Linux DVD playing and the MPAA [Archive]

fisheromen1031

July 5th, 2005, 12:14 AM

For those who haven't already figured it out, Ubuntu (like many other distros) does not come with out-of-the-box support for playing commonly purchased DVD movies. This is due to legal issues in countries like the United States where associations like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) have pushed legislation that makes it difficult for non-Windows and non-Mac OS's to legally play DVD movies.
The following quote is from MPAA's website:

Q: Doesn’t the DMCA allow reverse engineering for compatibility, for example to allow playing of a DVD on a Linux operating system-driven personal computer?
A: The DMCA does allow reverse engineering. However, the reverse engineering provisions in the DMCA were never intended to enable anyone to circumvent technical protection measures (TPMs) for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to or making unauthorized copies of copyrighted works.

The DMCA does allow a lawful user of a computer program to circumvent TPMs to ensure that the program can work with other programs (interoperability); and, with strict limitations, the research may be shared with others, as long as it does not infringe the copyright in the original or a related work. However, reverse engineering is not permissible if there is a readily available commercial alternative for that purpose. In this case, there exist MANY commercially available DVD players.
.....
Q: Some computer users say they only want to use DeCSS to view their DVDs on computers that use the Linux operating system. Windows- and Macintosh-based computers can play DVDs, so is it fair to deprive the Linux community?
A: The Linux argument is a false issue. It has always been in the interest of the Motion Picture industry that there be as many legitimately licensed DVD players as possible, including those using non-Windows operating systems. However the argument that DeCSS was written for Linux players is simply false. The De-CSS utility was written for Windows-based software, not Linux.

Also, the development of two, separate, licensed DVD players for Linux systems - which use the CSS system - were recently announced. Sigma Designs (www.sigmadesigns.com) and InterVideo Inc. (www.intervideo.com) both announced the roll-out of LICENSED, LEGAL Linux-based DVD players.
this was found at http://www.mpaa.org/Press/DVD_FAQ.htm

This press release from the MPAA is very missleading. As anyone who has tried to find such commercially licensed DVD players already knows, nothing exists for the linux desktop user.

i guess this is an FYI for those curious or may be this is a good discussion opener.

-fisher

Kyral

July 5th, 2005, 12:28 AM

*shrug*

I gave up trying to keep on the legal side of the net back in the Napster days. Which is not to say that I am a Pirate, just that I gave up trying to figure out the fog that is Internet Legality

sonny

July 5th, 2005, 12:42 AM

They cannot offer Linux support becuase MS wont allow them, not because of the legal talk (wich obviously favors MS). That makes you think... Linux has achive all of this without (or few) support from big hardware-manufacturers, my question is this, what would Linux achive if it'd have the support that MS has right now?

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 12:47 AM

I don't give a damn about the MPAA, and I don't give a damn about the law. I own my DVDs, and I own my computer. What I do with the two is nobody else's business, and if the MPAA disagrees, they can discuss the matter with my sledgehammer.

Kyral

July 5th, 2005, 01:03 AM

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 01:07 AM

Amen to that!! *high-fives Stormy Eyes*

Thanks, but be careful about agreeing with me. I have no respect whatsoever for the law or for social mores.

fisheromen1031

July 5th, 2005, 01:10 AM

There are some of us out there that would like to remain as law abiders regardless of if others know or whether we think the laws are rather stupid. Petitioning/complaining to the proper peoples (or other similar actions) are prefered by some over simple disobedience. Does anybody know if anyone (in the USA that is) is working to make it legal for me to play my DVDs on my linux box?

poofyhairguy

July 5th, 2005, 01:15 AM

Does anybody know if anyone (in the USA that is) is working to make it legal for me to play my DVDs on my linux box?

Well...there is this...but its not for things like Ubuntu:

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 01:19 AM

There are some of us out there that would like to remain as law abiders regardless of if others know or whether we think the laws are rather stupid.

I know there are, and while I don't agree with them, I bear them no malice.

Petitioning/complaining to the proper peoples (or other similar actions) are prefered by some over simple disobedience.

I know. However, I don't think that working within a broken system will solve anything. Instead, I decide for myself what is right, act accordingly, and face the consequences.

Does anybody know if anyone (in the USA that is) is working to make it legal for me to play my DVDs on my linux box?

