Legal suggestion

[cholla]

No, it's not. Cause rightfully so, China does not give a damn about US laws. And this ruling will be overturned cause it's ridiculously broad. Why the HECK should the industry get to say who Mastercard or Paypayl can do business with?

I don't have an arguement with you in principal.
Of course the AACS LA (Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator) shouldn't be able to get a US court to do this.

China may not "give a damn about US laws" . IMO they do to some degree.
That doesn't mean that the .cn can't be stopped from use in the US just like the others. IMO none of the domains of DVDFab should have been shutdown but my government doesn't consult me.

[cholla]

Where does "Free Use" come into play. Aren't we allowed to make a backup for your protection if the retail disc become damaged?? Or has that been struck down too ....

To make it clear I support the "free use" decision by the US Supreme Court.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was & is an attempt to circumvent the courts "fair use" ruling . The US Supreme Court should rule that the DMCA is unconstitutional & had no right to be passed because it go against the courts decision by making it impossible to make a backup copy under the fair use ruling.
The problem is the new law has to be contested in a case before such a ruling can be made. This is what DVDFab now has the opportunity to do.

They can always "license" a manufacturer for a specific use.

That's true . The AACS LA (Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator) can license a manufacturer od DVD/BD player to use the keys to decrypt DVD/BD discs.
A manufacturer can manufacture & sell the DVD/BD players .
All that is legal.
Here's where they have a legal problem under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA):
Once a consumer plays a DVD/BD disc & that disc is decrypted.
They have no authority to bypass the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) with a license . The AACS LA (Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator) owns the rights to the software & that makes them the criminal .
The consumer doesn't own the software in the firmware that does the decryption.
This relieves the consumer of any criminal liability .
The simple arguement is if a consumer reverse enginered the firmware to get the software & then started manufacturing DVD/BD players without purchasing a liscense from the AACS LA they would be quickly sued.
So IMO the AACS LA should have a ruling against them for violating the DMCA.
With the DVD/BD players they have licensed they have violated the DMCA millions more times than DVDFab may have.
To mt DVDFab should be legal because it allows US citizens to be able to apply the fair use rights they have.
I know other countries have laws about this but my knowlege is mostly about US law. Members from other countries can post about their laws.

[signals]

An interesting thread. Many avenues of legal challenges to the ruling I am sure are being explored.

[murffee1]

There is a lot at stake with this ruling against DVDFab. If the U.S. Court system is victorious, there are numerous other companies with similar software. There is at least one very big software maker that is a direct competitor of DVDFab. I am sure that the U.S. Court/movie industry will go after the others if this ruling stands.

[Chetwood]

That indicates that the .cn will eventually have the same problem.

No, it's not. Cause rightfully so, China does not give a damn about US laws. And this ruling will be overturned cause it's ridiculously broad. Why the HECK should the industry get to say who Mastercard or Paypayl can do business with?

[kherr]

.... I was thinking one thing and typing another .. yes

[GregiBoy]

You mean "Fair Use" don't you?

[kherr]

They can always "license" a manufacturer for a specific use.

Where does "Free Use" come into play. Aren't we allowed to make a backup for your protection if the retail disc become damaged?? Or has that been struck down too ....

[cholla]

The solution is like done by dvdfab, use .cn (owned and managed by the country)

The above is the solution currently used & is a temporary work-around.
It might stand the test of time & the US may not be able to shut it down.

From a PM I received from a member that wishes to remain anonymous stated this:

A New York federal court has upheld a complaint that accuses the tool to overturn copy protections from DVDs and Blu-rays. As a result, all websites, servers and social media appearances were seized and shut down by DVDFab. Payment service providers such as MasterCard and PayPal may no longer work with DVDFab.

Company did not respond to prosecution
Behind the long been standing in the room display against ripping software put Intel, Microsoft, Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba, Walt Disney and Warner Bros. So far, DVDFab had not commented on the allegations. Consequently, the Court spoke of a default judgment and thus decided in favor of the accuser. An earlier response from DVDFab would have resulted in certain circumstances to less drastic measures.

