Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DRM Media Piracy Technology Your Rights Online

Tenative Ruling Against Kaleidescape in DVD CCA Case 150

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the your-license-means-what-we-say-it-means dept.
An anonymous reader wrote in with an update in the long drawn out legal proceedings between the DVD CCA and Kaleidescape, a manufacturer of a video jukeboxes. Despite a victory by Kaleidescape in 2007, they ended up back in court in November 2011. The DVD CCA insisted that ripping a DVD was in violation of the license granted to Kaleidescape; Kaleidescape disagreed since their jukebox made a bit-for-bit copy of the disc rather than first decrypting the contents. Unfortunately, in a preliminary ruling, the court agrees with the DVD CCA. Kaleidescape has released a statement.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tenative Ruling Against Kaleidescape in DVD CCA Case

Comments Filter:
  • Obviously (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bobstreo (1320787) on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:04PM (#38873257)

    The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA

    • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:11PM (#38873301)

      The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA

      Just because you don't like the ruling, doesn't necessarily mean it's contrary to the law.

      That being said, the MPAA and RIAA have been instrumental in writing the laws, so...

      • by bobstreo (1320787)

        Oh I don't actually care about the ruling. I only buy used blu-rays and dvds. Or watch last decades movies on NetFlix.

        • by SirGeek (120712)
          Until they declare it illegal to resell DVDs or they tie the content to a specific piece of hardware for playback.
          • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Interesting)

            by causality (777677) on Monday January 30, 2012 @11:07PM (#38873667)

            Until they declare it illegal to resell DVDs or they tie the content to a specific piece of hardware for playback.

            The bittorrent pirates couldn't dream of a better justification in the popular mind.

            The copyright interests enjoy some public sympathy as long as they can portray themselves as the poor victims of rampant "theft" who just want a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. This mostly depends on the general public being ignorant and not considering it worthwhile to read up on the subject and learn about its nuances. Thus, what is generally known about them comes from propaganda (aka "PR") sponsored by them. If the cartels clamp down too hard, no amount of PR will prevent it from being generally known that they are a bunch of assholes and control freaks who will never be satisfied.

            What you suggest is, sadly, the kind of thing they would do. It's also the dumbest thing they could do. Seems like a balance to me.

            • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Ramin_HAL9001 (1677134) on Monday January 30, 2012 @11:47PM (#38873931)

              Until they declare it illegal to resell DVDs or they tie the content to a specific piece of hardware for playback.

              The bittorrent pirates couldn't dream of a better justification in the popular mind. .... If the cartels clamp down too hard, no amount of PR will prevent it from being generally known that they are a bunch of assholes and control freaks who will never be satisfied.

              I think you put way too much faith in the general public's attention span.

              If the MAFIAA were to use their political clout and pass laws that made it illegal to watch a movie without a specific piece of hardware, which they have already done in a way, using region codes and forcing DRM on downloaded music, people will just sit back and take it, and continue to repeat the propaganda spoon-fed to them. "Its good for the economy, they have the right to make money in whatever way they want, pirates are bad, baaah baaah baaah baaah."

              No one notices just how many liberties we have lost over the past 20 years (ironically, more and more so as technology has improved) because no one knows the technology well enough to know when a politician is passing yet another law to take their freedoms and property rights away. They think, "as long as I don't vote for those big-government Democrats, I'll be safe." If only it were that easy.

              • Re:Obviously (Score:4, Insightful)

                by EdIII (1114411) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @12:19AM (#38874105)

                which they have already done in a way, using region codes and forcing DRM on downloaded music

                Uhhhh, not they have not. Purchased music is widely available in DRM-free formats and has been for some time now.

                Region codes do not force a specific piece of hardware at all. You still require a basic DVD-ROM to even begin to physically read the disk. I don't think that is forced, and certainly not by law. You have a choice of DVD hardware to purchase. Additionally, as stupid as region codes were, they were incredibly easy to bypass, even for the most unsophisticated person. When purchasing a new DVD-ROM you get to set the region code. At least on the last couple I purchased, and you could reset it up to five times. I believe I even found some DVD players that ignored region codes entirely. I can't say for sure... but I imagine they would be quite popular in some places.

