Great news: DVD Hacker wins court case

[leonpmu]

Follow this link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3341211.stm)

I found it just now. Maybe it is old news, but hey, it is still good news!!:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Now maybe the DeCSS code will be more easily available over the Net...

But, here's my question: Since this case took place in Norway, could the MPAA still sue people for distributing the code in the US?

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
Now maybe the DeCSS code will be more easily available over the Net...

But, here's my question: Since this case took place in Norway, could the MPAA still sue people for distributing the code in the US?

like you said alex this is great news but I was wondering the same thing, my guess is that the MPAA will still attempt to sue people and or sites that distribute the code, even though this will not stop the distribution:D although I wonder if the U.S.courts would be more likley to say that the code fell under the protection of fare use laws?

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Originally posted by bosox79
like you said alex this is great news but I was wondering the same thing, my guess is that the MPAA will still attempt to sue people and or sites that distribute the code, even though this will not stop the distribution:D although I wonder if the U.S.courts would be more likely to say that the code fell under the protection of fair use laws?

That's my whole question. The way the DMCA has been used lately, it'll at least be tied up in court for a while, I'd bet. Meanwhile, the judge will issue an injunction stating that the DeCSS code can't be made available in the US. So, if the MPAA drags out the court case, it would suit their goals just fine.

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
That's my whole question. The way the DMCA has been used lately, it'll at least be tied up in court for a while, I'd bet. Meanwhile, the judge will issue an injunction stating that the DeCSS code can't be made available in the US. So, if the MPAA drags out the court case, it would suit their goals just fine.

I could see that happening :( but just as food for thought what if the code is hosted on a site outside the U.S. say in Norway is a U.S. court going to have the authority to tell a site admin in Norwy that they can not host the code? and besides that how are they going to enforce the injunction on a worlds wide scale? again this is not mean to be a flame or anything of the sort just food for thought :D

bosox

[leonpmu]

but they can force the site to put a thing in agreeing that you dont live in the US and that if you do, you cant download this file. I have seen it somewhere else before, that, thank God, is why I will never live in the States, it is supposed to be the land of the free, my a$$ it is!!!

[DerekKraan]

I live in Canada, so no worries for me. ;)

I'm glad that this guy got off though. At least the justice seems to have a clue in whatever country he comes from(some scandinavian place I'm sure.)

I really don't like how they make him seem like a criminal or a script kiddie in that article. He really isn't using the software to copy DVDs, only to watch them on an OS that isn't supported by the big companies. It's only through their ignorance that this software was developed.

[voidinit]

Originally posted by leonpmu
but they can force the site to put a thing in agreeing that you dont live in the US and that if you do, you cant download this file. I have seen it somewhere else before, that, thank God, is why I will never live in the States, it is supposed to be the land of the free, my a$$ it is!!!

I really don't think the U.S. Government could force a foriegn website to put any such warnings up. You've got to remember that Norway is a sovereign nation and Norwegians need only abide by the laws of their government. I mean, the U.S. Government can't (or won't?) even force Mexico to extradite native Mexican criminals charged, in the U.S., with capital crimes.

If it were my site, I would post the warning just to avoid the monetary hassle of legal fees. It doesn't mean that people in the U.S. have to listen to the warning, it just means they were warned.

I'm sure the U.S. could make up some silly law to restrict the code from coming into the U.S. or to ban the use of the code within the U.S. However, I'm sure it will have the same ineffectiveness as the export of cryptography laws.

I am just counting the days until the Government and more importantly the entertainment industry realizes that the old way of doing business just doesn't work any more. How can they not get it!? The market they used to know is now gone, and they fight like hungry jackals to get it back. I don't want to see production companies go broke, I like movies and music, but I would like to see them concede to the fact that they need a new strategy besides suing potential paying customers. Eventually one of them will come up with a new business model that works. Until then, we Americans have to put up with this petty BS.

[EnigmaOne]

In actuality, the "DeCSS code" is ridiculously easy to distribute over the Internet...without fear of litigation:
http://decss.zoy.org/

As well, Dr. David S. Touretzky, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, has, through intelligent argument and personal presentation, handily fed the MPAAs own threats back to them--with a side-order of crow:
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/

On a side-note, the material facts at issue were indeed misrepresented by the MPAA lawyers prior to, during, and since Jon's first trial.
At issue was his right to watch DVDs on his Linux-based system, which the MPAA lawyers claimed he had no right to do since there was no MPAA-sanctioned and licensed player for any Open Source Operating System. The core-issue for the MPAA, of course, being that they want some serious dough to use their decryption method.

Since Jon and his friends weren't willing to pay the MPAA their extortion money, they--legally, I might add--came up with their own decryption method; which has, since that time, undergone some major changes to the point that it in no way resembles the decryption method the MPAA wants licensing fees to use.

The MPAA changed the charges against Johansen 3 times during the course of his trial, to finally end up at the accusation that the issues were best framed--inaccurately--in the context that Johansen only wanted to illegally copy DVDs; an activity which can EASILY be accomplished without any CSS decryption algorithm.

The 2 key benefits of using an Open Source implementation of CSS decryption are the facts that:
1) region coding, which is actually illegal in many localities, becomes irrelevant.
2) those irritating FBI notices and advertisements may be skipped altogether.

These facts scare the living cr@p out of the MPAA, because they pose the very real eventuality of shutting off two streams of unjust enrichment on the part of the MPAA member companies.
The MPAA has, both in and out of court, stayed conspicuously clear of these topics; because, once the cat's out of the bag, it's impossible to get her, and her kittens, back in there again.
As far as they are concerned, "fair use" of copyrighted material is what they tell you it should be, and nothing else.

The Fair Use Doctrine, and various Constitutional issues will probably be where the DMCA ultimately dies; and, given that you can't construct a complete brain from the grey-matter from a hundred or so Hollywood-types, it'll be sooner than later.

main(){char q[8],b,i=3,j;for(;j=read(0,q,i?1:8);i?*q-10?0:i--:write(1,&b,1))for(;~i&j--;b+=(1&q[j])+b);}

Have fun....

[edit]
grammar fix...and a spelling error I just spotted (rolling eyes)