Topic: DVD Ripping -- Is it Right for MC12? (Read 5982 times)

JimH · « **on:** February 23, 2007, 06:21:22 pm »

We ran a couple of polls last week to get a feel for how people viewed DVD ripping. Without being too precise it seems that:

More than 90% of people who voted think there is a valid reason for ripping DVD's. These include backup of the plastic, viewing on a device that doesn't have a DVD drive, etc. View the poll

More than 80% of those voting said they thought it would be wrong to put the ripped DVD on the Internet for sharing (AKA Piracy). View the poll

I'm aware that this would almost certainly bring lawsuits, but I believe that the law is wrong and that we could win. We will talk in detail with our attorneys before doing anything.

Please tell us what you think we should do.

(I may move this poll to the MC12 board later.)

Thanks,

Jim

park · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2007, 11:01:10 pm »

I agree in so far as I think the law is wrong. I have just started experimenting with ripping my DVDs. It's something I've been meaning to do for the last couple of years. Now with big NAS type drives being widely available, and a general movement towards moving all media onto the PC, in the mainstream, I think it's the perfect time for media management software to be able to rip media, no matter what kind of disc it comes from.

It seems that the law isnt even saying that ripping is wrong. The bypassing drm thing seems more of a technicality. I hope that somebody challenges that law, just so that we can get more innovation and competition in media management software. I tried DVDFab last night, and it is a very smooth all-in-one process that doesnt really need any technical knowledge. Of course, I'd prefer to use MC (assuming I could still convert to mp4, which is taggable isnt it?).

I can't talk about whether or not the risk is worth taking (from a legal perspective), but I know that it's a feature that more and more people are ready to use right now, if it's easy enough.

Doof · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2007, 12:01:08 am »

Out of curiosity, what makes you so confident that you could win such a lawsuit?

And while I'd love the feature, what's making it such an important addition all of a sudden?

GHammer · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2007, 12:39:25 am »

I'd like the ability to rip DVDs without exception.
If I get the ability to rip this but not that it would be less useful because I'd have to keep track of ripped and not ripped titles. I'm easily confused.

I think a good method would be to build DVD ripping so that the 'protection' component was optional. If you live where it is legal, download it and drop it into a folder where it would be recognized and used.

It would seem to me that would get around legalities (who can keep track of each countries laws?) and give people the ability to rip all their DVDs with a bit of one off effort.

If it were some 3rd party tool/DLL it would add that much more distance for J River.

RhinoBanga · « **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2007, 05:16:12 am »

Personally I have no issues whatsoever ripping my DVDs (or making my DVD players multiregional). I paid for them and I want to view them whenever/wherever/however I want.

Now, if I was you I'd allow ripping but do not bypass any encryption, hence protecting yourselves from the DMCA, etc. Instead let it be known that people can install DVD43 for free which, for those of you who do not know what it does, will decrypt on the fly:

http://www.dvd43.com/

As Alex asked, what angle are you going to take that others haven't?

JimH · « **Reply #5 on:** February 24, 2007, 07:45:12 am »

Quote from: RhinoBanga on February 24, 2007, 05:16:12 am

As Alex asked, what angle are you going to take that others haven't?

1. Fair use.
2. DVD players are becoming obsolete technology, replaced by PC's.

I don't think the law has been tested, but we'll know more before we do anything.

RhinoBanga · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2007, 12:12:22 pm »

Quote from: JimH on February 24, 2007, 07:45:12 am

I don't think the law has been tested, but we'll know more before we do anything.

FYI it was and the software company lost ...

http://dvdxcopy.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/72527

jgreen · « **Reply #7 on:** February 24, 2007, 01:00:22 pm »

JimH--

This looks to be a huge distraction without much discernable upside, yet the downside is substantial and more or less probable. For purely selfish reasons (I don't want to lose future upgrades to MC), I hope you set aside this particular adventure indenfinitely.

I'm one of the 90%, and I think this would be a great feature for MC. But I could rip my DVD's right now, if I chose to. Having that capability in MC would only be a convenience. To my mind, if you're determined to go down this path, the publicity value to the company far outweighs the utility of the feature.

Compare that to the new "Tab Views". The reaction has been overwhelmingly positive, to say the least. The beta Test board was lit up with comments and ideas relating to tab views. I think you ought to follow that path where it leads, JimH. Declare version 13 and charge us all an additional upgrade fee, if you must, but developing the tabs further seems the most productive use of time and resources.

Further development to Otto; full path renaming for "Copy Disk File"; a dedicated backup scheme; offline cataloging--these are all features that I would place ahead of DVD ripping, and yet no one is going to sue you over them.

