Germany Says Copying of DVDs, CDs Is Verboten

Billosaur writes "In what can only be seen as the opening salvo in an attempt to control what users can do with content, the German parliament has approved a controversial copyright law which will make it illegal to make copies of CDs and DVDs, even for personal use. The Bundesrat, the upper part of the German parliament, approved the legislation over the objections of consumer protection groups. The law is set to take effect in 2008, and covers CDs, DVDs, recordings from IPTV, and TV recordings." A few folks have noted that this story is incorrect. The original link seems to be down now anyway. Sorry.

In the words of a famous 'german'..

i see noooothing, i hear nooothing !!

Re:

I think auf Deutsch it would be, "I see nussing, I hear nussing!"

Better hurry then

That gives you three months to make all the copies you're going to need.

what about copying comments?

The author does not report the facts. The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies like Macrovision et al., something that has been illegal in the US for a decade. The law specifically allows users to make backups of DVD and CD movies, software and music and other digital content for their own archives and to use/play on alternate devices (i.e., ripping movies to your hard drive to watch on a DVR or other device, ripping music to play on an ipod or other device, etc.). These specifically-named consumer rights are actually broader than those granted by law to American consumers. I am not sure what the author relied upon for his translation of the law, but I can assure you that it does nothing like what he suggests.

Re:

The author does not report the facts. The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies like Macrovision et al., something that has been illegal in the US for a decade. The law specifically al

Re:

It would probably be a lot like this:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29620 [theonion.com]

Re:what about copying comments?

"The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies like Macrovision et al.,"
So exactly how does one make a copy of a movie to their hard drive without circumventing De-CSS?
Seems like the DMCA to me.

Re:

Copy the key along with the cyphertext.

Re:

You can copy the encrypted .vob to your hard disk without circumventing CSS. You just can't view it.

Re:what about copying comments?

Unfortunately for your grand plan, reality conflicts.

Recordable DVDs have the area which would be used to store the CSS keys pre-burned to 000000000. This is *precisely* to keep the end user from making a bit-for-bit copy.

Furthermore, you can't make a bit-for-bit copy of even just the contents of the largest dual layer silvers. A dual layer silver can hold roughly 9GB, while a dual layer recordable maxes out at 8.5GB. It doesn't really do much to stop anyone from anything, but sometimes bit-for-bit is legal while a re-encode is not.

Laws sometimes suck.

Re:what about copying comments?

That's both crappy and stupid of them to do. Generally, most "pirates" are just people who are willing to cross into the legally grey zone of copying vs re-encoding if "no harm" was done (what's the harm in copying a dvd in one way which does work, if it's legal to do it another way which doesn't but which has the same end result?)

This also means that when people DO shrink the file, it is that much easier if they want to share the video over the internet/"schoolyard trading". It doesn't necessarily result in a loss of quality (MPEG2 is not exactly the most compressible codec compared to DivX/Xvid/other commonly playable files), so quality degradation is a non-issue.

In fact, the only thing "lost" is the menu (which is often not lost depending on encoding method, and if it is it can be easily appended to the new file, assuming that it was worth keeping - it rarely is). This is a good trade for more videos on the one disc imho. It also means that the annoying trailers can be removed (fortunately, they're stored in a separate PGC); all bad things for dvd producers.

I'd be willing to bet that the dvd shrinking process would be less developed/prevalent/user-friendly if they allowed bit-for-bit copying of the DVDs (which would benefit the dvd manufacturers, since people would buy more discs); all because people reason that it's OK to do something which is "the same" as something legal, and demand/supply took over.

Re:

not all dvds are encrypted.

Re:

I actually lost any desire to waste time on pirating or even really purchasing that much "dvd content" years back.

Last DVD I burned or even "decrypted" was Gentoo 7.0 DVD... I even used that verboten technology "bittorent" to download it... aren't I the ev

Re:what about copying comments?

Heh... I am in Stuttgart (Deutschland!) and yesterday my computer was confiscated because I downloaded OpenOffice 2.3 using BitTorrent.

