Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government Data Storage Media Movies News Technology

In Response To Restraining Order, Real Networks Pulls RealDVD 193

Posted by timothy
from the corporate-masochism dept.
eldavojohn writes "RealNetworks' product that allows one to copy a DVD containing a movie has been pulled. You may recall us discussing RealDVD and its legal implications." According to the linked BBC report, "RealNetworks — the firm behind the software — has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software [sic]. Six major movie studios jointly sued the company on 30 September — the day the software was launched."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In Response To Restraining Order, Real Networks Pulls RealDVD

Comments Filter:
  • by JeanBaptiste (537955) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:26AM (#25285897)

    Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

    If there isn't, can I write one and get sued ? At least I'd get my name in the papers...

    • by Holmwood (899130) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:32AM (#25286009)

      There is other software -- DVD Decrypter was one popular piece of software. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Decrypter [wikipedia.org] ) In the US, it may or may not be illegal under the DMCA to use such programs to back up your own DVDs. The only controlling legal authority I'm aware of said that doing so was legal, provided it was for personal use, but that distributing software to make this possible was illegal.

      Go figure.

      • by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:52AM (#25286313)

        In the US, it may or may not be illegal under the DMCA to use such programs to back up your own DVDs.

        This is not an open question.

        The only controlling legal authority I'm aware of said that doing so was legal, provided it was for personal use, but that distributing software to make this possible was illegal.

        This is correct--and the controlling legal authority is not a case, but the DMCA itself. You cannot circumvent protection to gain "access" to a work, but you can circumvent protection for "use" of a work provided you gained access (i.e. purchased the work) legally.

        The problem being that you cannot "traffic in" tools designed to circumvent protection at all. So you likely can't buy, sell, or give away programs designed to help people take advantage of this subtle difference. You have to know how to circumvent the protection all by yourself.

        Ironically, the area of law where this is not clear is whether it is legal to teach someone how to circumvent protection "on their own." Likely the First Amendment would preclude such a sweeping definition of "traffic in," but there are no test cases on this that I'm aware of. Certainly more perplexing conclusions have been reached before...

        There is an obvious logical disconnect in allowing people under one section of the law to do certain things that the vast majority will be unable to do because of provisions in another section of the law. The rationale is that tools enabling DRM-circumventing "use" will naturally also enable DRM-circumventing "access," which is a no-no.

        Just one more good example of how copyright law is suppressing the usefulness technology. But because this is copyright rather than patent law, the "useful article" doctrine fails to apply.

        The foregoing is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer. However I am a law student and have made extensive study of the subject.

        • Correction (Score:4, Informative)

          by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @10:02AM (#25286489)

          Sorry, I wrote that too fast. "Useful article" doctrine is not the phrase I was looking for. The "substantial non-infringing use" analysis, which is a part of copyright law, is where circumvention devices might be exempt from the DMCA, under its own provisions.

          Please just ignore the second sentence of the second-to-last paragraph. I blame mornings.

          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward

            I blame your legal system if you live somewhere you actually need to add "The foregoing is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer" to a forum post to safeguard yourself against litigation.

        • by Sloppy (14984)

          but you can circumvent protection for "use" of a work provided you gained access (i.e. purchased the work) legally.

          What part of DMCA [cornell.edu] exempts that? I don't see anything in there about legally gained access. Is it one of the Librarian of Congress exemptions?

          • by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @10:34AM (#25287039)

            Fine, fine. Here we go. d^_^b

            1201(a)(1)(a) says, "No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title." (emphasis added)

            So circumvention for access is explicitly forbidden, except under the Library of Congress exemptions.

            1201(b) adds that "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof," that is primarily designed for, marketed for, or has limited use other than to circumvent protection.

            So, circumvention for access is forbidden, and trafficking in circumvetion tools is forbidden. Notice what is omitted here. Nowhere does the DMCA forbid circumvention for use. Thus it was that the Supreme Court observed in U.S. v. Elcom (the Dmitri Skylarov case, which I feel was wrongly decided for other reasons we needn't go into):

            Congress did not ban the act of circumventing the use restrictions. Instead, Congress banned only the trafficking in and marketing of devices primarily designed to circumvent the use restriction protective technologies. Congress did not prohibit the act of circumvention because it sought to preserve the fair use rights of persons who had lawfully acquired a work.

            There is no part of the DMCA that "exempts" circumvention for use--because there is no part of the DMCA that makes it illegal.