Aside from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (http:/www.eff.org)? I don't know of any. I never cared to look for one, being the sort who will do as he will while taking care not to trample on others' rights. In D&D parlance, my alignment would be 'chaotic good', not lawful.

TravisNewman

July 5th, 2005, 01:19 AM

See, Stormy Appears to be a practical anarchist, as discussed in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" by Heinlen. Essentially, that means that you follow the law when you believe it to be worthy and along your moral stance. If not, you refuse to follow it.

It's a total separation from social mores, as you put it Stormy. It's all about deciding for yourself what is right, and not what others say.

EDIT: what I mean to say with all this is that even though Stormy has no respect for society's laws, it doesn't mean he doesn't follow his own. I doubt he's out killing people daily, etc. He shows respect for those who remain totally lawful

fisheromen1031

July 5th, 2005, 01:20 AM

Well...there is this...but its not for things like Ubuntu:

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp

that's part of the point. Part of what I was trying to point out is that MPAA is incorrect in saying that such things are available for Linux desktop users.

WildTangent

July 5th, 2005, 01:26 AM

as long as i can get my DVD decoder for free, i wont pay a dime for it. the MPAA and RIAA can stick their rules where there is a lack of solar activity for all i care. in any case, is their a way to download the .deb files from the repos so they can be burnt to a CD? :P

-Wild

poptones

July 5th, 2005, 01:57 AM

It's all about deciding for yourself what is right, and not what others say.

But that's NOT a "total separation from social mores." The only difference between Stormy and the MPAA, regarding this issue, is economic. The MPAA has decided what is its best interest and has lobbied for legislation that most any citizen of the US would argue is inherently unfair and not at all based on the provisions which the basis for this legislation was intended.

I'm a bit more torn on this. Consider: the same protection that allows the MPAA to legally lock up their movies is the protection that allows me to sue their butts if they make unfair use of some snippet of code I have contributed to the world via GPL.

Using decss to decrypt MPAA movies on your linux system is like using a modchip to play warez games on your Playstation. You want to talk anarchy? You're not likely to find many more sociopathic than myself outside state institutions - but I would no defend use of decss to watch movies YOU bought or rented. Why? Because you are contributing to the coercive system you're complaining about. It may be a joke that we live in a "free economy" but one freedom we all very much have is whether or not to support the MPAA with our disposable income.

How about this instead of decss? When you buy or rent a movie and it is encrypted and unpplayable, return it as defective and demand your money back. Write our representatives in support of legislation that would require approriate labeling of ALL electronically published material so that you can tell from the packaging whether a piece of media is encrypted or otherwise "copyguarded."

Refuse to support the offenders and you change the system. Anything else is just more manna in the mouths of the kings.

I shop for music in the international newsgroups and at magnatune, I stopped looking to the mainstream for music long ago and now it seems weird to me when people DON'T know the artists that linger at the top of my playlists. I look for online films and other programming (look at all the stuff now available on the BBC and at the internet archive - there's already more stuff there than anyone could watch and listen to in a lifetime). I buy only used media, I don't pay for TV or dead tree magazines and I make use of e-books whenever possible. No one needs Survivor and The Sith - let them keep it.

I say this as a child of a generation raised on reruns of I Dream Of Jeannie and The Brady Bunch: Culture is what we each make of it; if your culture is enslaved to corporations, you have no one to blame but yourself.

CoriolisSTORM

July 5th, 2005, 02:03 AM

The MPAA and RIAA is a bunch of rich uptite communist tofu fartin' fairies </Larry the Cable Guy> They seriously have forgotten about their needs to remember the end user. According to many members of the RIAA it is illegal for a person to even rip a song to their PC or to burn a CD of it for their personal use. The MPAA I'm pretty sure is much the same. They need to remember their deb to the end user after all because without them they wouldn't be there.

poptones

July 5th, 2005, 02:33 AM

Very true.

And... you think they are going to get that message by you sending them money and hyping their movies?

Breaking the law doesn't harm them - even if you downloaded that blockbuster you watched last night, you still watched it. It's in your head, in your consciousness, and likely will be in your conversations in the near term. This just gives more hype to the machine and, ultimately, more dollars in their pockets. Where is the incentive for them to change?