                You missed his point. The populace usually does not notice until you stop them from doing something they want and without an exceptionally good reason.

                Telling people that a DVD jukebox is illegal, when they purchased the jukebox and all the movies, is something that they will notice and get pissed about. Once that happens, that is all the motivation they need to bring out Google, start talking to friends, and then..... welcome to the world wide web of pirating.

                In my experience, once somebody finds out how easy it is to get stuff for free, they never pay again. I will pay for music, software, and DVDs out of principle, but I know I am not in the majority.

                The poster you are replying to is right. The absolute last thing the content companies want is to provide motivation for people to get educated on their options. That is because none of those options is good for the content companies, even the legal ones.

                • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Informative)

                  by Kjella (173770) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @06:50AM (#38875679) Homepage

                  You still require a basic DVD-ROM to even begin to physically read the disk. I don't think that is forced, and certainly not by law. You have a choice of DVD hardware to purchase.

                  Sure, you can pick the logo on the player but you don't have a choice. To play DVDs it must have a CSS key, to get a CSS key it must follow the CSS license and to play it in any other way would violate the DMCA (or EUCD in Europe or whatever fits your region). It doesn't matter if you've legally bought and own the disc, if you find a way to play it on your own you're a criminal. And because every manufacturer is under the whip of the CSS license, so are you. If they want to enforce region codes or don't want you to fast forward past the commercials they can impose those conditions on the manufacturers through the license who will then impose those restrictions on you. It's not required by law, they've just taken away all other ways of doing it legally - but it works much the same.

                • by mcgrew (92797) *

                  In my experience, once somebody finds out how easy it is to get stuff for free, they never pay again.

                  That's not been my experience. We were copying LPs onto cassettes way back when, and the RIAA screamed bloody murder about it, even though it was legal. But just because you could record your buddy's LP didn't keep anyone from buying LPs.

                  I will pay for music, software, and DVDs out of principle

                  See? There's one more in my experience. Also, studies have shown that your sample of one is faulty, that music pirat

              • Re:Obviously (Score:4, Insightful)

                by Opportunist (166417) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @01:13AM (#38874363)

                Not necessarily. Or at least, in my experience.

                Take my dad. The most un-technical person on this planet outside of an Amish village. Lately, he actually replaced his VHS recorder with a DVD player. He is, though, a person who doesn't give half a shit about "the economy" as long as he doesn't profit from it. As it is with most people around Europe, I might add. Sadly, he also doesn't give too much about his liberties. As does most of Europe...

                But he has a keen sense about being ripped off. And being ripped off includes everything he's used to and cannot do anymore. He's used to borrowing movies from a friend. Take that from him and he'll certainly notice. And not in a good way. And as much as he is a die-hard conservative, something like that won't sit well with him.

            • by elrous0 (869638) *

              What you suggest is, sadly, the kind of thing they would do. It's also the dumbest thing they could do.

              The PC game/software companies got away with it, didn't they? You see any used PC games for sale these days?

            • by mcgrew (92797) *

              The copyright interests enjoy some public sympathy as long as they can portray themselves as the poor victims of rampant "theft" who just want a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

              I wish you wouldn't use the term "copyright interests". I hold copyrights, but they should have expired, and would have had it not been for the Bono Act. FOSS authors are "copyright interests". My first book is on BitTorrent (I put it there myself) and I'll be registering its copyright when I finish the dead tree version's dust

      • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Interesting)

        by causality (777677) on Monday January 30, 2012 @11:00PM (#38873631)

        The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA

        Just because you don't like the ruling, doesn't necessarily mean it's contrary to the law.

        That being said, the MPAA and RIAA have been instrumental in writing the laws, so...