            • Not my morning.... (Score:3, Informative)

              by Alaren (682568)
              Also, the quote I gave is from the Northern District of California, not the Supreme Court. Sorry for the rampant errors in my posts this morning.
            • by cfulmer (3166)

              I think you may be parsing that incorrectly. If the technological measure "effectively controls access," then circumventing that measure is forbidden, regardless of the reason or purpose of circumvention. If the measure controls both access and use, then circumvention for any reason is a problem.

              • by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @11:23AM (#25287877)

                Well, look, you are free to suggest that Congress wrote this badly, but the quote I provided from U.S. v. Elcom cites directly to the congressional record. This isn't just some random law student's interpretation of a confusingly written law. This is how the DMCA was apparently intended to function, and how the courts have interpreted it to function (though, arguably, only in dicta).

                • by cfulmer (3166)

                  You're taking your quote out of context. In context, it's proceeded by a cite of Section 1201(b) and then "Unlike Section 1201(a), however, Congress did not . . ." So, it's clearly referring to Section 1201(b), not to the entire DMCA.

                  And, that is correct -- Section 1201(b) does not bar circumvention for use. But, Section *1201(a)* does that when the protective measure controls both access and use.

                  Anyway, Elcom was a district court decision in a criminal case. And, the part here only allowed the court to

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by fugue (4373)

              I love the phrases "Congress banned..." and "Congress did not prohibit...". Congress would be quite interested to hear that. Congress is made of people, after all, and they almost never have the tiniest clue as to how their laws will be interpreted by trained nit-pickers. The idea that they did any of this intentionally is farcical. A more realistic phrase would be something like "Due to a bizarre, completely unanticipated technicality in over-analysed legalese, we are not allowed to ..."

              This reminds

            • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

              by LordLucless (582312)
              "No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."

              That's awesome then. All we need to do is train monkeys in decryption techniques and we're set!
              • So wait... If I buy a device from you, and it already does this for me... then the device, and not a person, is circumventing the tech. measure. So, all I have to do to be legal in this is buy a device that already does this for me from somewhere where these laws to do not apply, use said device, and poof! The machine is doing the action of circumvention, not I. </tongue in cheek>
            • Congress did not prohibit the act of circumvention because it sought to preserve the fair use rights of persons who had lawfully acquired a work.

              If you believe this "intent", I have a bridge to sell you.

          • by Peter Simpson (112887) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @10:45AM (#25287267)

            Well, every time you use a licensed player to play a DVD, you (legally) circumvent or bypass the encryption (otherwise, you could not view the DVD you paid for)

            It comes down to the term "circumvent", which is defined in the DMCA as:

            "...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..."

            I call your attention to the phrase "descramble a scrambled work...without the authority of the copyright owner" in the above quote.

            Does viewing a DVD under Linux, for example, using a non-approved decrypter, constitute circumvention, or, have you, by virtue of your purchase of the DVD, received an implicit license from the copyright owner to view the content? Did you receive a license to view the content *only* on licensed playback devices? If so, where is that restriction listed on the media you purchased?

        • by CSMatt (1175471)

          Just one more good example of how copyright law is suppressing the usefulness technology. But because this is copyright rather than patent law, the "useful article" doctrine fails to apply.

          I'm not a lawyer or a law student, but it would seem to me that anti-circumvention (or rather, anti-circumvention-trafficking) laws have nothing to do with copyright, other than being written into a copyright bill.

          For example, if I distribute a copy of HandBrake in the United States, with libdvdcss2 (or whatever it uses) intact, I have violated this part of the DMCA, but I am not committing copyright infringement since HandBrake is under the GNU GPL. However, If I download a ripped DVD from the Internet wi

          • by Alaren (682568)

            I didn't say anything about infringement. You are correct that violating the DMCA is different than infringing on someone's copyright--for one thing, DMCA violation carries criminal penalties, while most run-of-the-mill infringement does not.

            However...

            ...it would seem to me that anti-circumvention (or rather, anti-circumvention-trafficking) laws have nothing to do with copyright...

            Some laws, maybe. But we're talking about the Digital Millenium COPYRIGHT Act. It is not merely "written into a copyright b

        • by harl (84412)

          There is an obvious logical disconnect in allowing people under one section of the law to do certain things that the vast majority will be unable to do because of provisions in another section of the law. The rationale is that tools enabling DRM-circumventing "use" will naturally also enable DRM-circumventing "access," which is a no-no.