I use opera and I did... my system administrator is very competent but unfortunately he didn't know how to disable torrent capabilities system-wide. They (some long word referring to teh-main-network-monitoring-team) caught the port being used for downloading.

Bad things happen :) I had around 6-7 GB of sceintific work but my machine is right now "frozen" and my professor cannot use it for the conference in Paris this monday. I had to hear "scheiße" uncountable times before he left my room in hurry.

Late evening I was told that my activities are being monitored (and will be). I didn't dare asking for how long. I hate those Turkish people who were caught making bombs. They ruin it for everyone! People try to convince me a number of times how "foreign" is better, but to tell you the truth, I miss having cheap un-monitored broadband connection of India than clean roads, train on-time and other expensive luxuries I do not use or care.

Re:what about copying comments?

Why not just copy the DVD bit-for-bit? That would not circumvent DeCSS and still in any player. You do not need to de-scramble to copy.

DVD burners cannot presently copy the keys that are required for the players to decrypt the data. The keys are on a different part of the disk. I seem to recall a story about changes to the DVD licenses that would allow burners to be sold that are capable of copying the keys.

Re:what about copying comments?

not for DVD which could always be copied bit for bit (as long as you had a dual-layer burner if necessary).

Not according to this Google Answers page and several other pages that I found on the web. [google.com]

From the page:
] 17.11.3 Content provider information
] These 28 672 bytes shall be set to all (00). Under no circumstance may data
] received from the host be recorded in this field. Circumvention: Recorders and
] recording drives shall be considered as circumvention devices when these are
] produced to record, or can easily be modified to record, in any manner, a
] user-defined number in this field.

Re:

The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies like Macrovision et al., something that has been illegal in the US for a decade.

Ah well that's good, because as stated previously it would be completely unenforceable unless they outlaw the possession of recordable media/recording devices. But, wait - It's still nearly impossible to enforce due to privacy laws (police can't just wal

Re:

Yep, absolutely crazy and.... completely made up.

>> representatives of the state do indeed walk into people's houses to check on things
>> like this.

This may have been true in the Communistic East German republic some 20 years ago, but in modern

Re:what about copying comments?

The author does not report the facts. The law does not prohibit the copying of DVDs or CDs; it disallows the circumvention of anti-copying technologies

And if someone were to hold a plastic bag over your head, it is not killing you, it disallows fresh air from reaching your lungs.

If you make all possible ways of achieving a task illegal, then it is illegal to achieve that task, no matter how you wish to play with your words.

Re:

I don't think the poster was condoning the law. And yes, it does suck... but it's also important to put it in perspective. It's no worse (but also not much better) than the USA's DMCA.

what about slash-pork?

"I am not sure what the author relied upon for his translation of the law, but I can assure you that it does nothing like what he suggests."

It's called, pushing the hot buttons. And since few RTFA or anything deeper than that. It slips by easier and easier. Kind of the slashdot version of slipping an item into a bill just before voting and hoping no one will notice. And much like that the consequences are hard to get rid of.

Re:

These specifically-named consumer rights are actually broader than those granted by law to American consumers.

Just because it's not as harsh as the US's law doesn't mean it's not too harsh.

Re:

Actually - I wasn't suggesting that at all. This is a nice way to end the day - with a chuckle. I'm gonna go eat dinner and count the moments to tonight's Avatar episode.

Paging Trent Reznor

You have a calling.

Let businesses fight it out

When large companies find that their IT departments can not stage ISOs for enterprise-wide deployment, they are going to fight this law much more effectively than any music enthusiasts could.

Re:

Indeed. I can't beleive the people approving this have any experience in corporate environments... I mean, if you're really close minded and ONLY know about home use, it can semi sortoff make sense to say you HAVE to use the physical media and no copy... y

Re:

No one is going to bother corporate IT people. They're not even on the RIAA/MPAA's radar, because they're copying software. And they're usually copying software that they explicitly have a license to copy for the entire organization, e.g., Windows. This

so what exactly are you getting ...

with a CD/DVD purchase? It seems to me - a license to play the content, privately, for the lifetime of the physical medium.

