Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

alexrad.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 159 posts

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#91

Post by mikeryan »

higherpurpose wrote: post #76
buro9 wrote: post #37

My partner is an academic, a lecturer in film theory. She watches a lot of films, and needs to make a lot of short clips for her lectures, and to take a lot of screenshots for her papers. This task is becoming increasingly difficult as time goes by. The most reliable method (for her skill level) is now to rip DVDs, removing various bits of protection, before playing the film using VLC on Windows and using VLC to take…

The strangest part is that according to the law (fair use) she should be able to do that. This DRM is effectively creating its own "copyright law", just like Cory Doctorow has warned us before. The whole copyright gang from MPAA to OS vendors and chip makers are using DRM to expand the reach of copyright law. And you can't just say "well I'll just break the DRM, since it's legal for me to take the screenshot" either.…

You're conflating copyright law. She is legally allowed to take screenshots and clips from copyrighted material. There's nothing in or about copyright law that requires content providers to make this easy.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#92

Post by crdoconnor »

iSnow wrote: post #83
juliendorra wrote: post #29

Just a note on the discourse: the point "I own it, I should be able to use it the way I want" feels like not really effective (as a rhetoric) in many part of the western world and in many social circles. I really feel for example in France it would be easily brushed off using analogy to construction permits or driver licenses, or just put the person in some crazy-libertarian box ("the kind that want to print firearms…

> the point "I own it, I should be able to use it the way I want" feels like not really effective (as a rhetoric) in many part of the western world and in many social circles. I really feel for example in France I really think that's a complete strawman. People in France (or Europe in general) very much feel like "this is my computer, I use it any way I want". Personally I think even more so than Americans, because u…

>BTW libertarians would be a-ok with corporations defining how your computer works, that's entrepreneurial freedom, after all.

Only because they imagine markets ('free') to be entirely defined according to consumers' desires, as opposed to the mess of monopolies, cartels and semi-cartels that exist naturally in the real world.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#93

Post by DanBC »

w0utert wrote: post #82
Ar-Curunir wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, this is the main problem I have with the people who claim in comment sections across the internet that since I'm only paying for a license to play the content, I can't complain about owning it. Nowhere on the iTunes store does it say, "Click here to purchase license to play video". Not on Amazon or Google Play either. This is just a case of false advertising by content producers and distributors. If they can…

You acknowledged that you were aware of these facts when you read the EULA (you did read it, right?) at some point in the past when installing or updating iTunes (or whatever other service). I know it's ridiculous but that's how it works, make sure to show a 50+ page 'you basically have no rights' notice that you have to 'agree', and you can strip whatever privileges you like from your paying customers.

That doesn't work in Germany and probably not in other EU countries.

Cookie law shows that Europe will go after these small things. (But also that their "solution" might be stupid.)

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#94

Post by frabcus »

w0utert wrote: post #82
Ar-Curunir wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, this is the main problem I have with the people who claim in comment sections across the internet that since I'm only paying for a license to play the content, I can't complain about owning it. Nowhere on the iTunes store does it say, "Click here to purchase license to play video". Not on Amazon or Google Play either. This is just a case of false advertising by content producers and distributors. If they can…

You acknowledged that you were aware of these facts when you read the EULA (you did read it, right?) at some point in the past when installing or updating iTunes (or whatever other service). I know it's ridiculous but that's how it works, make sure to show a 50+ page 'you basically have no rights' notice that you have to 'agree', and you can strip whatever privileges you like from your paying customers.

Nobody reads EULAs. They are irrelevant in a historical context.

They'll clearly be replaced by consumer law at some point.

You don't have to sign a 20 page license to go into a shop and buy a banana, do you? And yet there are all sorts of property and purchasing rights (for buyer and seller) associated with that.

The correct way of talking about this now is to discuss what the consumer law should say which will replace EULAs.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#95

Post by marcosdumay »

w0utert wrote: post #82
Ar-Curunir wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, this is the main problem I have with the people who claim in comment sections across the internet that since I'm only paying for a license to play the content, I can't complain about owning it. Nowhere on the iTunes store does it say, "Click here to purchase license to play video". Not on Amazon or Google Play either. This is just a case of false advertising by content producers and distributors. If they can…

You acknowledged that you were aware of these facts when you read the EULA (you did read it, right?) at some point in the past when installing or updating iTunes (or whatever other service). I know it's ridiculous but that's how it works, make sure to show a 50+ page 'you basically have no rights' notice that you have to 'agree', and you can strip whatever privileges you like from your paying customers.

