[Techtalk] No DVDs for Linux?

[Conor Daly]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 09:47:07PM -0800 or so it is rumoured hereabouts, 
Akkana Peck thought:
> Mary writes:
> > been done for DVDs because DVD are physical objects distributed by
> > commercial interests: there's no interest in a free standard because it
> > would make copying easier.
> 
> Would it? I know the MPAA argues that, but I've always found that
> argument confusing. I've never tried to copy a DVD, but can't you
> just copy the bits from one disc onto another disc directly, without
> ever needing to decode any CSS?
 
Not with dd.  You can with a non-encrypted DVD, but not with an encrypted
one.  Or is that some other dodgy bits protection method which is itself
an admission by the DVD makers that CSS is not a copy-protection device?

> Certainly it would make it easier to take a DVD and encode it into
> some other format like divx or mpeg. But that doesn't seem to be a
> major part of their usual argument against deCSS; they usually
> seem to be railing against DVD pirates, and I've never seen it
> explained how deCSS fits into that picture at all.

As I understand it, CSS encryption has nothing to do with copy protection.
It's simply a device to prevent the manufacture and/or distribution of DVD
players that have not been licensed by the DVD producers.  In combination
with the US DMCA and the European Union Copyright Directive {EUCD}, it is
now a criminal offence to play a DVD on anything other than an approved
DVD player or with an approved DVD playing program.

Sorry, I tell a lie.  It does have something to do with copy protection.
Copy protection is the lie used to justify the use of CSS encryption to
erode fair use rights under copyright law...

Conor {do I sound a bit cynical here??}
-- 
Conor Daly <conor.daly at cod.homelinux.org>
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/G/S/O d+(-) s:+ a+ C++(+) UL++++ US++ P>++ L+++>++++ E--- W++ !N
PS+ PE Y+ PGP? tv(-) b+++(+) G e+++(*) h-- r+++ z++++ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------