ripping CDs is legal, ripping DVDs is not?

[blusubaru]

freeradical wrote: There are "CD's" that do not conform to the original CD standard, and are actually impossible to play on my iMac; it just spits them out after I put one in.

Those CD's would not be a true Audio CD then. They could also be scratched or a version of an Enhanced Audio CD that is not Mac friendly. Maybe a drive issue too.

The main reason that there are no issues with copying/ripping CD's is because the format doesn't allow for any copy protection. Sure, there are some bits you can change around to try to prevent a copy of a copy (duplication). Those are easy to get around. Redbook Audio CD's are a standard format that has to be able to be played on even the dumbest of CD players. These CD players (some probably still from the late 80's) will have no way to read an Audio CD with any type of copy protection. That doesn't directly make it legal, just possible with no consequences.

At least with DVD's, there has been some form of copy protection from the start - Macrovision. The thing that scrambles your picture when you try to record a DVD to VHS. The "computer" on DVD players is smarter than that of CD players and allows for multiple forms of copy protected material to be played back without issue.

[silvarios]

I wrote an article or two or three for Low End Mac dealing with such issues of DMCA restrictions and circumvention. I'm aware of the consequences, but I have so far been happy to completely ignore copyright restrictions when it comes to the restriction of "fair use". I've ripped plenty of DVDs for personal use. In fact, I've quite publicly discussed the fact that I "break the law" every time I play a DVD on my Linux systems.

Come get me.

C'est la vie.

Nathan

[motopsyco]

I'm old fashion, rip nothing but farts.

[Doc]

blusubaru wrote:
At least with DVD's, there has been some form of copy protection from the start - Macrovision. The thing that scrambles your picture when you try to record a DVD to VHS.

That doesn't count. It doesn't prevent access. It just makes the image look lousy when using analog outputs or recording to analog devices. It's also implemented at the player-level. If you have a player that doesn't respect Macrovision protection or which digitally enhances the image back to something watchable, Macrovision is no protection at all.

The technological control measure that gets a movie on DVD covered by the DMCA is CSS.

There's a separate provision of the DMCA for Macrovision which covers analog devices (VHS). (And if you think about it, this tells you exactly who writes our laws these days.)

[blusubaru]

I'm aware of CSS, my point was Macrovision was there from the start of DVD's. As long as DVDs have been around, copy protection was there to some extent. Macrovision was even being used towards the end of the VHS era.
Macrovision has other options of copy protection similar to CSS in that they scramble the content (RipGuard). They also have a CD-Rom copy protection scheme called SafeDisc (now bought out and being discontinued).

[RAMd®d]

There is no exception in the DMCA for fair use.

No, but if this ever became a court case involving home users archiving legally purchased DVDs, I bet there would be.

[JoeH]

Doc wrote:
CDs that conform to spec' are not protected media. Copying a lawfully purchased CD for non-commercial purposes is at least arguably fair use.

DVDs have content/access-controls on them, which bring them under the purview of the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions.

The DMCA makes the possession, distribution or use of any device that can be used for circumvention unlawful.

There is no exception in the DMCA for fair use.

That last statement is not quite completely true. The Library of Congress working with the Register of Copyrights reviews requests for classes of exemptions from the prohibition on circumventing DMCA protected copy protection. The reviews are done annually as I recall, and the exemptions are granted for some time period into the future or denied. They apply to classes of copy protection circumvention determined to be necessary for a variety of reasons. It can also be revoked at a future review. The exemptions are published after the review, I would have to do a bit of research to find out where.

[Doc]

JoeH wrote:
[quote=Doc]
CDs that conform to spec' are not protected media. Copying a lawfully purchased CD for non-commercial purposes is at least arguably fair use.

DVDs have content/access-controls on them, which bring them under the purview of the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions.

The DMCA makes the possession, distribution or use of any device that can be used for circumvention unlawful.

There is no exception in the DMCA for fair use.

That last statement is not quite completely true. The Library of Congress working with the Register of Copyrights reviews requests for classes of exemptions from the prohibition on circumventing DMCA protected copy protection. The reviews are done annually as I recall, and the exemptions are granted for some time period into the future or denied. They apply to classes of copy protection circumvention determined to be necessary for a variety of reasons. It can also be revoked at a future review. The exemptions are published after the review, I would have to do a bit of research to find out where.
Such exemptions are ephemeral. They last no more than 3 years and are mostly meaningless tokens.

Reviews are every 3 years and exemptions expire if nobody petitions the Librarian of Congress for an extension or if the Copyright Office feels that it's no longer necessary or if they just don't give a damn.

Previous exemptions are published here:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/