This Company and their software

[NewMelle]

My head hurts! artsunlimited my friend you have a Titanium constitution. I mean that in a good way. If I'm ever in trouble I know who to contact! And with my temper?

Legal people can complicate the F out of a potato! This is why I moved to the boonies, put up no trespassing signs and a warning sign indicating I have 19 acres to hide the bodies.

[artsunlimited]

My head hurts! artsunlimited my friend you have a Titanium constitution. I mean that in a good way. If I'm ever in trouble I know who to contact! And with my temper?

Legal people can complicate the F out of a potato! This is why I moved to the boonies, put up no trespassing signs and a warning sign indicating I have 19 acres to hide the bodies.

Rather than firing up the backhoe, you'd be much better off claiming insufficient service of any and all complaints because your crank-up internet connection is gawdawful!

Not one single judge who experienced it for themselves would think of denying the motion.

[NewMelle]

LMAO!!!! So true!

[artsunlimited]

LMAO!!!! So true!

*snerk*

[Cats4U]

I still stand behind what I previously wrote. I don't think this AACS lawsuit directly applies to StreamFab (or MusicFab). Perhaps another lawsuit will follow in the future from the organization that handles streaming copyright violations, but I don't see where AACS has any standing for that.
As for the service to Tao, they made the mistake of hiring a lawyer and even acknowledging that anyone in the US had any jurisdiction over them. They should have just hid behind the bamboo curtain.

[NewMelle]

Gibson is the most sue-happy lazy redneck company in the world and if they can't do anything no one can.

[Sebastian001]

my goodness, it's more exciting than your Trump trials....

But in the end, what does that mean for us?

[artsunlimited]

I still stand behind what I previously wrote. I don't think this AACS lawsuit directly applies to StreamFab (or MusicFab). Perhaps another lawsuit will follow in the future from the organization that handles streaming copyright violations, but I don't see where AACS has any standing for that.
As for the service to Tao, they made the mistake of hiring a lawyer and even acknowledging that anyone in the US had any jurisdiction over them. They should have just hid behind the bamboo curtain.

If you're thinking only video content on DVDs, then that would make sense. But as it's pre-recorded media, the AACS might also consider online content like streaming video to be part of its content distribution system since it's actually pre-recorded content. I can't see that there's a loophole to allow for downloading streaming copyrighted content in the injunction.
The question is whether there's any teeth in enjoining credit cards to cease providing services to them by processing payments. I suspect there isn't.

Doing anything to acknowledge AACSLA had filed against them was probably not wise, but as there are probably ways to prove an email has been received, this way they dragged out the suit for a good 9 years. AACSLA was pretty clever in serving Feng Tao himself by email, since The Hague Service Convention permits alternative service methods, such as mail or email, if the State of designation doesn't object. Thing is, when China adopted the Convention, it DID object to those alternative service methods, so if a US company wants to serve a Chinese company in China, they need to make requests for service to the Ministry of Justice of China, which would then forward the documents to the requisite Chinese court to serve the documents.

It's time consuming, but it doesn't necessarily mean that DVDFab/Feng Tao Software wouldn't ultimately be served, and as soon as that happens, the jurisdiction of the court where the complaint is filed is established. But as they listed Feng Tao himself as dba DVDFab and Fengtao Software, they didn't limit the complaint to just a company, so I believe that allowed them to circumvent China's refusal to accept alternative methods for service.

[jpp72]

I'm with Cats4U on this one. Circumventing the AACS protection means AACS sues you. Circumventing Widevine would be in the hands of Google, PlayReady would be Microsoft and FairPlay would be Apple.

If it was the MPAA suing then i would say it covers AACS, Widevine, PlayReady and FairPlay.

In theory, the AACS could win and seize the DVDFab domains but another corporate entity that isn't a subsidiary could own StreamFab and its websites.

I know a ton of shit concerning IT but absolutely nothing of copyright law so i am figuratively talking out of my ass

[artsunlimited]

my goodness, it's more exciting than your Trump trials....

But in the end, what does that mean for us?

Oh, who knows at this point. If SF hasn't figured out going into the fifth month that they don't have the in-house talent to crack even one DRM, don't look for them to get wise to it and hire someone who can do the job anytime soon. If they find they can peddle an overpriced screen recorder to the gullible with some success and slap on a few more porn modules, then that's what they'll do.

China is a signatory to the1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which basically means it will likely enforce foreign arbitral awards from recognized foreign arbitral bodies, like a US Federal Court. What they're less likely to do is enforce default awards based on a failure to show up for a foreign arbitration the defendant knows they'll lose, which the 2023 order basically was, and Chinese companies count on that.

But SF may be reluctant to put forth any real financial effort to start decrypting things if they think they'll have to shut up shop soon, so my guess is that either way, we won't get a direct downloader back again.

[NewMelle]

my goodness, it's more exciting than your Trump trials....

I haven't watched the news in decades and all the better for it. I figure whatever they're fighting about these days let em fight it out. Fewer to get rid of when the dust settles.

But in the end, what does that mean for us?

Probably nothing. As SF is moving towards a full blown screen recorder instead of a direct downloader (circumventing DRM) by the time any of the litigation comes to a head (if it ever does), if it even applies to SF, SF will no longer be decrypting anything and just like so many other things they've copied can then also copy MovPilot's decryption disclaimer of not circumventing DRM.

I have a few suggestions for the new direction, and yes, I am being facetious.

[Sebastian001]

We send Wilson to the witness stand :-)

[artsunlimited]

I'm with Cats4U on this one. Circumventing the AACS protection means AACS sues you. Circumventing Widevine would be in the hands of Google, PlayReady would be Microsoft and FairPlay would be Apple.

If it was the MPAA suing then i would say it covers AACS, Widevine, PlayReady and FairPlay.

In theory, the AACS could win and seize the DVDFab domains but another corporate entity that isn't a subsidiary could own StreamFab and its websites.

I know a ton of shit concerning IT but absolutely nothing of copyright law so i am figuratively talking out of my ass

That why the lawsuit reads "JOHN DOE, JANE DOE and/or XYZ COMPANY" - that covers anyone doing business under another name, but not recognizing that said other name is an independent legal entity, as well as covers their asses in case the claim should've actually been brought against XYZ Company as a separate legal entity. (This is also why IT is a heckuva lot more interesting than IP law.) StreamFab wasn't a thing AFAIK in 2014, but it appears to be a subsidiary of DVDFab or else somehow part of the FengTao family.

You're quite correct in that circumventing the AACS protection means AACS has the grounds to sue you, but under its 193 PAGE ARE YOU KIDDING ME HERE adopter agreement as the Licensor, AASCLA makes it clear that Widevine, FairPlay and PlayReady are considered to be among its Trusted Source Mark Allowed Technologies or TSMAT. So it does appear if anyone circumvents Widevine or any content protection system on their allowed technology list, they could ultimately be dealing with AASCLA as this agreement does seem to give them standing.

[artsunlimited]

We send Wilson to the witness stand :-)

LOL, for some reason that really cracked me up.
Nah, Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination would protect him, and no one's gonna offer him immunity in a civil trial.

[Chameleon]

Stream Fab developers and I use that term loosely spent 3 weeks telling jpp72 they think they have it fixed. Don't you think they thought that screen recording was what they were referring to? To them, it's fixed now. They spent 3 weeks to a month working on their screen recorder, this is it folks. This is your fix. Game over. Strike three.