        If I were a judge I'd never rule in favor of something I know to be wrong, excessive, or unreasonable. Modern copyright suits like this one fit all three descriptions. If the law says otherwise, let them impeach me. Then I might lose my cushy prestigious job. Then I'd say hey, at least I put something on the line to try to bring some sanity to our legal system; how many others did the same?

        You wonder why freedoms are eroding?

        • It's very possible the judge is not morally opposed to current copyright law. Most people aren't, you know, especially older people.
          • Since when was not ruling against kalediescape and being supportive of copyright laws ever mutually exclusive?
        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          If I were a judge I'd never rule in favor of something I know to be wrong, excessive, or unreasonable.

          "Judge" is a political position. You have too much integrity to gain it in the first place to have to worry about losing it. THAT is why freedoms are eroding.

        • by Hatta (162192)

          If I were a judge I'd never rule in favor of something I know to be wrong, excessive, or unreasonable.

          Which is exactly why you'll never be a judge. First, they're going to beat anything that looks like integrity out of you in law school. Then you're going to live hand to mouth defending poor people, or you're going to live like a king helping enforce those wrong, excessive, and unreasonable laws. After years of swallowing your conscience you're finally appointed to the bench, are you going to throw i

          • by Talderas (1212466)

            Is a law degree required to become a judge? Not just that not having a law degree serves as an attack point and makes it unlikely for your to be elected/appointed but that it is a genuine requirement of the job? I think I have heard that you have to be a member of the bar to be a judge but you don't need to have a law degree to be admitted to the bar.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA

        Just because you don't like the ruling, doesn't necessarily mean it's contrary to the law.

        That being said, the MPAA and RIAA have been instrumental in writing the laws, so...

        It's the LAW I don't like

        However your comment is a beautiful encapsulation of the entire problem.
        First, the courts are for sale, since judges are elected.
        Second, the people who write the laws are for sale.

        American politicians are little more than puppets for the wealthy and powerful to play with.

    • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Moryath (553296) on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:11PM (#38873303)

      It's funny, whenever someone suggests this sort of thing, they usually get modded down.

      And yet the judge basically took the DVD-CCA's side and copy-pasted it into his ruling word for word. He ignored basically every argument Kaleidescape put forth. That's rare in court. Not only that, but the judge has done a major about-face since the last ruling in 2007. What changed in the intervening time? How do you go from a judge ruling that Kaleidescape had made good faith efforts to ensure their products were compliant, and were in fact compliant, to what came out today if money didn't change hands somewhere?

      • Re:Obviously (Score:5, Interesting)

        by LoverOfJoy (820058) on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:41PM (#38873497) Homepage

        How do you go from a judge ruling that Kaleidescape had made good faith efforts to ensure their products were compliant, and were in fact compliant, to what came out today if money didn't change hands somewhere?

        Who needs money when you have incriminating photos?

        • by wbr1 (2538558)
          Or youhavedowloaded.com style logs of Zoophilia downloads. Do you think that judge really wants hos relationship with sheep exposed?
    • by rhook (943951)

      Judges are appointed not elected.

    • by Lumpy (12016)

      No the judge is a whiny bitch that cant afford a Kaleidescape system in his home.

    • by 91degrees (207121)
      Seems to be a case of the DVD-CCA saying "the letter of the law states this", and Kaleidoscope saying "yes, but that's ridiculous, this in no way harms the DVD-CCA". The judge is simply siding with the law here. That's the way it should work. The problem is that the law's rubbish.

      Strange that the DVD-CCA actually has an objection.
      • Seems to be a case of the DVD-CCA saying "the letter of the law states this", and Kaleidoscope saying "yes, but that's ridiculous, this in no way harms the DVD-CCA". The judge is simply siding with the law here. That's the way it should work. The problem is that the law's rubbish.

        Um, I think that Kaleidoscope did adhere to the "letter of the law". The DVD-CCA is the one insisting on not following the letter of the law, but instead going with the principles.