Re:so what exactly are you getting ...

For that much money it better be for MY lifetime.

Re:

For that much money it better be for MY lifetime.

Oh my dear GOD! Don't say stuff like that! Do you really think the media pigopolists would have any qualms about making that part of the license terms finite as well?

*AA: "Yup, lifetime license."
You: "Grea

Re:

Seems to me, a physical recording.  That's it.

LICENSE MY ASS.  SHOW ME THE CONTRACT.

So sad.

I remember the good ol' days when copying of DVDs and CDs was just farhfegnugen in Germany. Now it's verboten? Next thing you know it will be gesundheit!

I guess I was wrong!

You see, I thought my German friends were more pragmatic than we Americans, but this law is making me review my attitude towards them. I personally doubt it will have any effect.

That's REALLY impressive!

Clearly German legislators are less expensive than those of many other nations! I'll keep that in mind when I need to buy a new law! :)

Re:

Thanks for the tip.

Cheers,

Murphy

Good job

Nice way to subvert the will of the majority and cater to a minority. Seems pretty obvious that the will of the German people was not served here.

Surprise! I support this law

Yes, your loving anarcho-capitalist, me, loudly pronounces his support of this great law.

It is my belief that the best way to get rid of government is to let it collapse on itself. We need more taxes, more laws, more regulations and more actions to be considered crimes -- at all levels of government. Not only would all this new legislation and income create a more massive bureaucracy that will just stifle its ability to do anything right, but it will help open the eyes of every being in seeing what a waste government is.

I love adding new non-violent action laws to the books: all it does is make the black market that much more fruitful for those willing to take the risk. Why just stop at copying the CD and DVD to another CD or DVD? Let's make it illegal to copy ANY information off of a CD or DVD into any other form, including RAM, so that just playing it is wrong.

"Did you see that new movie? It's gorgeous, bright and shiny, and the case is really nice!"

"What's the plot?"

"I don't know, I didn't want to risk playing it. But the DVD is nice!!!"

Another completely misleading article

For some more serious information check out this article:

http://www.goethe.de/wis/buv/thm/urh/en2550214.htm [goethe.de]

Very quick summary: Yes, you can make copies of your CDs for private use. There are things that you are not allowed to copy, but they are not CDs.

Obviously it is now up to consumers not to buy music in a format that doesn't allow copying.

Re:Another completely misleading article

Critical bit from that article:

To be sure, copying for private use is still permitted - which is, after all, the reason for the flat-rate levy payable on certain devices. However, if special anti-copying technology has been employed to protect the medium, e.g. a music CD, such protection may not be circumvented by any means. The Ministry of Justice has given clear expression to this prohibition: "There is no 'right of private copying' at the expense of rights holders". This also means that consumers who download a file from the Internet must first check whether the offer is legal. How users are supposed to do so remains unclear, says the National Federation of Consumer Organisations.

Re:Another completely misleading article

``To be sure, copying for private use is still permitted - which is, after all, the reason for the flat-rate levy payable on certain devices. However, if special anti-copying technology has been employed to protect the medium, e.g. a music CD, such protection may not be circumvented by any means. The Ministry of Justice has given clear expression to this prohibition: "There is no 'right of private copying' at the expense of rights holders". This also means that consumers who download a file from the Internet must first check whether the offer is legal. How users are supposed to do so remains unclear, says the National Federation of Consumer Organisations.''

Comparing this to the Dutch (from the Netherlands, a small country that borders Germany in the west) equivalent of copyright law, I get the following.

1. Copying for personal use is permitted by basic copyright law, which, in the Netherlands, has been in place for a pretty long time. I imagine the same to be true in Germany.
2. Not allowing the circumvention of "technical measures" is from the EUCD, the EU equivalent of the DMCA. Both Germany and the Netherlands have this.
3. In the Netherlands at least, downloading a file from the Internet constitutes making a copy for personal use, which is expressly permitted as per 1. (That is, for anything that is on media, except software. Books don't apply as thy aren't on media, music does, and software doesn't, because it is explicitly mentioned as an exception.)