          From the bill's author's stand point there is no logical disconnect. You can't outlaw fair-use. That would not fly and might even face constitutional challenge. The DMCA is a rather elegant solution. Everyone still has their fair-use rights but effectively no one can make use of them.

          This is a perfect example of the evil of the law. People weren't protesting it because they wanted free stuff they were protesting it because it de facto outlaws fair-use.

          • by queequeg1 (180099)

            Not that I'm advocating this, but why can't you outlaw fair use? The doctrine of "fair use" was a part of the US common law until it was incorporated into the Copyright Act of 1976 (since we're talking about the DMCA I am focusing on US law). The only thing that would prevent a mere federal statute from modifying the doctrine (or eliminating it completely) is if the doctrine were somehow rooted in the US Constitution. Courts have already held that the power to enact protections for creators for "limited"

            • by queequeg1 (180099)

              Or perhaps when you said "that would not fly" you were talking about the political fallout that might result from a statute repealing fair use (and not whether such a repeal was technically possible). A nice sentiment. However, given developments in US intellectual property law over the past 15-20 years, I question if there is any level of foolishness that can anger a critical mass of voters.

        • by b4upoo (166390)

          Sadly the law has become so unreasonable and contorted that many people pick and choose which laws they recognize or obey. Somewhere we need some sort of rule that disallows "nonsense" in the laws and their enforcement. It is not just in property rights cases either. For example the right to bear arms is explicit. The laws of the land wish to convert the issue to ownership rather than carrying or "bearing" arms. Underneath that is the normal conclusion that people have the right to shoot as the situa

        • by 6Yankee (597075)

          You cannot circumvent protection to gain "access" to a work, but you can circumvent protection for "use" of a work provided you gained access (i.e. purchased the work) legally.

          So if I rent a DVD, which should mean I'm legally entitled to gain access to it, and ripping it to hard disk qualifies as "use", I'm allowed to rip it to hard disk? I'm confused. (And not in the USA anyway, just amused and interested at this mess of a law.)

          • by dimeglio (456244)

            Or how about sending your Region 1 DVD to a friend in Taiwan (which is not a member of WIPO [wikipedia.org]) for him/her to decrypt and email back to you the MP4 unlocked version? Maybe that would be like having the FBI ship out suspected criminals to, say Siria, for a more effective interrogation (or to get a confession)... then returning the results back to the FBI.

      • by kimvette (919543)

        Bypassing copy protection is STILL legal even under the DMCA for the purpose of interoperability.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Some code snippets for you.
          (from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/)

          #!/usr/bin/perl
          # 472-byte qrpff, Keith Winstein and Marc Horowitz <sipb-iap-dvd@mit.edu>
          # MPEG 2 PS VOB file -> descrambled output on stdout.
          # usage: perl -I <k1>:<k2>:<k3>:<k4>:<k5> qrpff
          # where k1..k5 are the title key bytes in least to most-significant order

          s''$/=\2048;while(<>){G=29;R=142;if((@a=unqT="C*",_)[20]&48){D=89;_=unqb24,qT,@
          b=map{ord qB8,unqb8,qT,_^$a[--D]}@INC;s/...$/1$
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by nurb432 (527695)

        Personally, i don't care if its illegal ( which it is if you break the encryption to do it ) to back up my own DVDs.

        • by jasen666 (88727)

          Pretty much.
          I bought the media, I'll do what the hell I want with it. Until the day comes that every DVD comes with a special agent who sits in your house to watch your every move, they're not going to stop most people from copying or backing up their media.

      • by b4upoo (166390)

        Put it on the torrents. Make sure that everyone has the software for eons to come. Power to the people!

    • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohnNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:36AM (#25286097) Journal

      Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

      Not commercial. There are open source tools that you can accomplish this with and there are certainly shady products you can find online that aren't supported and probably aren't owned and operated inside the United States. The important thing is that they are not sold at Best Buy nor are they easy to use. I know ways of doing it with Ubuntu but your average person is still mystified that typing something on a command line causes my DVD player to do something.

      DVD X Copy comes to mind although I've never used it, that's the most commercial looking stuff I've ever seen. And this is what its site [dvdxcopy.com] says:

      Authentic DVDXCopy software is no longer being sold anywhere.

