This Will Be An Interesting Trial.

Bigdog · Post by **Bigdog** » Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:46 am

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Hollywood ... 21001.html

This could have an impact on where they go for the question of format shifting.

letitrip · Post by **letitrip** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:57 pm

Actually what's interesting is the law that they site as being violated by the software (the DMCA) is actually the exact law that makes this legal. The changes to Fair Use as it relates to "format shit" are a part of the DMCA and clearly make it legal to format shift for purposes of personal use. Once again copyright holders sit on their hands instead of proactively addressing consumer demand and then cry like little babies when someone else comes to market with a tool that meets the demand.

The RIAA and MPAA have missed something big here. Wouldn't you rather encourage folks to use products from legitimate manufacturers like Real where you can work with the company to make sure sufficient DRM is in place than force consumers to go to other less scrupulous options where you have no ability to affect how the software works? It amazes me how these folks just keep missing the boat on this stuff.

Bigdog · Post by **Bigdog** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:52 pm

Our format shift is not for private use. It's considered commercial because we are making money from it.

letitrip · Post by **letitrip** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:26 pm

Bigdog wrote:Our format shift is not for private use. It's considered commercial because we are making money from it.

Note the term is Personal Use, not private use, that is a significant distinction and one that would be at the heart of any lawsuit filed against KJ's for format shift. Regardless, I wasn't talking about us anyway, I was talking about the subject of the article you posted. Consumers using Real software to make personal backup copies of their DVD's. Fits right in with personal use and therefore protected under Fair Use clauses in the DMCA.

Bigdog · Post by **Bigdog** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:08 pm

Personal use means for my usage. (Not making money with it.) Whenever we play them for bars it's no longer personal. It's Commercial. Not private.

The backup question will apply to us using stuff that belongs to other people without permission. Whether DVD CDG CD

letitrip · Post by **letitrip** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:02 pm

Well the manufacturers echo the stance you mentioned here BD, however, folks on the other side of the fence, which includes KJ's, DJ's and Digital broadcasters feel differently. Private use and personal use are not equivalent. The argument that is made to support the right to format shift for public performance is that personal use means "use by you personally" as opposed to use by somone else. Pulbic Performers contend that since they are using the copy themselves it meets the intent of the personal use clause because you have not given it to somone else to use.

Now who's right in this? Well only a court can decide that, after all the judicial system is responsible for interpreting the laws. The fact is this has never come to trial. My personal feeling is that neither side really wants a court to decide because both sides stand to lose significantly if the ruling doesn't go their way. Plus it would be very expensive to battle it out. So what we're left with is two camps giving contradictory views on what the law really means, and you and I are stuck in the middle with no real answers.

mnementh · Post by **mnementh** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 5:39 am

Over here, it's NOT illegal to make a backup of anything you buy, as long as it's for personal use.

However, it has been mooted that format shifting, i.e. from CDG to MP3+G would be against the Law.

However, I believe (and I might very well be wrong), that Sunfly and the rest of the UK producers turn a blind eye as long as the original disc can be produced.

Makes sense to me and encourages purchase of an original, rather than a copy, IMHO.

Sandy