I Need a Supporter!

The Origonal Head Hunter · Post by **The Origonal Head Hunter** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:43 pm

AaronAMV wrote:
LivingFlame wrote:h4x.
I already know that! I just want the hack. =/

set your email address in your profile to pink_donutslover@hotmail.co.uk and it will work.

AaronAMV · Post by **AaronAMV** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:48 pm

Filthy lies!

8bit_samurai · Post by **8bit_samurai** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:56 pm

I always thought it was hosatchel :/

AaronAMV · Post by **AaronAMV** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:01 pm

Youtube.
I feel special.

LivingFlame · Post by **LivingFlame** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:03 pm

h4x! b7 nao!

Really though, I'm surprised this thread is still alive. I guess it's because I went and started a temporary discussion.

AaronAMV · Post by **AaronAMV** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:10 pm

Youtube,youtube, and youtube. Man, this is fun.
But anyway, so I'm not just making a pointless comment...

Eh, this topic really should be locked soon, but yeah, it was nice to do some random talking about nothing. Well, not really about "nothing" because it evolved into the DVD discussion, but yeah.

dragontamer5788 · Post by **dragontamer5788** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:30 pm

the warning on discs down under states "avoiding the copy protection on this disc is illegal" it therefore doesn't matter how you get around it.
But our laws also allow us to use up to 10% of anothers work for non profit means and not get nabbed. <_>

Fortunately: the MPAA does not have the legal authority to dicate US Law :-p

And actually, no. There is no strict % to the "Fair Use" clause that I know of. If someone wishes to correct me, please give me a Supreme Court Case and/or the section in the US Code please.

As far as I understand Fair Use... Non-Profit helps your case, but it doesn't solidify it. From the US Code Title 17 Section 107:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

BTW: If you really want to cover your ***, talk to a lawyer who knows the precise safe zone you can walk. I'm not a lawyer... and I have no formal training in law at all. Etc. Etc. I just happen to look up Copyright Law and like to get involved in these kinds of debates...

moonie211 wrote:Yeah, like Aut said, any way you do it would still be illegal.
You would still be duplicating a copyrighted source without permision from the copyright holders.
Most music video editors don't have anything to worry about though unless they are going around selling their videos or something.

Duplicating Copyrighted Sources is legal. In Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios 1984, the US Supreme Court ruled that copying copyrighted works for the purpose of time-shifting is considered Fair Use and therefore is not a violation of copyright. IE: It is legal to take a copy of a copyrighted work on television and view it later.

Distributing the said copies however is very clearly illegal.

Now, the DMCA specifically says and I quote (US Code Title 17, 1201 Paragraph 1):

No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.

And further (US Code Title 17, 1201 Paragraph 3):

(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
(B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

The DVD DRM does not prevent me from plugging a Video Cable into a PC, TiVo, VCR Player, or Television. And I mean this in the literal sense... there is nothing that stops you from getting a DVD cable and plugging it into a different Television or PC or something. Therefore, it does not "effectively control access to a work".

Therefore: it is illegal to use a DRM Cracker as per 1201 Paragraph 1, but it is legal to use a Video Capture card.

I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, it is legal...

dragontamer5788 · Post by **dragontamer5788** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:35 pm

Oh, yeah, and... Youtube? Is it really that hard?

LivingFlame · Post by **LivingFlame** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:39 pm

dragontamer5788 wrote:And further (US Code Title 17, 1201 Paragraph 3):
(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
(B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
The DVD DRM does not prevent me from plugging a Video Cable into a PC, TiVo, VCR Player, or Television. And I mean this in the literal sense... there is nothing that stops you from getting a DVD cable and plugging it into a different Television or PC or something. Therefore, it does not "effectively control access to a work".

Therefore: it is illegal to use a DRM Cracker as per 1201 Paragraph 1, but it is legal to use a Video Capture card.

I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, it is legal...

That bolded part is the part that would seemingly make use of a capture card to get around (i.e. circumvent/avoid/bypass) DRM illegal.

And no, youtube is not really that hard.

Kitsuner · Post by **Kitsuner** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:45 pm

LivingFlame wrote:And no, youtube is not really that hard.

But I am.