TravisNewman

July 5th, 2005, 03:15 AM

The MPAA and RIAA is a bunch of rich uptite communist tofu fartin' fairies </Larry the Cable Guy>

Communist? There's nothing communist about them. They're ALL capitalist. I know you're quoting Larry the Cable Guy, and perhaps he doesn't know what he's talking about, but really, communism and capitalism are quite opposite.

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 03:48 AM

It may be a joke that we live in a "free economy" but one freedom we all very much have is whether or not to support the MPAA with our disposable income.

Here's another freedom that you have, if you are man enough to take it. You are free to refuse to make sacrifices. If it's encrypted, crack it. If it's got some kind of anti-copying tech, override it. Why should I inconvenience myself to make some ineffectual gesture? Am I Hercules, to offer Atlas a break by letting the weight of the world rest on my shoulders?

I just got off the phone with God. She says, "Take what you want, and pay for it."

poptones

July 5th, 2005, 07:05 PM

You are free to refuse to make sacrifices. If it's encrypted, crack it. If it's got some kind of anti-copying tech, override it. Why should I inconvenience myself to make some ineffectual gesture? Am I Hercules, to offer Atlas a break by letting the weight of the world rest on my shoulders?

So I take it you are not partial to the GPL. Or are your rules not allowed to folks like Bill Gates and George Lucas? If you are allowed to just take what you want, why should they not be as well?

It's really simple. When a five year old is acting like a selfish brat with some favorite toy, you let him act like a brat and you stand back and watch while the other kids ostracize him. You don't teach him the "value" of sharing by grabbing the toy from his hands just because you're bigger and stronger and can get away with it.

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 07:12 PM

So I take it you are not partial to the GPL.

I don't care one way or the other about the GPL. I abide by its terms out of courtesy, and nothing more.

It's really simple. When a five year old is acting like a selfish brat with some favorite toy, you let him act like a brat and you ostracize him. You don't teach him the "value" of sharing by grabbing the toy from his hands just because you're bigger and stronger and can get away with it.

The MPAA is not a five-year-old brat.

When you boycott an industry group for telling you what you can and cannot do with the products you have purchased, you are still acknowledging that they have the right to tell you how to use your DVDs. By accepting the false choice the MPAA offers: "Let us tell you what to do or don't buy from us", you are giving them the right to set the rules.

I do not give them this right. I buy what I want, and I do what I want with what I have bought, because I own it.

txgeek

July 5th, 2005, 07:36 PM

Well...there is this...but its not for things like Ubuntu:

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp

Can I get a copy of LinDVD?
LinDVD, InterVideo's Linux software DVD player, is currently available only to manufacturers for evaluation and integration.

Sigma Designs, Inc., a recognized leader in digital video solutions, announced today that it will add Linux support to its new REALmagic® NetStream™ 2000 card and EM8400 progressive MPEG-2/DVD decoder chip. (February 2000)

So to watch that DVD you legally bought and paid for you will need to buy a new computer, a new video card that was supposed to materialize in 2000 or, if you can find one, a new DVD drive with the OEM version of the Linux software.

N'Jal

July 5th, 2005, 08:08 PM

Big companies's rarly want to support linux.
That's ****.
We chose to live with that.

We could always go back to windows, it's our choice.

poptones

July 5th, 2005, 08:14 PM

When you boycott an industry group for telling you what you can and cannot do with the products you have purchased, you are still acknowledging that they have the right to tell you how to use your DVDs. By accepting the false choice the MPAA offers: "Let us tell you what to do or don't buy from us", you are giving them the right to set the rules.

Wrong. The rules are already established. And if you "already bought and paid for it" then you have already rewarded their bad behavior. A boycott means you don't pay them and you don't buy it, not you take it from them anyway and just don't pay.

I am not about to call this "stealing" but it IS a disincentive to everyone. It rewards the offender, it gives you zero incentive to change the system (because you think the rules don't apply to you anyway) and it gives society no incentive to change either, because you are neither making a point nor a sacrifice.

You are essentially making yourself a non entity - fine, ok, that may be what you want but that also means you have zero rights. You have no right to protection under those laws you put yourself beyond, and you have no right to grievance when someone steps on you the same way.

There are plenty of good players out there. Paramount, last I knew, still wasn't encrypting any of their disks. Virtually none of the smaller distributors use it, indie film makers want to be seen, and indie bands want to be heard. If you "just take what you want" then they don't get to eat either - and they are not the ones acting like spoiled brats.