        The DMCA talks a lot about fair use. It says that fair use is still allowed, provided that a device that can be used to circumvent a copy protection scheme is not defeated, nor is such a device bought or sold.

        Kaliedoscope followed the letter of the law by not messing with the copy protection. It doesn't circumvent it at all. I

    • Re:Obviously (Score:4, Informative)

      by tlhIngan (30335) <[ten.frow] [ta] [todhsals]> on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:47AM (#38878577)

      The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA

      Technically this case was more of the agreement between DVD Forum and Kaleidascope. The DVD Forum runs a licensing agency (DVD CCA) that handles all the patents/technology/etc licensing so if you want to implement the DVD standard, you apply for a license and get access to the spec, the patents, etc.

      The licensing agreement states fundamentally that a movie DVD data may not be copied to another medium except for temporary storage. It also states other things (wonder why you can't ever get more than 480p out of the analog outputs? Same reason - of course, HDMI hadn't quite been invented yet, so it's really just a loophole).

      And that's where the company lost - they made a DVD media server that "ripped" DVDs to hard drive and didn't require the disc to play, in contravention to the licensing agreement they signed.

      The DVD Forum is not the MPAA's bitch, though. Their next gen HD spec was dropped because the movie studios hated the fact that it lacked region protection, letting people in other countries import HD-DVDs before the movie even hit theatres. (It was one reason why the studios started releasing HD-DVDs long after the DVD and Blu-Ray versions came out... lots of people were doing this before the movies hit their local theatres months later).

  • by ichthus (72442) on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:22PM (#38873391) Homepage
    Technology could be so much better if the damned companies would just get out of our way:

    -Let us tether our phones. Don't make us jailbreak/root the things to get the bandwidth and features we pay for. The phones are perfectly capable, so stop stifling us!

    -Let us watch our movies on whatever device we want, whenever we want, without having to crack/decrypt or download someone else's cracked/decrypted copy.

    -Embrace streaming. The infrastructure is there. The technology is mature. Drive-in theaters died a long time ago, and so will megaplexes. Deal with it. Stop fighting Netflix. Stop trying to cling onto your antiquated distribution platform.

    I'm sure I have other rants, but I won't be able to think of them until my vein recedes back into my forehead.
    • The phrase you're looking for is 'nickel and diming'. Start using that more regularly in a negative context and maybe we'll start seeing some change.

      • by Dan667 (564390) on Monday January 30, 2012 @11:20PM (#38873757)
        it is not nickel and diming, it is insisting on being a horse and buggy maker in a car world. The RIAA and MPAA are throwing away huge wads of money to cling to a business model that no longer works.
        • by causality (777677)

          it is not nickel and diming

          But it is.

          it is insisting on being a horse and buggy maker in a car world

          That's the goal, yes. The method by which they reach the goal is nickel-and-diming. Confusing the two led you to believe that one of them must be false.

          The RIAA and MPAA are throwing away huge wads of money to cling to a business model that no longer works.

          Makes you wonder how they can afford all of that if their claims of how badly piracy hurts their bottom line had merit... Imagine how much more profit their shareholders would enjoy if they saved this money instead. If you want to hit them where it hurts, reveal to those shareholders why they should be outraged about this and why they should be

          • Makes you wonder how they can afford all of that if their claims of how badly piracy hurts their bottom line had merit... Imagine how much more profit their shareholders would enjoy if they saved this money instead. If you want to hit them where it hurts, reveal to those shareholders why they should be outraged about this and why they should be divesting or at least demanding an investigation. It could be as simple as demonstrating they waste more money on lawsuits and political contributions than they gain

        • Yes, it is. You can't tether unless you pay a fee. You can't stream until people stop buying the more expensive media. You can't shift media, you're expected to re-purchase the content. This is all about finding new and ingenius ways of making you hand over cash.

          • by jedidiah (1196)

            No. This is about making you pay for those things that you have already paid for. Back in the pre-digital days, this was easy. The media was the product and media formats changed. When this happened, you had to buy all new media again.