I would be mildly surprised if 3 were different in Germany, i.e. you were not allowed to download music files under all circumstances. What is illegal, in the Netherlands, is circumventing the DRM. Anything that involves that (making a copy of th contents of the DVD, playing the DVD) therefore cannot be done legally. Downloading a file from the Internet does not involve curcimventing DRM, so isn't made ilelgal by tha.t

Democracy

In a democracy, shouldn't we, the people, be deciding if we are allowed to copy anything we want?

Re:

shouldn't we, the people, be deciding if we are allowed to copy anything we want?

Surely private enterprise can invent chip implants that scramble experience if you don't have the keys. The same sort of noise-cancellation currently used for headphones, why

What does it mean to "own" media?

Do we license it?

Do we own the physical CD/DVD, but not what's on it?

If we own the right to use the media for personal use, then we should get additional copies of the physical media at no (or very little) charge if it becomes damaged.

But if we own that CD/DVD, then we should be able to make our own backups, at the least.

The content producers want it both ways. They say that we don't really "own" the content, just the right to access it, but what if you can't access that content? For example, no more working record players or tape decks in the world. Then we should get the updated version for free right? If we bought the right to access that content. If not, then they should just fuck off and let us acquire or reacquire content we already paid for.

Turn it around!

This could be an absolutely retarded thing I'm saying, but, couldn't we turn the public on to them?

Say something like, for example, that this will enable paedophiles to hide their files. Independent groups won't be able to verify their contents and police will need court orders (or whatever kind of official permission there is there to enable police to conduct searches) and that it will radically slow down any important investigations...

I don't know how, but I feel it's time to use their own manipulative weapons against them. Remember, it doesn't have to be logical or completely sane, just "emotional" enough to convince the impulsive masses.

Would something like this be possible?

The real reason behind this law

Do you really think this silly law is about DRM? IP rights? Copyright infrigement? C'mon! Just like the anti p2p legislation, it will be ignored by nearly everyone, and the government won't even try to enforce it on normal citizens. The real reason for such widely disobeyed laws is for the government to have a tool they can smash on the heads of people they don't like and against whom they have no other legal recourse. An example? Merkel doesn't like, say, Germans converting to Islam. Now imagine some government employee at work: "Oh, it's not illegal to convert? Damn those constitutional rights! How can I brown-nose our Angie? I need that promotion pronto! Oh, yeah, let's check out his private CDs / DVDs collection: there WILL be something illegal there to haul him into jail! Hmm.... What would I do with the pay rise?" Too narrow? Not so many "Konvertiten"? No problem! What about those pesky attac dissenters? Consumer rights groups? People protesting against taxes? Peace activists?... All of them will have compromitting CDs/DVDs somewhere, so government can selectively apply its silly anti-circumvention law to silence them too. Normal population has nothing to fear at all from this: it's a purely political law, that will be used for political purpuses only (plus a few token normal cases, so nobody gets all too suspicious).

Re:

I know, but there weren't any other comments yet and it was about Germany making draconian laws. I've been here for seven years and it's the closest I've come to the top... which used to be the bottom.

Oh well.

Re:

Fascism has nothing to do with an attempt to crack down on copyright violators.

      No, but it does have a LOT to do with telling you what you can and can't do in the privacy of your own home.

Re:

Fascism is not necessarily authoritarian.

      What? History kinda disagrees with you. Please point out the historical example of non authoritarian fascism.

Re:

Actually there is a pretty strong relation going back to WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism [wikipedia.org]

Historically, corporatism or corporativism (Italian: corporativismo) refers to a political or economic system in which power is given to civic assemblies

Re:

(And I don't mean which countries don't enforce their laws. I mean which countries actually have laws offer the most freedom for citizens.)

By that metric the US would be very permissive given the constitution. You can't just look at the letter of the law,