Kimm

July 5th, 2005, 08:19 PM

Isn't InterVideo a PC software company?
Yes. InterVideo is best known as a software company that makes DVD and video software for PCs. Tens of millions of people have InterVideo software on their computers.

I hate it when people refer to only Windows computers as PC's...

poofyhairguy

July 5th, 2005, 08:28 PM

So I take it you are not partial to the GPL. Or are your rules not allowed to folks like Bill Gates and George Lucas? If you are allowed to just take what you want, why should they not be as well?

They can break the rules too. Its fine with me if they want to disrespect license like I do. The difference is that I do it in my home at a small scale, so the risk of lawsuit is small. If Billy tried to put some GPL stuff in a product of his, it would be noticed and he would be taken to court for it.

Everyone has the right to break the law (till we have chips in our heads that kill us if we do). Just not everyone gets punished the same for it. And thats fairness in an unfair world.

Breaking the law doesn't harm them - even if you downloaded that blockbuster you watched last night, you still watched it. It's in your head, in your consciousness, and likely will be in your conversations in the near term. This just gives more hype to the machine and, ultimately, more dollars in their pockets. Where is the incentive for them to change?

Well...as far as consumer pressure goes...they have little incentive to change. But they never would. Even if EVERY SINGLE LINUX USER boycotted their stuff we wouldn't make a dent. Boycotts don't work in the modern era. There is only one thing that does- using the holes in the system to your advantage just like they do. I could buy $100 worth of movies then give $100 to my senator with a "don't let the slimey liberals in Holloywood have their way" attached (note: I am not against Liberals, but I live in Texas and that statement is worth at least another $100 in action to the conservative politicians around here) and the would do MUCH more good than not buying $100 worth of movies in the first place.

We can't beat them in the economic system. If we want to win...we got to buy more senators then them. Currently the political climate in my home nation (Republicans controling almost everything) is very bad for them- most Hollywood money and support goes to the Democrats. I believe that THAT is why the broadcast flag died. And why they can't get a harsher DMCA. And why they have turned to more rhetoric and less "writing our own laws" in recent years.

Maybe when (if) the Democrats get back in power, they will have more sway again. And a that point I plan to spend money to "donate" to senators and pay high school children to call their offices during the day until their staff can't do anything else but hear my bitching....

Refuse to support the offenders and you change the system. Anything else is just more manna in the mouths of the kings.

Well...last year my system of Netflix + DVD burned kept them from getting my money. I might have marketed for them....but at the same time I also marketed how to get their products without paying. Now I don't watch as much TV so the Netflix wasn't worth the price...but they got no money from me and I got what they wanted from them. Sounds like the best case scenario for me....why not take advantage of it?

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 08:54 PM

You are essentially making yourself a non entity - fine, ok, that may be what you want but that also means you have zero rights.

As far as society is concerned, I am a non-entity with no rights. Outside of philosophical debates, you only have rights if you can persuade or force others to recognise them. Seeking redress through legal means only works for those who can afford to spend years in court.

As far as the indie studios and indie bands are concerned: whether or not they eat isn't my problem. I will continue to buy what I want and use it as I deem fit. If the Man notices little old me and tries to make an example of me, I'll fight. But, in the meantime, I stongly doubt that boycotts are going to help.

fisheromen1031

July 5th, 2005, 09:23 PM

Stormy Eyes, thanks for that link earlier. It turned out to be very useful.

For other USA peeps out there, there appears to be a bill in congress at the moment related to copy-writtened CDs, encrypted DVDs, and other fair use of media you have rightfully obtained. Go here (https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?JServSessionIdr006=31kh7z42c1.app13b&page=UserAction&cmd=display&id=115) and show your support for reforming legislation that infringes your fair use.

For those of you who don't give a flip about regulations and are going to do as you please, you could do the rest of us a favor and support the possiblity of some good legislation.

thanks for everyone who has voiced their thoughts!

-fisher

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 09:38 PM

For those of you who don't give a flip about regulations and are going to do as you please, you could do the rest of us a favor and support the possiblity of some good legislation.