      In response to:

      If there isn't, can I write one and get sued ? At least I'd get my name in the papers...

      Sir, you need look no further than the RIAA/MPAA to be sued. Why bother writing software when you can simply create a single backup copy of a CD or DVD for your personal use and notify them that you have done so. Your name won't make the papers but you will be sued. I'm certain they will be able to show that since you had it on your computer and your computer was connected to the internet, you were distributing it to several thousand other people who had no legal right in owning it. You won't be sued for the additional price of that media, you will be sued $75,000 because that's how much money you thieved from them! And thus you can be part of the ridiculous system that is digital music today!

      • by homes32 (1265404) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:46AM (#25286237)

        Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

        Not commercial. There are open source tools that you can accomplish this with and there are certainly shady products you can find online that aren't supported and probably aren't owned and operated inside the United States. The important thing is that they are not sold at Best Buy nor are they easy to use. I know ways of doing it with Ubuntu but your average person is still mystified that typing something on a command line causes my DVD player to do something.

        I disagree. AnyDVD and DVDFAB Decrypter are straight forward and extremely easy to use, (1-2 button click) and have a pretty decent support base. Although you can't find them at Best Buy...

        • by jedidiah (1196)

          AnyDVD is easy enough for an enthusiast to use but I wouldn't
          put it in the same category as something like iTunes or even
          mplayer. Some types of DVD rips are crude even if you are
          using the recommended ripper for AppleTV (Handbrake).

      • by wisty (1335733)
        Mirror Pirate Bay, and maybe a few other popular torrent sites. I'm not sure how many billion they would hit you with, but it would probably be enough to bail out a small financial institution. Oh, and end world poverty, but that's not so important now, right?
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by jasen666 (88727)

        CloneDVD? It's simple to use and not a shady product. Works pretty damn well actually.

    • by Zymergy (803632) * on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:38AM (#25286115)
      AnyDVD and CloneDVD2 are my personal favorites for a ripper/burner.
      (The AnyDVD ripper will also rip BlueRay and HD DVD's nicely (if you buy the HD Key for HD) and it can also rip directly to a non-DRM'd DVD or HDDVD/BlueRay image file) :)
      http://www.slysoft.com/en/download.html [slysoft.com]
      http://www.elby.ch/products/clone_dvd/index.html [www.elby.ch]
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Yes, there are various freeware and commercial products that let you rip and copy DVDs. I would point you at some websites, but I'm afraid of the Slashdot Effect causing them problems.

      DVD Decrypter hasn't been updated in years because it's author was given a choice between facing a very expensive lawsuit or turning over the code and stopping work on it. He chose the latter. DVD Decrypter works fine on most DVDs, but not all.

      AnyDVD is a commercial ripper that works on all DVDs and is updated regul
    • I played around with the "free" rippers and re-encoders for weeks and could never resolve audio/video synchronization issues.

      Finally I broke down and purchased SlySoft's Any DVD ripper and their Clone DVD mobile. Now I have my entire DVD collection as .avi files - with no FBI warnings, commercials, etc., etc..

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        Unless you are trying to screw around with the framerate,
        none of the available transcoding tools should pose a problem.
        Some of the commandline ones are pretty easy to use if you
        aren't interested in tweaking a lot of options.

        Although if you are trying to play something on a machine
        that isn't powerful enough, you will get sync issues. The HD
        h264 output from the Hauppauge 1212 is good at generating this
        sort of "problem". Although DVDs generally should not be a problem.

    • by WDot (1286728)
      There's DVD Fab Decryptor, the free (but effective) portion of a commercial DVD ripping program. Oddly enough they haven't been sued out of existence yet, so my guess is they just haven't shown up on the radar.

      It would be nice if Real or Apple or Microsoft finagled a way to put easy DVD ripping features into their respective media players. DVD ripping would really take off and be a big win for consumers. It would no longer be solely for power users who "know where to look."
    • libdvdcss is the package you want for Linux. There are plenty of repositories you can add which let you apt-get install it.

      I installed it to get around the region restrictions since my DVD drive's firmware was broken and wouldn't let me switch.

