Scripps Employees Called 'Hackers' For Exposing Massive Security Flaw
Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
So long RealDVD, it's been, uh... real
RealNetworks had been hoping that these restrictions would help the software survive against any legal claims. After all, the courts have a long history of deciding that you have a right to create backup copies of media you purchase for personal use. Unfortunately, the DCMA circumvents this right by declaring that you can't use technology that circumvents copy-protection.
The long and short of it is that the court ruled against the company because its software violates the DCMA. It's not clear whether RealNetworks will appeal the case. Honestly, I doubt there were throngs of people clamoring to buy copies of RealDVD at $30 a pop when there are plenty of free alternatives that don't restrict what you can do with ripped movies.
But RealNetworks had been hoping to launch a version of the software that could be included on set-top boxes like DVD players that would allow users to insert a disc and save the data to a hard drive so they could browse through their movie collections and watch videos without swapping discs. And that's a feature I could see people spending a few bucks for.
Comments
1
Subscribe to commentsJonathanAug 12th 2009 12:59PM
Even though I hate Real Networks, and every product they ever made, I think they should appeal this judgement.
I do not understand the US Justice system all that well, but can't the judge then rule in favour of Real, and as a consequence use this as a test-case to vacate the DMCA as invalid?
My understanding in criminal trials, you can find a guilty person innocent if the law itself is unjust and you can do so by finding the defendant not guilty and the law would go under review.
If this is the case, would it work for civil cases such as this? Why can't the DMCA be contested? If Fair Use is being prevented due to the DMCA, I thought that was a valid reason? Isn't there a clause that allows personal use to use technology to circumvent something?
Why is your nation so dumb when it comes to these laws? I thought Bill Clinton was a smart man, why would he sign such an idiotic bill into law?