I did a few weeks ago. I might not care much for the system, being what the sociologists used to call 'inner-directed', but I know that not everybody is able or willing to direct themselves. If I can persuade a Senator or a Congresscritter to support good legislation to improve the system with a well-written letter or two, I don't mind spending a couple bucks on stamps.

gil-galad

July 5th, 2005, 11:35 PM

poptones

July 6th, 2005, 01:24 AM

The problem is not (directly) the MPAA. The problem is recent US Law (The DMCA) which prevents breaking anti-piracy protections even for educational and reverse-engineering purposes.

And why do we have these laws? Because LOBBYISTS representing the interests of Sony and Microsoft and Disney and Warner essentially "bought" them.

and where did they get that money?

Every dollar you send to Sony is one dollar toward the erosion of the "rights" you claim as your own. With every CD and movie and Playstation purchase you subsidize the erosion of your own culture.

Sye d'Burns

July 6th, 2005, 01:35 AM

And why do we have these laws? Because LOBBYISTS representing the interests of Sony and Microsoft and Disney and Warner essentially "bought" them.

and where did they get that money?

Every dollar you send to Sony is one dollar toward the erosion of the "rights" you claim as your own. With every CD and movie and Playstation purchase you subsidize the erosion of your own culture.

Sad but true.

Stormy Eyes

July 6th, 2005, 01:49 AM

And why do we have these laws? Because LOBBYISTS representing the interests of Sony and Microsoft and Disney and Warner essentially "bought" them.

Would the lobbyists have anybody to lobby if people like you, who trust in law and society, did not tolerate the State? The government exists only because we allow it to. By acknowledging the government, we empower it. If enough people ignore the government (or boycott it, if you prefer), the government becomes impotent.

You're still playing into Sony's hands by trying to boycott them because you don't like the rules they set. You can't refuse to play because you don't like the rules. If you want to win, you have to play the game, and play it on your terms and by your rules.

Don't protest the encryption. Crack it!
Don't protest the law. Disobey it!
Don't fear the State. Ignore it!

Government, like God, only matters because we let it matter.

MetalMusicAddict

July 6th, 2005, 02:19 AM

Remember being little and having a clear picture of what was supposed to be right and wrong? What it ment to be an adult. I have found out that as I've become a "adult" (kids and all) that adults are not adults.

Why cant rules be made that dont F everyone? (rhetorical question) :neutral:

gil-galad

July 6th, 2005, 02:20 AM

And why do we have these laws? Because LOBBYISTS representing the interests of Sony and Microsoft and Disney and Warner essentially "bought" them.

No, we have these laws because congress passed them. Unless you can show me proof that the MPAA directly bought the vote, I am not going to buy it. I don't feel the need to blame companies for laws. I would rather blame the government that actually passed them.

There is nothing inherently wrong with encrypting movies. If I wanted to make a movie and encrypt it, I should be able to. Not allowing people to break it is what is wrong. The movie companies encrypt their dvds. Well and good. The government is what is not allowing me to break the encryption. Therefore the government should be boycotted, not the MPAA.

Stormy Eyes

July 6th, 2005, 03:21 AM

Why cant rules be made that dont F everyone? (rhetorical question) :neutral:

Those who make the rules have the most to gain from taking privileges for themselves and f---ing everybody else. Do you know what democracy really is? It's the war of all against all that Thomas Hobbes wrote about in Leviathan entombed in formalities.

MetalMusicAddict

July 6th, 2005, 03:54 AM

Why cant rules be made that dont F everyone? (rhetorical question) :neutral:

From Websters:
1 a : of, relating to, or concerned with rhetoric b : employed for rhetorical effect; especially : asked merely for effect with no answer expected <a rhetorical question>

I know the reasons for the way the world is. Hence my "Adults arent Adults" statement which you omitted. ;) It was light-hearted and I feel people need to relax a little. Its just computers and there will ALWAYS be something for someone to bitch about.

And before you mention its not just about computers the thread is supposed to be about playing DVDs on Linux how the MPAA sees it. If people here feel a need to address the great injustices of the world maybe we need to start its own thread or go to a appropriate fourm. :) Its gone off topic.

poptones

July 6th, 2005, 04:31 AM

No, we have these laws because congress passed them.

And why did congress pass them?

Honestly, this isn't an argument that can be won with idealist semantics. No matter how you go about it, the ultimate responsibility for this "injustice" is upon each of us as individuals to correct. Making excuses about the man keeping you down while oyu go on trading your labor for something so worthless as bits in ether isn't going to change a thing.

