said by dualsub2006:
It is in no way legal for one owner of a DVD to transcode that disk and then make the resulting files available for download via BT even if the downloader is also a legal owner of the same DVD. Don't worry about what the content industry will tell you on this one, worry about the judge. He will tell you every single time that you have no right to distribute copyrighted works in any way, shape, form or fashion. Period.
Let's see. You are wrong (counting)+ + + + + + at least six times above, not counting mere inaccuracies that are side effects of the structure of your statement.
That's a problem with this. The law and the technology weren't written together and the DMCA does not join them. Even the judges are struggling with this, and countries that supposedly have the same laws due to conventions and treaties no longer agree as to their interpretation.
There are volumes on this, I won't go further. Needless to say, the DMCA thing doesn't belong in THIS plan. The DMCA part of this plan need not be in it as it contributes nothing to the success or failure of it.
Finally naming the Invisicap and the consequences for breaking it is the right thing to do, regardless. That Comcast is thinking about a relatively high cap and a much more modest penalty than before just makes it a better plan.
The DMCA part is a terrible afterthought, and Comcast should reevaluate why it wants to lick its hands and grab on to that wire!--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...