  • Working together (Score:5, Informative)

    by iamwhoiamtoday (1177507) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:26AM (#25285903)
    See? The big companies CAN work together when they want to. I'm honestly surprised that 6 major movie companies could work together without backstabbing each other. On a related note: When it comes to DVD ripping... just use "Handbrake" (google it. open-source ripping software)
    • Re:Working together (Score:4, Informative)

      by Dr. Manhattan (29720) <sorceror171@gmai ... om minus painter> on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:36AM (#25286091) Homepage
      When it comes to DVD ripping... just use "Handbrake"

      Or, if you want something that'll play in a standard DVD player, k9copy [sourceforge.net]. I have young kids, and for some weird reasons I haven't bought them and video iPods. Backing up their DVDs is kind of a must.

      • by Dog-Cow (21281) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:58AM (#25286419)

        If I had a choice between buying kids and video iPods, I'd pick the iPods any day.

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        Who wants a standard DVD player?

        Crappy upscaling. Bad remote. Stupid ads. Annoying menus.

        Relegate the DVD player to grandpa.

        • Who wants a standard DVD player? Crappy upscaling. Bad remote. Stupid ads. Annoying menus.

          Extremely cheap to replace if a three-year-old damages it.

          • by jedidiah (1196)

            My 3 year old didn't destroy my MythTV frontends.

            OTOH, he doesn't need to get anywhere near it.

            No physical media to break either.

            He learned how to use the Streamzap remote before the wife did.

            Something else to contemplate is the fact that new stereos
            are coming with ipod attachments. Before too long, you can
            just plug in your ipod (or bulk storage of choice) to any
            random A/V decoder and play your movies that way.

            Some DVD players already come with that as an option.

    • by WDot (1286728)
      Handbrake is DVD reencoding software. It may work with your DVDs, but DRM can easily trip it up, so you'd want to find another program that rips the DVD bit for bit but takes out any copy protection. Encode the result to your codec of choice and delete the lossless rip.
  • by ChienAndalu (1293930) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:26AM (#25285905)
    I mean, have you ever *used* a Real(TM) product? Maybe the film studios only want to protect us...
  • Why this one? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sTERNKERN (1290626) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:33AM (#25286021)
    I can count several other program doing exactly the same job and there are some which are not freeware but can be bought. Probably only because they got too much attention?
  • DVD decrypter + nero (Score:3, Informative)

    by ionix5891 (1228718) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:33AM (#25286037)

    just use an old copy if DVD decrypter floating around and Nero

    to copy DVDs to other DVS's or mp4 files

  • by DrXym (126579) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:34AM (#25286047)
    DVDs are easy to rip. Commercial tools like AnyDVD and Nero Recode make a good job but you can do it for nothing quite easily.
    1. Install DVD Decrypter. Google for it
    2. Install Handbrake [handbrake.fr]
    3. Rip DVD with Decrypter to a folder on the HDD
    4. Run Handbrake, choose DVD folder
    5. Select main movie feature or anything else
    6. Tweak bitrate and other settings and / or pick a target device (iPod, PS3, 360 etc.)
    7. Click Start
    8. Wait a bit, shiny digital copy pops out

    Handbrake is a front end over xvid and x264 encoders so you get either an MPEG-2 ASP (DiVX) or H264 AVC file from the process. Depending on your target device you might want to choose one or the other or fiddle with the other settings but the defaults are pretty sane if you don't know what you are doing.

    Sure the process might skip supplementals and there may be edge cases with alternate tracks or subtitles that require more effort but x264 is an excellent encoder and the quality is very good. I really don't see why anybody would want to use RealDVD when it DRMs the resulting movie in the process.

    • by Abcd1234 (188840)

      It's just a shame that there's nothing out there that can rip a DVD to MPEG4 *and* preserve all the menus and additional content. The Mastroka container can, in theory, support menuing, and apparently it's implementation is a near-carbon-copy of the DVD standard, but alas a) nothing out there can reliably create them automatically based on a DVD rip, and b) nothing can reliably play them back.

      So, for now, I live with DVDs. But, perhaps one day...

  • by Quiet_Desperation (858215) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:34AM (#25286057)

    This is Sauron versus Palpatine. Is there a good guy? Don't think so.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MobyDisk (75490)

      Except that in this case, Real Networks is doing the right thing.

      • Real Networks is taking the bullet for whom, exactly? Is there someone else with a product that can do the same function, or even improve on it (think JarJar-less Star Wars)?

    • by Sloppy (14984)

      Good/evil isn't the way to look at it. Assailant/victim is. You can condemn the aggression even if you don't like the victim.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        You can condemn the aggression even if you don't like the victim.

