It is not semantics, and in the balance are our rights, what we are entitled too, what is legal and what is theft. Unfortunately by interchangeably using these terms it becomes possible for others to lump these very distinct functions and forms together, calling for a summary judgment on all approaches.

Keeping the “lock” on the data and only licensing the key is simply a dirty technicality of it’s own, preventing the legitimate holder from fully enjoying the rights of ownership and even extending to and limiting fair use.

I applaud all media server companies who try to develop processes which keep the spirit of anti piracy while still growing legitimate markets.

Amen, Joel!

At the very least, DVD CCA needs to put a process in place so that they don’t penalize manufacturers who try to take the high road. As it stands now, you are better to NOT license CSS, lest you be sued for breach of contract.

Does anyone know what kind of liability me the dealer assumes by selling and installing these kinds of products to end users? Seams scary? I know ANYDVD is illegal in the US, but some industry manufactures rely on it for their product to work, and make the dealer install it?

Scott, thanks for asking. I asked our attorney friends at EFF these very questions.

Their answers will be posted tomorrow.

That’s some old ######## right there.

I have already replaced my records with tapes, my tapes with CDs and my VHSs with DVDs. I can only be expected to pay for the same content so many times.

If i buy a DVD it should be mine. If I choose to encode the sucker to lower Quality to fit on my Phone,MP3,watch or what ever I should be allowed to, anyone that says different is a money grubbing scum bag.

That’s only if you choose to leave the content unprotected. There is a choice to leave it with the copyright unlocked, a better, apropriate action is to re-lock it, post rip. Then you have exercised fair use while upholding copyright and more importantly, copy-responsibility