I would rather blame the government that actually passed them.

Blame is the refuge of the weak.

TravisNewman

July 6th, 2005, 04:33 AM

I was just talking to my wife about this, we came to the conclusion that it being in our hands as citizens is a moot point. People don't want to know about this. They just want things that work. They'll get it no matter what. Trying to get people to change their views is nearly impossible, which is why, I think, an all-out boycott would never gain nearly enough participants to make the MPAA bat an eyelash.

nocturn

July 6th, 2005, 07:54 AM

that's part of the point. Part of what I was trying to point out is that MPAA is incorrect in saying that such things are available for Linux desktop users.

That's true. And, I have this policy of wanting GPL'ed apps :-)
Lucky for me, I'm not in the USA (so Mplayer/Xmms/* are legal here)

nocturn

July 6th, 2005, 07:58 AM

I hate it when people refer to only Windows computers as PC's...

Me too, specially when it was Apple who used the term Personal Computer first...

nocturn

July 6th, 2005, 08:03 AM

Remember being little and having a clear picture of what was supposed to be right and wrong?

I still do. That's why I support Free Software.
Granted, it is more of a fight then I bargained for as a child, but the morals are still intact.

poptones

July 6th, 2005, 05:50 PM

I was just talking to my wife about this, we came to the conclusion that it being in our hands as citizens is a moot point. People don't want to know about this. They just want things that work. They'll get it no matter what.

That's the inevitable excuse, though. Everyone (not the strawman everyone, the metaphorical one :) ) says "no one else will do it so I won't either because it doesn't matter."

But it does. I am how I am, and there are others in this community because they see I am serious about it and they agree. it is only impossible if everyone chooses excuses instead of action.

I am not even saying "all out boycott." I support artists via Magnatune and even international orders when I can get them (for example, I actually BOUGHT most of the CDs available from the Russian pop artist Linda). Supporting good players doesn't mean "all out boycott" it just means NOT supporting the worse offenders - like Sony, Disney, Warner, etc. These people "own our culture" because WE allow them to be a part in it. But this is not life and death stuff they are offering - it is not even food or water. It is entertainment - diversion. They need us far more than we need them. I have not seen an ABC program in nearly a decade, I can honestly say I don't miss a thing.

aragorn2909

July 6th, 2005, 09:07 PM

TravisNewman

July 6th, 2005, 11:52 PM

poptones, what I'm saying is, even if you got all the people who DO say "nobody else is doing it so I won't either" to actually do it and boycott or whatever, you'd still come up quite short from what you need to make any difference. Most people have no opinion at all. PETA tried to get the world to see what happens in factory farms. Many people have said, once seeing it, that if everyone knew what happened inside of factory farms, the factory farms would change. PETA is a pretty big organization, but they were still unable to get anyone to even watch their videos who wouldn't have already. That's because people don't care, for the most part, especially western countries and especially the US. We have an "I want what I want when I want it, regardless of what it takes" attitude.

fisheromen1031

July 7th, 2005, 12:42 AM

Some of the points being expressed about the philisophically "we can't make a difference" is a bit of a null point on this issue. How can I say that? If you will notice the link I posted earlier, you will see that voices are already being heard AND making a difference. Legislators ARE working to uphold your right to use media you bought/obtained fairly. I'm sorry but the ball is rolling on this issue and we have some momentum. Energy is better spent taking a FEW moments to show your support of your rights rather than making excuses that it won't matter anyway. It is already showing fruits so take off the philsopical blindfold.

poptones

July 7th, 2005, 02:21 AM

Humbly, poptones, removing yourself from the "system" does nothing but marginalize, and turn you into a non-entity. IMHO, better to rage against the machine from within, than to sit idly by on the fringe.

Wow did you misinterpret me! Stop trying to interpret and read what I said without the translation. TRADING with fair players is not "removing myself from the system." Sending money to artists via Magnatune is not removing myself rom the system. Seeking out LEGIT copies of russian music is most definitely not removing myself from the system - if you ever tried to find russian CDs that WEREN'T bootlegs you'd know this quite well.

