.

The RIAA stated (in your quote) that they have no problem with people making copies of the CDs they own for personal use. And neither do I.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

But under the law only Bill can prove that he is law abiding so both Frank and Steven would be charged with possessing an illegal copy.

None of these people have to prove anything. The burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecutor or plaintiff. That's how the presumption of innocence works.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

None of these people have to prove anything. The burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecutor or plaintiff. That's how the presumption of innocence works.

Which brings me back to my previous point:

If copies of discs you no longer owned were legal then there would be no such thing as illegal copies because it would be impossible to prove that any copy was ever made illegally.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Ender14

The RIAA would disagree with you:



https://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/about-piracy/

Get out of the quicksand while you can! Save yourself!

[bhampton]

I hope I can get Crawl on UHD BD tomorrow.

Today I picked up Rise of Gru and Days of Thunder.

I've gone back to watching discs directly. I also can't stop buying them so I need to take over another wall for shelves.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

Which brings me back to my previous point:

If copies of discs you no longer owned were legal then there would be no such thing as illegal copies because it would be impossible to prove that any copy was ever made illegally.

Not impossible, just difficult.

That's why there is essentially no enforcement regarding illegal copies and why studios so very badly want to go entirely with digital distribution.

Even with digital distribution, the studio's property still winds up on FTP sites thanks, in part, to another legal type of software: streaming capture software. It's a game of whack-a-mole at best.