JimH · « **Reply #8 on:** February 24, 2007, 02:26:23 pm »

Quote from: RhinoBanga on February 24, 2007, 12:12:22 pm

FYI it was and the software company lost ...

http://dvdxcopy.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/72527

1. That was three years ago. The integration of TV and PC was just beginning then. I believe that DVD Jon was acquitted for breaking CSS in Norway after that.

2. The sole purpose of the program was to rip DVD's.

3. I don't think it was appealed.

jmone · « **Reply #9 on:** February 24, 2007, 03:04:44 pm »

I think you should included support for Ripping DVDs (eg - I rip music DVD's and save them by chapter to get a similar functionality as with music tracks) - However I'd be cautious about including any code in MC that defeats the copy protection on commercial DVDs - you have a great company and I'd hate to see your resources being absorbed in a Holy War against the sudios.

As there is a ton of this S'W a user could choose to load prior to ripping DVD's in MC would seem to be the way to go!

benn600 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 24, 2007, 03:25:02 pm »

lol. Oh right. So now everyone wants a huge legal battle. I'm the only one who declined the poll question?! Whatever...I guess it would get attention.

RhinoBanga · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2007, 06:11:54 pm »

Quote from: JimH on February 24, 2007, 02:26:23 pm

1. That was three years ago. The integration of TV and PC was just beginning then. I believe that DVD Jon was acquitted for breaking CSS in Norway after that.

Correct ... he was acquitted however the precedent is set.

Quote

2. The sole purpose of the program was to rip DVD's.

If the "fair use" argument was not sufficient for a program dedicated to making backups of one's DVDs I can't see how it could be used as an argument for a program where it is a small component.

Quote

3. I don't think it was appealed.

Again correct and it's going to take some deep pockets to fight this one as the studio's can't be seen to back down. They want control at all costs even though it's impossible with every hacker in the world gunning for them. Just look to the fact that the Blue-Ray/HD-DVD copy protection has been totally blown apart and the format hasn't even taken off yet.

Don't get me wrong Jim, if you go down this road I'll be behind you guys 100% but I really can't see you winning this. Keep us posted as to what your solicitor says,

runemail · « **Reply #12 on:** February 25, 2007, 07:57:41 am »

At least you will get a lot of publicity. DVD-JimH sounds nice

DVD ripping should be safe, but adding a DVD decrypter would bring you in a lot of trouble since you are based in the us. My understanding of the us "legal system" is that you then need to spend more than the RIAA on lawyers, judges and politicians to stay alive. And they spend a lot! Or you could "move" to Antigua and let your current office be the us headquarter.

I only keep one shared optical drive in all my computers. I still buy DVDs but rarely cds. When i watch movies they are either played from the fileserver or played from the DVD-drive in the workstation. So DVD ripping from MC12 is nice, at least for me.

Mr ChriZ · « **Reply #13 on:** February 25, 2007, 08:10:41 am »

There seems to be a lot of pay for DVD rippers out there now a day
you only have to do a google search for DVD rippers
and stuff like this comes up
http://www.magicdvdripper.com/

I think it's a good a time as any to try it.
Make it easy to remove it necassery, see if anyone
notices sort of thing...
Maybe they'd send you a cease and desist type letter
before anything else?

Failing that as recommended above migrate somewhere =)

Magic_Randy · « **Reply #14 on:** February 25, 2007, 10:37:20 am »

I don't know if this helps, maybe it is a question for the attorneys.

Lets say that DVD ripping is implemented. The default is to only rip unprotected DVDs.

Provide an option to rip protected DVDs. This option would have a caveat associated with it that says this feature is only intended to be used for: "fair use situations where it is legal. It is the responsibility of the user to make sure their are in compliance."

benn600 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 25, 2007, 10:52:41 am »

Hide the option too. Make it only known to those who really take advantage of MC (participate in Interact) and are advanced users.

Doof · « **Reply #16 on:** February 25, 2007, 10:35:42 pm »

Quote from: benn600 on February 25, 2007, 10:52:41 am

Hide the option too. Make it only known to those who really take advantage of MC (participate in Interact) and are advanced users.

I think that resorting to those types of tactics would only indicate that you knew that you were in the wrong, but went ahead with it anyway.

johnnyboy · « **Reply #17 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:12:48 am »

I think Jim is pretty aware of whats going on in the world. His timing couldn't be more spot on to the current market.