            Once stuff went digital, the product became the data and that can live forever.

            The need to buy the same thing in 5 different formats evaporated.

            The gravy train is over. The dinosoaur just hasn't given up the ghost yet.

        • by gl4ss (559668)

          riaa and mpaa are horse licensors, they don't have a business in the new world.

        • by Ihmhi (1206036)

          a business model that no longer works.

          It works just fine when you have the Congress and Senate in your pocket to write absurd laws that favor your industry.

    • by CODiNE (27417) on Monday January 30, 2012 @11:48PM (#38873943) Homepage

      Wanted to pick up a copy of Tucker: The man and his dream today. So I check out used prices on Amazon and Paypal. Both selling used from $60-90. Daaaang. Well I wanted to avoid DRM and have a nice portable copy, but $60 is a bit much for that, so I figured I'll get it for $10 on iTunes and only play it on iDevices. Eh.

      Well it's only for rent at $4. Every single comment in the reviews mentions that it should be for sale. Huh... oh maybe Amazon is selling it. Dang, $4 rental there too.

      What's the point in making it rental only? It's not like the makers profit off the used DVD market, or did one of them buy a pallet of them? Besides that, the movie is from 1994, it should be $0.99 and not "new release" price.

      Oh well, I'm not going to pirate it... I'm going to wait for it from the library. If I can't own it I won't pay to rent it. Total cost to the movie studios? -$10.

      There you have it, one good rant deserves another.

      • by BoberFett (127537)

        "They" just don't want you watching a movie about how an aspiring entrepreneur was crushed by big business and corruption. ;)

    • by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968 AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @03:02AM (#38874723) Journal

      I'd agree with two out of three but frankly the world was a better place before the iPhone and everybody trying to use a wireless like a landline. there is only a limited amount of wireless bandwidth you know, and in many places its already saturated to the max just with all the teens blabbing their asses off all day, tethering your laptop and trying to treat it like a landline just makes the whole thing suck worse for everyone else. Wait until you fucking get home or use Wifi dude, don't be a bandwidth piggie.

      As for TFA all my customers are switching to media tanks so meh to the MPAA. Once they are all using Nboxes and WDTVs I'm sure they'll find out about the wonders of TPB, just another case where the pirated version is the better version. i mean here it is 2012 and they expect people to feed discs into the thing like its 1997, wake up and smell the technology jerks! Music has already gone to MP3 because with no DRM they'll play anywhere, yet here they are saying only this DRM encrusted crap is the only way you can play a movie. Well i hate to break the news to them but MP3 didn't become the default format because the record companies liked it, it became the default because of piracy, because people wanted easy and simple which the record companies didn't give them. The same thing is happening with movies as even that $40 DVD player from Walmart is now playing DivX .avi and MKV files. Do they think grandma is making MKVs of the kid's baseball game? nope its just folks bypassing the bullshit yet again.

      It took years of dragging the record companies before we could bring their stupid asses to the giant money trough that is selling MP3s, it looks like it'll be another decade to do the same to the MPAA. What a bunch of total dipshits, they'd rather spend millions in bribes trying to make the world 1979 again than face the fact that times change, just retarded.

      • by ichthus (72442)

        in many places its already saturated to the max just with all the teens blabbing their asses off all day, tethering your laptop and trying to treat it like a landline just makes the whole thing suck worse for everyone else.

        Maybe you didn't know that voice and data are two separate channels (for now.) Eventually, it will all be VOIP, but for now it doesn't matter how many teens are "blabbing their asses off all day" — that doesn't effect the data stream.