But sending money to Sony IS a joke. What are you going to do, stand in line at wal-mart and complain to the cashier about your loss fo rights? Sending money to Boucher and notes to your congressman are good (you should see my "sent" box - and believe me, the stuff I send ain't just click-and-run forms at the EFF) but sending your money to ANY of the bad players is just shooting yourself in the foot.

The teenager who pesters you and pesters you and drives you mad over the fifty dollars she needs to go to the mall doesn't CARE that she gets the lecture while you open the wallet when she still gets the fifty bucks. You think the guys RENTING mansions around LA for $10,000 a month care that you hate them? You think some promoter goes to bed at night and cries on the shoulder of his teenage trophy because of the bad rap you're giving him?

Removing MONEY from that system is the only way. Legislation? You cannot legislate fairness any more than you can legislate morality.

aragorn2909

July 7th, 2005, 05:24 AM

First, a correction. Perhaps I should have used the term "mainstream" instead of "system" in my previous post, I'll edit that later. On to business, and without translation.

TRADING with fair players is not "removing myself from the system." Sending money to artists via Magnatune is not removing myself rom the system. Seeking out LEGIT copies of russian music is most definitely not removing myself from the system
Perhaps not, but when this is what you restrict yourself to (Magnatune and Russian pop as your examples), you most certainly have removed yourself from the mainstream, thus marginalizing yourself and your opinion.

But sending money to Sony IS a joke. What are you going to do, stand in line at wal-mart and complain to the cashier about your loss fo rights? ... but sending your money to ANY of the bad players is just shooting yourself in the foot.
First off, I do not shop at Wal-Mart. Secondly handing over MY money to Sony, or whoever, may be a joke to you, but if they have something I want, I'll pay for it. Am I shooting myself in the foot because I am a consumer? Who do you think Sony is more likely to listen to when it comes down to it? 1000 paying Sony customers, or 1000 paying Magnatune customers? I'll take my chances raging from within.

Removing MONEY from that system is the only way.
This is a boycott. No more, no less, and I have to agree with Poofy here, boycotts don't work in the modern era. You marginalize yourself from the mainstream just by advocating it.

You cannot legislate fairness
Thats awfully cynical, and I for one don't buy it.

poptones

July 7th, 2005, 08:49 AM

Perhaps not, but when this is what you restrict yourself to (Magnatune and Russian pop as your examples), you most certainly have removed yourself from the mainstream

Linda is basically the Madonna of Russia. In fact Madonna's "Frozen" video was so similar to Linda's "Vorona" video it brought a lawsuit. You might have never heard of some of the music I enjoy, but the world does not end at the borders of English speaking countries. In fact, there's a lot more who don't than who do.

Do you think Sony doesn't cater to them as well?

I find it hilarious that you really think Sony is going to listen to "paying customers" complaining about "fairness" while they keep reaching for that wallet. And I find it really sad that so many just accept the whole "consumers" label. Media is not something that is "consumed" - there is an infinite supply of it... no matter how "marginalized" some might consider it.

Boycotts don't work? Sure seemed to do a number on the bus system in Montgomery. I wasn't around for that one but I was for the grape boycott of the 80's that one also worked. And when the gay bars stopped stocking Coors those folks sure took notice - lots of money spent on leisure in that community, and they weren't getting a dime of it. It also wasn't long ago at all a bunch of coal miners shut down a country and started a movement of strikes and boycotts that wrapped around the world - and led to the fall of an entire system of government. I wonder how many told Lech Walesa boycotts and strikes wouldn't work? That he was just "marginilizing himself" by "removing himself from the mainstream?"

MetalMusicAddict

July 7th, 2005, 11:14 AM

Sorry guys but this has gone way off topic and honestly where it has gone has been beat to death on this and other fourms.

"Linux DVD playing and the MPAA"

zero0w

September 16th, 2005, 06:38 PM

vayu

September 16th, 2005, 07:07 PM

So I take it you are not partial to the GPL. Or are your rules not allowed to folks like Bill Gates and George Lucas? If you are allowed to just take what you want, why should they not be as well?

You're talking about principles, not reality. It's a matter of scale. These huge corporations work to control everything, they are the biggest of thieves. They basically write the laws any way they want without regard to morality. The masses have comparatively little power in the legal realm and will never be able to come to justice unless they become as organized and large as they are. Until then the only defense is by being wiley and running between the giants legs changing direction faster than he can.

poofyhairguy

September 16th, 2005, 07:24 PM

Isn't DMCA only effective in US so far? Why does the Ubuntu Wiki suggest in most countries?