1. mp3 players are now becoming mp4 players and doing video playback, almost as standard these days. All of these will want video on them so there is currently HUGE consumer awareness of the issue of video's on pc's and portability of media.
2. Several recent surveys of the RIAA found that 90% of them thought that removing DRM was the way ahead yet they just wont push to go ahead with it.
3. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray copy protection have both just been blow apart proving to the industry that the millions they invested in it were a waste of money and that the public are desperate for content without protection.
4. Steve Job's public slagging off of DRM and putting it down is a MAJOR market leader against it with a HUGE customer base following and listening to him.
5. Yahoo is publically saying DRM should be removed
6. A Canadian company has just ripped the DRM off of 50,000 of its online tracks it sells further pushing the move towards no DRM.

All in all, the tide is turning NOW and this is the point in the war where if pushed, the enemy could break.
Yes laws up until now have backed this as illegal but previously doing something like this was for the technically minded. Now thanks to iPod Video and such like, this is a day to day standard type thing to do.

MadJewDisaster · « **Reply #18 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:54:05 am »

~~~~~~~~~~I think that resorting to those types of tactics would only indicate that you knew that you were in the wrong, but went ahead with it anyway.~~~~~~~~~~

I'am with you ,Doof- Beside it they want to sell MC , they would like to challenge actual ruling.
So , REALLY , no point to hide this fonction or that fonction.
Hiden fonctions does not look like a sale point.. and a good way to challenge....

Beside it , ANYONE on this forum do rip DVDs or know how to do it.MC not needed.
What is needded is a company going under the spotlight to chalenge.
No idea if safe for JRiver, this they will find out better than we.

There is still a point i do not understand :
What about all this ripping programs , FOR PAY , not free or open source?
I mean they are here , selling means a minimum of legal frame , they are not varez kind.

About sharing - Of cause , most posters here gave 'I will not share bla-bla' no matter what they really do , by the way......

But is the question is : do MC with riping DVD will induce sharing of movies ?
Well , few movies riped with MC instead of program X may be shared , but , anyway , MC dvd ripping or not , they will be shared.
And what about Zone ?
They cannot have MC riping only zone ? - USA i mean , when selling in many different countrys.

Concerning Zone , NO ONE - i mean from varez freak , to head bank manager- got a zone limited DVD reader in France .
Even FNAC - kind of Best Buy in France - does remove the zone limitation if you ask - They just do not give you any warranty.[ not a bad deal for them , in fact]
What you see is that all the kind of rules than few want to impose generated a new kind of 'delinquency'
Average good citizens, who would never do something wrong in normal times are tagged as 'thugs'.

I think it was the only time i saw my father giving a finger to the law..At 70 years old he got a hacked DVD reader , zone free.
So , he was a thug

GHammer · « **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:50:35 am »

Make the protected ripping module an optional download for those who are in areas that permit it. Then, if people install illegal options, it wasn't J River.

Sun and others who have sensitive algorithms make you say you are not in violation of the US export acts before you download the items. They don't prevent you from doing so. They even make you promise not to use the software to produce atomic weapons! In my opinion, if a click is good enough to protect atomic secrets, it is good enough for the DCMA.

"14.4 Services, Content, and product derived or obtained from this Website may be subject to the U.S. export laws and the export or import laws of other countries. You agree to comply strictly with all such laws and, in particular, shall: (a) obtain any export, reexport, or import authorizations required by U.S. or your local laws; (b) not use Services, Content, or direct product from this Website to design, develop or produce missile, chemical/biological, or nuclear weaponry; and (c) not provide Services, Content, or direct product from this Website to prohibited countries and entities identified in the U.S. export regulations."

GHammer · « **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2007, 06:22:16 am »

If this is done, it would be nice to be able to select from encoding options.
MPG, MOV, DiVX, sizes, audio, etc. What about subtitles?
A straight rip is ok, but giving options so I could create content for my handheld, for archiving, etc is best.

benn600 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 26, 2007, 08:59:34 am »

Quote

1. mp3 players are now becoming mp4 players and doing video playback, almost as standard these days. All of these will want video on them so there is currently HUGE consumer awareness of the issue of video's on pc's and portability of media.
2. Several recent surveys of the RIAA found that 90% of them thought that removing DRM was the way ahead yet they just wont push to go ahead with it.
3. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray copy protection have both just been blow apart proving to the industry that the millions they invested in it were a waste of money and that the public are desperate for content without protection.
4. Steve Job's public slagging off of DRM and putting it down is a MAJOR market leader against it with a HUGE customer base following and listening to him.
5. Yahoo is publically saying DRM should be removed
6. A Canadian company has just ripped the DRM off of 50,000 of its online tracks it sells further pushing the move towards no DRM.

That's a great summary of what has been happening recently. I just want to point out, though, that even if they do remove the DRM, I still will not be interested in downloading! The problem is that I get CDs for, we'll say an average of $5. Now, let's say the average CD has three good songs on it. I have some that are all good and some with one or zero--one's that the listener personally likes. So that comes out to $3. Now we have some problems.

1) Sure, you get the music you know you like (radio, etc) but you are missing out on discovering new songs from a particular artist. I find a new song from time to time and those are worth quite a bit to me because whenever I can discover new songs, that means I don't have to get sick of my current favorites as fast.
2) No physical media. I don't have anything to fall back on if my drives fail! Yes, I keep backups, but for the average person who doesn't, they have nothing to fall back on and are taking a huge risk. The $5, or the extra $2 is almost like insurance.
3) Plus you get the cover art, a nice CD, case, and inserts which sometimes include some nice things. Some artists hide pages behind the CD holder piece, which makes it more interesting.
4) Technically a lower quality piece. I do hear the difference between many MP3s and lossless audio. On a good stereo or good set of headphones, there's no question that you are losing quality.

So in the end, you're looking at a 30% premium to get a physical piece of media but remember, you're getting 3-5 or more times the tracks! The shorter songs often yield CDs with more than 15 tracks! Say you then want an entire CD? They offer it at $10? That's a rip of!

5) So if you want a whole CD, you're looking at a premium for the download! Of 100%!

I won't be downloading ANYTIME soon! I remember back when the free iTunes codes with Pepsi were around. I got a lot of them but then started buying codes on eBay. What a waste of money. Back then, I was satisfied with low quality recordings. With good speakers, the music sounds terrible, though.

dcwebman · « **Reply #22 on:** February 26, 2007, 09:24:02 am »

Quote from: jgreen on February 24, 2007, 01:00:22 pm

Compare that to the new "Tab Views". The reaction has been overwhelmingly positive, to say the least. The beta Test board was lit up with comments and ideas relating to tab views. I think you ought to follow that path where it leads, JimH. Declare version 13 and charge us all an additional upgrade fee, if you must, but developing the tabs further seems the most productive use of time and resources.

Further development to Otto; full path renaming for "Copy Disk File"; a dedicated backup scheme; offline cataloging--these are all features that I would place ahead of DVD ripping, and yet no one is going to sue you over them.

I think jgreen's post says it best. Improve what's there, in addition to his list add macros, make it the industry standard that others look to, make it THE program people want to use to organize, play, and sync their media, etc.

zagor · « **Reply #23 on:** February 26, 2007, 10:24:42 am »

I think DVD ripping is not a crucial feature for MC12. Because there are a couple of very good rippers people are already using whether it is legal or illegal, and jriver shouldn't go into a long legal debate.
But the most important necessity is the conversion of ripped MPEG-2 files to a more computer friendly MP4 format and of course easier media management of the final files. That will be a killer and 100% legal feature for MC.
Of course there are also a lot of conversion tools but they are not user friendly, they don't have any media management capabilities and they could use only some of the older formats. If jriver decides to add the video conversion tool, I want the much newer formats like H264 and VC-1, not just Divx and Xvid.

park · « **Reply #24 on:** February 27, 2007, 04:40:35 am »

I hope this feature stays, if only so that MC's DVD management gets better (seamless to browse converted avi's and ripped dvds in one view).

HTPC4ME · « **Reply #25 on:** February 27, 2007, 10:35:32 am »

Just an FYI guys. the Law has been tested. there's a company called 321 studios. one of the first i believe dvd ripper\copier\burners. there product dvd copy, dvd next copy now. they lost there lawsuit and have now moved out of the United states. you go to there website. they ask (at least use to ask your zip code.) if in the USA they wouldnt even sell you there product anymore. i had bought the Product before the lawsuit. those who had bought it before lawsuit. it was said by courts they were entiltiled to keep there products and the company still offers free upgrades. they are now dvd next copy.

I tried selling my purchased product of dvd copy on ebay a year ago (bought it for a $126.00 at the time) and within a 1 day. i recieved an email from both riaa and mpca. telling me it was illegal for me to sell thi son ebay.