        The real problem -- the source of both our w

        • by hairyfeet (841228)

          Maybe you didn't realize its all going through the same gear and when you heat that sucker up pumping data through it like there's no tomorrow the whole system gets glitchy. Frankly these systems weren't designed for the amount of information, neither voice NOR data, going through them and when either side gets crapflooded the whole thing gets buggy. Maybe its different on Verizon, don't know, but I've actually given the guy a hand on the AT&T system in my mom's back yard and when that thing gets overlo

    • I think they'd sell more DVDs/Blu-Rays if they allowed people to rip them. Yes, some people would buy a copy, rip it, and then sell it on the used market. Most people, though, would buy it, rip it to their device, and then put the disc away as a backup. I'd love to be able to select from a digital list of the movies I have ripped from legally purchased discs and then play the movie. This would let me actually watch the movies I own instead of fumbling through piles of DVD boxes to find just the right mo

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:26PM (#38873415)

    Just let both parties put up a binding contract of injunctive relief. Then they submit it together with an undisclosed amount of money to the court. Whichever side submitted the most wins and their contract is enforced. The other side gets the money, minus, say, 10% that go to taxes. Problem solved: better, predictable justice for all instead of the travesty of "who bought the judge" all the while pretending that there is such a thing as fairness.

  • DVD ? DVDead. (Score:5, Informative)

    by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Monday January 30, 2012 @10:30PM (#38873455) Homepage

    I'm quite familiar with the Kaleidescape system. It's effectively a DVD jukebox that uses disc images instead of physical media. In 2011, it's a very outdated piece of technology, but it remains one of the few idiot-proof systems out there. Pay gobs of money, plug it into your TV, fiddle the remote and you're off to the races.

    From the very beginning, the system has required users to rip their own DVDs. You don't download shows to it, you have to pop in the disc and let the system create its own image. No disc, no love. Sure, you could toss in a burned disc, but by that point the encryption has already been broken. The only way you can willfully circumvent copyright laws with this thing is by renting/borrowing a movie, ripping it and returning the disc.

    That said, if someone has the whimsical income to afford a $7000+ Kaleidescape system, they can probably afford to buy their movies legally. Once again, the movie industry doesn't have a goddamned clue.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      What the MPAA wanted to make sure is that a Kalidescape system didn't become an everyday item. The technology is Kalidescape is not that difficult, and today you can do the same with:

      1. NAS storage server
      2. Computer with ripping software of your choice
      3. XBMC running on cheap receivers.
      4. Download movie/tv info from tvdb.com/IMDB/etc.

      All of the above can be put together for well under $1000.

      What a company cannot do in the US is put all of the above together into an easy to setup package. Kalidescape go

      • What the MPAA wanted to make sure is that a Kalidescape system didn't become an everyday item. The technology is Kalidescape is not that difficult, and today you can do the same with:

        1. NAS storage server 2. Computer with ripping software of your choice 3. XBMC running on cheap receivers. 4. Download movie/tv info from tvdb.com/IMDB/etc.

        All of the above can be put together for well under $1000.

        You can also do it with Apple TV and iTunes; with a lot less fiddling around, so there is even a solution for the non-trchincally inclined.

        • by jedidiah (1196)

          > You can also do it with Apple TV and iTunes; with a lot less fiddling around, so there is even a solution for the non-trchincally inclined.

          The only way the iTunes approach is going to yield "less fiddling" is if you restrict yourself entirely to what's available on iTunes and pay their prices. Unfortunately, their prices are high and their selection is inadequate.

          The end result will be much like the Kaledescape. You can only play your stuff on devices from the single vendor. Although the Kaledescape al

          • > You can also do it with Apple TV and iTunes; with a lot less fiddling around, so there is even a solution for the non-trchincally inclined.

            The only way the iTunes approach is going to yield "less fiddling" is if you restrict yourself entirely to what's available on iTunes and pay their prices. Unfortunately, their prices are high and their selection is inadequate.

            The end result will be much like the Kaledescape. You can only play your stuff on devices from the single vendor. Although the Kaledescape allows you to shop at Target and Best Buy.

            HUh? I can import files into iTunes that I did not buy from them. Just rip into a compatible format and import.

            • by jedidiah (1196)

              > HUh? I can import files into iTunes that I did not buy from them. Just rip into a compatible format and import.