The sight we are using now is also in the law suit so also may get closed down and visa,mastercard and paypal won't take money for Fab anymore as a result of all this

That indicates that the .cn will eventually have the same problem .
DVDFab will need to fight this in US & probably other nations courts . If they want to continue as a company.
This is the reason I made the suggection. All of the countries allow the manufactur & sale of the DVD/BD players which do decrypt . Whether the companies on the "plaintiff" side of of the legal action like to admit that or not.
Most of those sell the DVD/BD players also. It is the decryption that is illegal . If the US courts are going to apply this to software then the DVD/BD players need to be included. Basically this would stop the use & sale of DVD/BD discs because no one could play them. We all know the US courts are not going to do that . The big companies in the "legal action" don't want that. Still it has the be argued that
decryption is decryption either it is illegal for all or legal for all. Allowing in one form sets a precedent.
Again the arguement that one is hardware & one is software doesn't hold either. I still hold that a chip is just a permanent way to hold in memory a software program . That is what a firmare flash is new software for the chip.
So why is this different from software stored on a harddrive ?
Even more so with the new ssd drives . Which could be considered a "big chip" .

[Jeep le rippeur]

This is the problem to have .com .net etc...owned and managed by icann (usa)

The solution is like done by dvdfab, use .cn (owned and managed by the country)

[ゲゲゲの鬼太郎]

After not being able to access DVDFab.com for a more than a day, I did a Google Search and found out through the DVDFab Facebook site (which by the looks of things has also been shut down since then) that the U.S. Courts ordered seizure of the domain.

What's next?

Are they going to pressure the Chinese Government to shutdown this site too?

Or are they going to start blocking access to this server on the international level or what?

The RIAA and MPAA are getting desperate and they don't care whether a software is being used for legitimate use or not. All they want is their share of the money to stuff in their FAT pockets!

Hell they are so greedy here is food for thought.....

Each year the best movie is judged not by how many people watched it and liked it, but by how much money a movie brings in.

This in itself is a big farce and we know it because depending on where you live, the price of a movie ticket can vary wildy. Some places can be as cheap as $5.00 and other places can be $12.00 or more. Then there is online pricing for movie rentals which can be outrageous depending on the service.

As it is, Newer movies will always win over older movies because of this model.

The MPAA and the RIAA are nothing more than GREEDY Fat Cats who don't care for anyone but themselves and screw everyone else!

[cholla]

I don't have enough information to discuss what the actual court order is about.
It was my impression this was done under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Which makes the decryption what it considers illegal.

Making some copies isn't illegal in any way. Such as camcorder "home movies".
So I find it hard to beleive it is the ability to copy that is in question .

It might be argued that the ability to make a decrypted copy is what is in question . To me that goes back to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
I'm fairly certain that is the US law behind the US courts actions.

[SweetOne69]

Decryption isn't the issue

The ability to decrypt isn't the issue. It is the ability to make copies that is at issue.

[cholla]

This is about the recent dvdfab site closings .
I was surprised there isn't a thread about this & if there is I didn't find it here.
If there is please merge this into it.

If this goes to a US court . I'm not an attorney but I think this should be attacked.
Standalone DVD & BD players also decrypt . Somewhere inside then they have a chip that contains keys to decrypt DVD/BD discs that are encrypted.
To me that is also decryption . They might say this is done with firmware
but what is firmware but a chip that has software written on it .
The legal point is the US courts just allow this when it should also be under the DMCA . That is if software like DVDFab is . That they allow these players to decrypt sets precedent for allowing software decryption programs to decrypt also.
Otherwise they need to enforce the DMCA on DVD/BD standalone players.
Of course that would mean people wouldn't purchase these discs. The movie industry could no longer sell them because they couldn't be played.
Further a recall of all old discs would need to be done requiring the manufacturer( movie studios) to give a full retail refund to anyone that wanted one.
The same for any standalone player (maybe even VHS ones) for a full retail refund. Since these would no longer meet the (warrant of merchantability).
(No longer fit to do what they were purchased for).
See how the movie studios & hardware manufacturer would like to do that.
Fair is fair & a court order against DVDFab should be applied to all violators
of the DMCA . Or to none . The latter being what I would choose .