ignorant\and curious as i am. i called them. and said i bought this, an di never use it i would like to sell it why did you email me. they replied with company lost a law suit. it is not legal to purchase this anymore. if you are an owner who bought it online before this date. you may keep it but can not sell it! within an hour of talking with them. ebay had pulled my ad off of ebay. i was not able to sell it. in fact still in the jewel case in the closet.
Personally dvd next copy is the only program i have left that hasnt been incorporated into media center. i love media center. and think dvd BACKUPS would be a GREAT FEATURE i have a son. and if had the funds would join YOU guys in a lawsuit as a witness\another voice to state YOUR\AND MY OPINION... backing up OF purchased items. for when my son scratches the originals.

But i am a small business owner as well. and i do video editing. and i have demo discs of my work. And J RIVER. YOU HAVE MY PERMISSION. TO INCORPORATE A DVD RIPPER INTO MEDIA CENTER SO WHEN NEW CUSTOMERS WANT A DVD DEMO. I CAN RIP THEM A COPY OF MY WORK.

P.S. MAYBE CHAT WITH 321 STUDIOS IF YA NEED TO?? http://www.321studiosinc.com/support.html

(IF YOU READ THAT PAGE AS WELL YOU WILL SEE A COUPLE TIMES THEM STATING THE ARE NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH FORMER 321 STUDIOS) (LEGAL REASONS AM SURE)

IF YOU CAN'T EMAIL THEM CAUSE YOUR NOT A MEMBER\PURCHASER...ONE OF YOU ADMINS I COULD GIVE YOU MY TRANSACTION \ORDER NUMBER SO AS TO EMAIL THEM AND ASK YOUR LEGAL QUESTIONS.

glynor · « **Reply #26 on:** February 27, 2007, 12:38:33 pm »

321 never appealed their case fully, and that was a very different product than what JRiver would be producing.

321 studio's application was designed primarily and only for ripping DVDs and copying them onto recordable media. JRiver's product is an entirely different beast, and the design of their ripper is targeted at format shifting not "backup" (which is viewed by the industry as a codeword for piracy). And all of that's not considering at all that we are in a very different legislative environment than we were previously, and the use-cases (and consumer awareness) of DeCSS is a lot bigger than it was when 321's case was tried (iPod Video for only one example).

IANAL, but I think JR has a good shot at breaking the DMCA's anti-circumvention provision here. Probably the best shot any company could possibly take at it, really.

I've posted the rest of my thoughts on this elsewhere, which is why I've kept mostly silent. Best any of us can really say is "we will see" and "good luck Jim".

Ingo · « **Reply #27 on:** February 27, 2007, 01:28:07 pm »

I just answered "are you nuts" because this feature would probably make even owning MC12 illegal in Germany and a few more countries in good old Europe...

Ingo

rjm · « **Reply #28 on:** February 27, 2007, 03:57:50 pm »

It would be very convenient to be able to convert video to XviD or H264 for online storage or handheld use from within MC, however based on considerable experience with many different tools, I am worried that this could suck a lot of development and support resources from JRiver, thus preventing progress on other JRiver features. Video conversion is a fairly complex domain. I think it will take a lot of work to get it right, and then even more work to support it.

benn600 · « **Reply #29 on:** February 27, 2007, 04:12:47 pm »

Very true. But, if they just did it right and got it over with, perhaps it wouldn't require much support or improvement.

Here's my biggest issue. I don't want to re-encode my direct DVD rips because I still have sufficient space to store the full quality and it would take a ton of time to re-encode 350 DVDs. The big issue is that I would really like a way to sync single episodes from those TV DVDs that I own and have ripped. Therefore, MC would have to have some method for diving into the DVD contents and choosing a specific chapter, title, or even frame based section. Then, it could encode this and transfer it to a portable player.

johnnyboy · « **Reply #30 on:** February 27, 2007, 04:56:10 pm »

Looks like Jim's even more ontop of whats currently going on in the DRM world than the rest of us:

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/27/1946228&from=rss

Very perfect timing with this feature and this new Bill.
Looks like it's us who are all behind the times and shouldn't try to second guess their legal perspective!

glynor · « **Reply #31 on:** February 28, 2007, 11:12:02 am »

The so-called FAIR USE Act is unfortunately not all it is cracked up to be. That's really too bad because Rick Boucher is the one representative who actually seems to "get it" and his previously proposed legislation, which was shot down, would have actually helped the situation significantly. Unfortunately, the FAIR USE act has been so neutered that it doesn't do any more to help us exercise our fair use rights than the PATRIOT Act helps us remain patriots (and if you've ever read the PATRIOT act you'll know it is far more likely to generate the opposite result).

Ars did a nice write up on it today: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070228-8942.html

INTERACT FORUM

Poll

Should we make a break for it and add DVD ripping now (once we talk to our attorney)?

Author Topic: DVD Ripping -- Is it Right for MC12? (Read 5982 times)