              You lost 99.9 percent of the Apple contingent at the "rip" part.

              Never mind the "compatable format" part. Then "importing" is going to be a vastly inferior thing compared to what Boxee or Plex or even MythTV gives you.

              • > HUh? I can import files into iTunes that I did not buy from them. Just rip into a compatible format and import.

                You lost 99.9 percent of the Apple contingent at the "rip" part.

                Probably, but then again 99.9 percent of all users are probably lost at "rip"

                Never mind the "compatable format" part. Then "importing" is going to be a vastly inferior thing compared to what Boxee or Plex or even MythTV gives you.

                Here I disagree. I have setup Plex on my Mac, and while it is anise interface it has enough quirks to make it more of a hobbyist tool than a "ready for prime time" app. ITunes its much more of a plug and play solution; which makes it more appealing to the average user. As for 'vastly inferior' I find iTunes quite acceptable for someone who just wants to watch movies/TV/listen to music and have some IMDB type info attached. In the

                • by jedidiah (1196)

                  > ITunes its much more of a plug and play solution;

                  Only until you want to use your own content.

                  iTunes is not "just fine" for random things you try to import into it. It doesn't handle this at all. What 3rd party add-ons exist are inferior as well as having the inherent problem of being cobble ware.

                  No. It's iTunes that looks like a "hobby" when compared to Plex.

                  iTunes only suits 99.9% of users needs if they are unwilling or unable to see beyond the Apple company store.

      • Exactly. If they allowed the $7,000 Kalidescape to exist, the next model would be a $2,000 version. Then, someone would make a $999 version and another company would lower the cost to $500. Eventually, you'd be able to pick up one of these devices for $100 and everyone would buy one. Then, they'd start buying tons of DVDs to rip on their devices and it would kill the industry the exact same way that the VCR killed them.

        For an industry that keeps being "killed" by new technology, they certainly seem to s

    • by wagnerrp (1305589)

      The only way you can willfully circumvent copyright laws with this thing is by renting/borrowing a movie, ripping it and returning the disc.

      The newer Bluray models don't even allow that. You still rip it to hard disk rather than accessing the disc each time, but you have to purchase disc vaults that only allow you to play content secured inside. Now sure, you could cut the things open to retrieve the discs, but I doubt it would let you add a new disc to a slot it thought was already filled, and at $7000 each for 320 discs, it costs more for the unit than it did to purchase the movies themselves.

    • by Dahamma (304068)

      That said, if someone has the whimsical income to afford a $7000+ Kaleidescape system, they can probably afford to buy their movies legally. Once again, the movie industry doesn't have a goddamned clue.

      This is the key point that makes the whole argument absurd. Many of the Kaleidescape buyers don't even deal with ripping DVDs themselves, they give their collection and/or just tell the HT installers what they want on it (who then go buy a crapload of legal DVDs) and pay someone else to do all of the work fo

    • by Lumpy (12016)

      Dated technology? have you touched one lately? It's far more advanced than any of the crap any geek can build at home. They did a full DVD rip to try and satisfy the stupid MPAA.

      The only thing that makes it dated is they tried like hell to keep the industry happy. The DVD images still have their CSS encryption on them, Which was their stupid mistake. You cant keep organized crime happy.

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        > Dated technology? have you touched one lately? It's far more advanced than any of the crap any geek can build at home.

        No it isn't. It hasn't been for a long time.

        The only value that it has is in being a "legitimate" solution.

        Now of course I "haven't touched one lately". I don't have the 50K or so it would cost me to replace my $800 solution.