-zero0w

Because the U.S. has succeeded in pushing its copyright law to most of the earth.

zero0w

September 16th, 2005, 08:34 PM

Because the U.S. has succeeded in pushing its copyright law to most of the earth.

Has she? I mean when DVD Jon was acquitted (twice), wasn't this a sign of failure to enforce this non-existent notion of 'protection circumvention' in Europe already?

As I rememeber, US is still working to bring DMCA to Canada thru CAFTA.

In particular, the article linked at CNET (http://news.com.com/Copyright+lobbyists+strike+again/2010-1071_3-5811025.html?part=rss&tag=5811025&subj=news) clearly indicated that "many sizable nations never signed the WIPO treaty: Canada, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Australia and many others abstained. And even some participating nations have been less than aggressive, with Japan concluding the treaty permits a less-regulatory approach."

So, that's why I questioned: if WIPO treaty were not even signed, how could this IP-related law be exported to non-US countries without notice? And last time I heard, modchip was upheld as legal in Australia to allow gamers to play parallel import games from US.

If DMCA is the only issue at hand (i.e. no copyright / patent issue involved), then how is US-law effective in non-US jurisdiction? This is something that really need clarification. Maybe some countries will draft their own version of DMCA, but until they do that, can we say in most countries libdvdcss is illegal, as suggested in the Ubuntu Wiki?

poofyhairguy

September 16th, 2005, 08:39 PM

Maybe some countries will draft their own version of DMCA, but until they do that, can we say in most countries libdvdcss is illegal, as suggested in the Ubuntu Wiki?

I guess you are right....but what else would you say? "Some?" "Many?"

Or the truth:

"Enough important ones that Ubuntu will not include this any time in the near future."

zero0w

September 16th, 2005, 08:59 PM

I guess you are right....but what else would you say? "Some?" "Many?"

Or the truth:

"Enough important ones that Ubuntu will not include this any time in the near future."

If you ask me, I suggest the Wiki should be adjusted to a more specific description:

"Currently there is no legal way to play DVD's on Linux using free packages in countries with DMCA-style regulation which forbids protection circumvention."

As someone from UK said in another thread, up to this moment reverse-engineering is completely legal in UK for interoperability purpose (and DeCSS belongs to an act of reverse engineering I think):

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=44950

Although I understand libdvdcss will not be included because US comprises a large population of Linux users, I still think "most countries" is a bit off and scaring users who would otherwise be able to use it legally should they understand more about this. Maybe the Wiki could point to this discussion thread so that they know more to decide the legal risk (or lack of) in using the libdvdcss library.

BWF89

September 16th, 2005, 09:14 PM

Why can't Linux legally support playing DVD's? Couldn't commercial distros like RedHat and SuSE pay the MPAA for the rights to legally read incripted DVD's like Windows and MacOS do?

aysiu

September 16th, 2005, 09:21 PM

Why can't Linux legally support playing DVD's? Couldn't commercial distros like RedHat and SuSE pay the MPAA for the rights to legally read incripted DVD's like Windows and MacOS do? Linspire does, apparently. (http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:ILaCjIoXnWoJ:sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php%3Fthread_id%3D8143702%26forum_id%3D7131+ linspire+libdvdcss&hl=en&start=1&lr=lang_en)

zero0w

September 16th, 2005, 09:32 PM

Why can't Linux legally support playing DVD's? Couldn't commercial distros like RedHat and SuSE pay the MPAA for the rights to legally read incripted DVD's like Windows and MacOS do?

It's not that DVD player is illegal, it's DeCSS which is illegal under DMCA in US.

As for what commercial DVD player is available on Linux, you have to ask MPAA because it is their FAQ said MANY such players are available without clarification of where to get them.

I heard once there was a PowerDVD player for Linux (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/29/140217&tid=165), but I don't think it's available for public purchase. So the thread starter has a point that such alternatives have not been available to general Linux users at all. And I don't think Red Hat is interested to bundle a commercial DVD player; Novell / SuSE may be interested at it if there is demand, but this is not a general solution to users of other distro. Again this is an issue mostly affecting users in countries with DMCA-style regulation, where most of Europe and Asia probably not affected, at least not yet.