377
‘My whole library is wiped out’: what it means to own movies and TV in the age of streaming services
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
377 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
59534 readers
3199 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you are into collecting, that is. I am kind of triggered by the binary "physical vs. non-owned" because physical is not for everyone, if I was dead set on paying and the media was not available DRMless, I would rather buy a digital copy plus pirate a DRMless one corresponding to it. Buying a disk only to throw it out after ripping is wasteful. If you keep them, they take up too much space and are too inconvenient to use compared to a few external drives.
Eh, they're not that big, especially if you discard the cases and store them in a binder.
I would also rather buy digital, but in general, they're not available DRM-free. I can rip the DRM from physical media, so that's what I do. Pirating is technically illegal, even if I own license, so that's not something I'm interested in.
You're okay ripping DRM illegally, but "piracy" is a bridge too far. To copyright holders they're the same thing.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think there's a legal defense under the DMCA, here's the applicable part of the code:
Subparagraph C describes the process by which the Librarian of Congress reviews such exemptions, and specifically calls out non-profit and educational use.
AFAIK, this provision hasn't been tested for a regular home user making digital backups of their copy-protected media for non-infringing use. There's a plausible defense here: I can't use a DVD player on my phone, so this law restricts my ability to make non-infringing use of the material I own when traveling without access to a DVD player (AFAIK, those don't exist on planes or at campsites) or my physical DVD. So it's reasonable to use a digital copy so that I can do non-profit research with the content on disks I own.
To me, that seems like a reasonable interpretation of the exception under this provision, and I think it has a reasonable chance of being upheld in a court of law. I don't think it's ever been tried, because copyright owners don't care about people making backups, and they wouldn't want to set legal precedent about this either. This argument hinges on whether ripping for home use can be considered "educational purposes."
So yes, I'm okay with ripping DRM from a disk I own because I think there's a legitimate legal defense. There isn't a legitimate legal defense for piracy, at least not one I'm aware of.
This is what I think about people using VPNs to access content. You're still accessing it contrary to the license agreement, it's still piracy. Just download it instead of paying for a VPN company to advertise on YouTube.
What is the point of storing something you know you will never use then? At this point can just throw out the disk.
Because then I cannot legally prove that I haven't given it away or sold it. In order to have any hope of a legitimate legal defense, I need to have a copy to prove that it's actually a backup. And no, buying (or borrowing) something, ripping it, and then returning it doesn't count as a "backup," that's illegal duplication.
Your describing a practice not everyone is ok with. I buy media and put it into my media cabinet. When I get rid of media I delete any copies I may still have of it.
I mean, disks take up a ton of space - not everyone is comfortable with that either. If I did that, I would have had to throw out or bother selling the disks.
Your missing the point. I keep the disk because that is the original media. Once the original media is gone so it the right to watch it.
I don't download any illegal media. I just use the physical medium I paid for. Without that medium I no longer have the right to the media.
Imagine enforcing shitty copyright laws on yourself like some code of honor. We developed the technology to make infinite copies of any media and then spend endless resources fighting it because it undermines our parasitic economic model.
Imagine for a moment that society embraced the full potential of digital technology. We could have a library of all human art and knowledge ever produced available for free, instantly, everywhere. If book libraries didn't already exist and were proposed today the excuses for rejecting it would be the same. The answer is also the same, change our economic model to support people's basic needs unconditionally and directly subsidize the production we need/want (like art).
What if you destroy the physical media so noone else can use it and then keep your digital copy in its place?
But who would check that? A raid? This is so pointless. You are not using it, you have paid for it, you are just occupying space with a useless piece of plastic...
I don't need the Police to enforce my morals. You you get rid of the original medium you no longer have the right to watch it as that is the license.
That's just how my morals work.
That's a very silly morals indeed.