  • Move to Asia, buy non US hardware. Problem solved.
  • so, for folks that have 'popcorn hour' boxes and WD media players, asus players, etc - are we all supposed to throw these in the trash, now?

    they play remote files.

    the essence of this ruling is that playing files is illegal (if they were on a dvd and you ripped it).

    essentially, its back to dvd-jon (remember him?) and how dvd ripping is the start of the end of civ as we know it.

    isn't there a precedence set by the fact that popcorn hour style boxes have legally been allowed for 5+ years, now?

    then again, almost

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Every other media player out there has skirted the law by not providing the crucial component (codec or decrypting library) as part of the default product sold in the US. When you connect the product, the necessary components are downloaded from a country that has no such restrictions. Kaliedescape and one other now defunct media management company were the only companies who tried to legally build a compliant product. Unfortunately media companies in their always unwillingness to adapt, don't see their

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        No. Other media players "skirt the rules" by not providing the mechanism for ripping the media.

        They just play files.

    • so, for folks that have 'popcorn hour' boxes and WD media players, asus players, etc - are we all supposed to throw these in the trash, now?

      No, because those devices don't have DVD CCA license agreements. This court case wasn't about copyright, it was about the hoops people agree to jump through in order to play DVDs.

      If you want to build a CSS-compatible DVD player "by the book" then you have to sign an agreement that your player will be guaranteed to suck. If your player doesn't totally suck, then you're

  • Tentative (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    May I just note that the word is "tentative", not "tenative"? Been bugging me from the get-go.
  • Tenative? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Red_Chaos1 (95148) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:05AM (#38874539)

    I think you meant tentative. Does nobody use spell check these days?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @03:40AM (#38874861)

    DVD CCA must be the most idiotic organization in the world. Why would you sue a company who provides the equipment to your boss's villas, yachts and planes? As someone who works in the industry and installs these systems II can guarantee you that every single one of the movie studio executives will have a Kaleidescape system in every single property or yacht they owe.

    And who would seriously slash out between $10 000 and $1 000 000 on a Kaleidescape system just so that they could make copies of DVD's they don't owe? Who are the DVD CCA trying to kid?

  • Kaleidescape servers are really expensive equipment from my experience. Normal consumers are not buying these devices. Kaliedescape servers are only installed in businesses and multi-million dollar houses where generally only legal media is used. It seems to me that they are being manufactured, marketed, sold and (in general) used in a fairly law-abiding spirit. This law suit does nothing but aggravate the situation.
  • by msobkow (48369) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @05:25AM (#38875273) Homepage Journal

    Maybe they need to move their headquarters. The right to back up media is enshrined in Canadian law, because we OWN our media, not "license" or "lease" it. So unless the *AA companies want to GUARANTEE to replace damaged or lost media AT NO CHARGE TO THE CONSUMER, they have to suck it up, give up on DMCA-type legislation, and go home with their tails between their legs like the whipped dogs they are. :P

    • I think they are in Canada, it is just that the market is rich people and that means the US for the most part. As of a few years ago their only product was the very top end and designed for holding an unlimited number of movies (they claimed every movie ever created was possible).
      They have at least part of their company here in Waterloo, Canada. I actually had an interview with them here, at that time they were really throwing money around trying and succeeded at looking impressive to Waterloo coop students

      • by Lumpy (12016)

        "market is rich people and that means the US for the most part."

        The system is far more popular in the middle east. Saudi Arabia as well as a the UAE are two of the largest installed base of these systems in the world. In fact as a expert integrator I get offers all the time to spend a month reprogramming some rich guys home or land yacht over there. Saudis make the american rich look like poor paupers.

  • They only need to win once for any stupid shit they wish to do. We need to win every single time to stop them doing stupid shit. Ergo, this war cannot be won :( All rights will eventually be lost.
  • Do you mean 'tentative'?

    Can I have your job, Mr. Editor?

    • by skywire (469351)

      You wouldn't want it. His job is to deliberately misspell simple words so as to generate posts like yours.

  • There is huge amount of profit to be made in the media industry. Bit media companies sitting on goldmines, and this is obvious from the fact that they're making huge profits despite being very poorly managed. The idiots in charge of these companies have a turn of the century mentality, they're stuck in the olden times and they can not capitalize on the goldmine they're sitting on because they're refusing to embrace new technology. They try to make new technology conform to the limitations of the old techno

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.

Working...