No, sorry, I didn't read the EULA. Also, I'm not a lawyer, and wont hire one to review each piece of software I use. In fact, I'm so wiling to take legal risks that I'll even greet my neighbors without consulting a lawyer first!

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#96

Post by jrochkind1 »

mikeryan wrote: post #91
higherpurpose wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strangest part is that according to the law (fair use) she should be able to do that. This DRM is effectively creating its own "copyright law", just like Cory Doctorow has warned us before. The whole copyright gang from MPAA to OS vendors and chip makers are using DRM to expand the reach of copyright law. And you can't just say "well I'll just break the DRM, since it's legal for me to take the screenshot" either.…

You're conflating copyright law. She is legally allowed to take screenshots and clips from copyrighted material. There's nothing in or about copyright law that requires content providers to make this easy.

The DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent technological protections in many instances where the result would still be fair use, if it weren't for the technological protections and the DMCA making circumventing them illegal.

It's not just that the content providers 'make it hard' -- it's that their attempts to 'make it hard' are protected by law, not just by difficulty. Even if they DRM doesn't actually make it very hard at all, it's still protected by the DMCA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#97

Post by fpgeek »

mikeryan wrote: post #91
higherpurpose wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strangest part is that according to the law (fair use) she should be able to do that. This DRM is effectively creating its own "copyright law", just like Cory Doctorow has warned us before. The whole copyright gang from MPAA to OS vendors and chip makers are using DRM to expand the reach of copyright law. And you can't just say "well I'll just break the DRM, since it's legal for me to take the screenshot" either.…

You're conflating copyright law. She is legally allowed to take screenshots and clips from copyrighted material. There's nothing in or about copyright law that requires content providers to make this easy.

Easy or hard isn't the issue. The problem is there's an evil catch-22 at the intersection of copyright law and DRM: She's allowed to take the screenshots and clips, but it's illegal for her to get the DRM removal tools that would let her do that. And even if she magically acquired the tools, it is illegal for her to use them, even for an otherwise legal purpose.

It's like giving you a driver's license, but making it illegal for you to buy, rent, borrow or be gifted a car. And if you did happen to have a car anyway, it's also illegal to start, stop or steer it.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#98

Post by Thlom »

davidgerard wrote: post #77
ris wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Intel's just using Hollywood's fear of piracy" DRM has very little to do with piracy. Hollywood know perfectly well that DRM will not stop a determined pirate and a movie only has to be ripped once to be pirated indefinitely. It's about control. It's about the studios always having a seat at the bargaining table when new products/devices are being floated. They fear becoming a commodity supplier.

>Hollywood know perfectly well that DRM will not stop a determined pirate and a movie only has to be ripped once to be pirated indefinitely. You know, I'm really not convinced they do. Everything I see from these people leads me to think they literally think this stuff is magic , and they want the snake oil so badly they'll believe the people selling it over the people telling them the disappointing truth, every time…

As far as I know the DRM on DCPs (Digital Cinema Package) isn't broken. Yet. Maybe because relatively few people have access to the encrypted content. I guess the most important thing for the movie industry is to have the cinema window free from pirated copies.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#99

Post by liadmat »

rewqfdsa wrote: post #11
Drakim wrote: post #6

What I don't really understand is how this could be used to stop piracy. Sure, you could stop recording on a machine with Intel Management Engine, but wouldn't pirates simply use a computer without Intel Management Engine to rip media? Unless the media becomes impossible to consume without Intel Management Engine (sounds unlikely, how would you explain that to customers), how does it prevent anything?

> the media becomes impossible to consume without Intel Management Engine That's why Intel management keeps greenlighting this project. Intel thinks that it if it can convince content producers to distribute media as blobs encrypted with Intel's public key (and maybe, say, Samsung's or Apple's), then we can transition to a world where consumer video files do work on most consumer hardware, but can't be decrypted outs…

> except for the analog hole

It's a pretty big hole, and it's practically impossible to seal. Which is why I don't think we'll ever see "game over" for piracy, no matter how advanced DRM technology becomes.

At this point, I think censoring the internet is the only way for the movies/music industry to win. Sadly this isn't so far fetched.

Re: Why Rosyna Can't Take a Movie Screenshot

#100

Post by dghughes »

It's bizarre foreign movie and music corporations (I'm Canadian) are dictating actual physical changes to computing hardware.

It's as bizarre to me as if US car corporations dictated I could only use premium fuel from Shell and monitored it in real-time.

Post reply on HN