        Or I can laugh at one pack of assholes beating up on another pack of assholes. Each to his own, I guess. ;-)

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Sloppy (14984)

          The problem with laughing at injustice to assholes, is that some day you will be the asshole. (And in Soviet Russia, asshole laughs at you.)

      • Nice try, Greedo.

  • Surprise? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by purpledinoz (573045)
    I'm not really sure what Real Networks was thinking when they came up with the idea of this software. How could they not assume that this software would attract a lawsuit? The MPAA are a bunch of assholes anyway. I recently moved to Europe, and I was reminded of the BS when I found out that I can't lend my DVDs, which I had legally purchased in Canada, to my friends because of region encoding. Now that I'm reminded of this BS, I will no longer purchase any DVD movies.
    • Re:Surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Dog-Cow (21281) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @10:01AM (#25286473)

      Who in the UK doesn't have a region-ignoring player? You need better educated friends, perhaps.

    • by jriding (1076733)

      Actually Real was the one who filed the lawsuit first. Then the movie company filed after them.
      They did this to establish it was not illegal and to set precedent. The RIAA/MPAA filed after words to get there 2 cents in. At the end of the day the court was put where Real filed instead of Hollywood Court where MPAA filed.

  • Fine. (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I'll stick with DVD Decrypter and DVD2One, then.

    I'd be more than happy to have a DRM-locked archive on my external hard disk, still with the content protection intact, but oh no, I have to reach behind me, search through the 200 or so properly licensed DVD's stacked in the bookcase behind me for the one I want, open the case, find that I put it back in the wrong box / brother borrowed it and it's not there, go hunting around the house for it, find it under a stack of papers on my desk, and finally g

    • by jedidiah (1196)

      This ties into one of my DVD gripes.

      They seems to be packaged in a way meant to cause the
      most damage. I give DVD's at the store a "jiggle" for
      this very reason. Some boxed sets in particular get
      harsh criticism for this.

      A lot of DVD's aren't something you want to touch
      ever again once you've done the initial rip. You're
      just inviting disaster. Either the packaging will
      come apart or the DVD will get scratched or both.

      It's hard to beat having every DVD you own at your fingertips.

      It makes what you do have seem mor

    • by Blakey Rat (99501)

      At the risk of asking a dumb question...

      What are you using DVD Decrypter and DVD2One for if you still have to dig through your pile of disks to find the one you want to watch?

  • by InspectorxGadget (1230170) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:38AM (#25286113)

    1. (DVD) -> DVD Decrypter -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.

    2. (BD) -> DVDFAB -> TsMuxeR -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.

    3. (CD) -> Exact Audio Copy -> FLAC -8 -> Done.

    Next question.

  • by MikeRT (947531) on Tuesday October 07, 2008 @09:59AM (#25286431) Homepage
    "Oops, someone broke into our network and stole the source code to RealDVD. Guess it's out of our hands now!"
    • by thepotoo (829391)
      Which would be utterly useless, because it's not like you could set up a Sourceforge project for it (legally), and you couldn't crack the DRM.

      Besides, why would anyone want to use this when DVD Decrypter and Handbrake work so well?

      Actual spite would involve hiring a bunch of devs to work on Handbrake and really make it easy enough so your grandma could use it; add decryption functionality, etc. Although I'm not sure that would be legal either...

  • Ulterior Motive? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by m509272 (1286764)
    Perhaps there is an ulterior motive? Is this some collaborative ploy to get DVD fair-use copying to be officially declared illegal?
  • Does this prevent Real from selling the product in other countries? If so, how?
    • by jedidiah (1196)

      > McCain finally got it. It's the Democrats AND the Republicans who are the problem.

      Unfortunately, he managed to pick a VP that demonstrates that he's
      a tool of the party, a dittohead lapdog or just plain senile.

      Before he picked Sara (lets shoot wolves from helicopters) Palin, I was planning on voting for the guy.

      I still appreciate his statement in Time magazine against torture.

      It's like he's some sort of.... Stepford Candidate.

  • As of late, I've had to start relying on the family XP machine, using DVD Decryptor, in order to rip many of the DVDs I encounter. Vobcopy is nice and all, but it doesn't seem to handle the DVDs that are intentionally damaged w/ bad sectors to thwart ripping. Are there any other tools out there that will actually do a proper rip of modern protected DVDs under Unix?

* * * * * THIS TERMINAL IS IN USE * * * * *

Working...