Why is making complication DVDs a forbidden topic? | Porn Fan Community Forum

New Pornstar Interviews - [more]

Introducing Lady LorReign

"Good oral on me turns me on. Also, knowing that my partner is enjoying themself,"

Participate...

log in
register

Browse...

Etiquette
Active Topics
Popular Topics
Member List
Search

All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 34 > Why is making complication DVDs a forbidden topic?

Author	Post
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 19 2007 : 10:54PM ADT moderators (especially Bill) must be aware of the concept of "fair use" and can probably see that making compliation DVDs from titles you have purchased readily falls under this legal concept. Is there fear that discussion of this could lead to others using similar techniques to steal scenes from rental DVDs? Or is there some legal or ethical reason that makes this so incredibly sensitve? ADT moderators must also be aware of the wide distribution of free tools for extracting DVD video and audio and/or compressing said audio and video into computer video formats. So it's not like any secrets are being discussed here. On the contrary: Authoring a compliation DVD seems to be quite a bit more complicated than simply coping an entire title (which is easy to do with free software). I personally would very much enjoy a discussion of how to create complication DVDs as I own a pretty high number of adult DVDs and would like to make a few "best of" or themed DVDs. Again, please note that this is "fair use" and totally legal. Dr. P [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 19 2007 : 11:36PM While these techniques are not secret, they choose not to be a part of the dissemination of information that may be part of illegal activities or hurt their sponsors. At a guess. [Link]
Joey Starr Senior Member Still wanking after all these years. 8082 Posts 10/00	Posted - May 20 2007 : 12:47AM Complication, compliation, compilation, whatever... [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - May 20 2007 : 12:51AM [Link]
chaotic_23 Member 339 Posts 1/06	Posted - May 20 2007 : 2:45AM "Because porn is complicated enough as it is! Hyuck hyuck..." [Link]

Harri Patel Senior Member #SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03	Posted - May 20 2007 : 3:00AM Again, please note that this is "fair use" and totally legal. Click to expand The software required to decrypt copy-protected DVDs is illegal under the DMCA, whether or not you are claiming that you wish to do so for "fair use" purposes. [Link]
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 20 2007 : 8:19AM The same information as to how to make fair use copying for personal use, is exactly the same information one would use for illegal copying. This fact makes such discussion almost impossible. The software required to decrypt copy-protected DVDs is illegal under the DMCA, whether or not you are claiming that you wish to do so for "fair use" purposes. Click to expand While this is exactly correct, it doesn't limit your right to fair use copying, it just makes it a crime to defeat/decrypt copy-protection measures -- if present -- in order to do so. Catch-22 [Link]
BIGmike B-I-G-m-i-k-e 2335 Posts 3/01	Posted - May 20 2007 : 9:28AM There are many popular search engines that will tell you whatever you want to know. Be it the background of any potential love interests, or how to work with DVDs, or even how to make homemade dark chocolate. Use one. All of the above are not that hard to do. *- -B -I -G -m -i -k -e, here and there, over and out! - -* [Link]
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 20 2007 : 9:50AM BigBobxxx wrote: While this is exactly correct, it doesn't limit your right to fair use copying, it just makes it a crime to defeat/decrypt copy-protection measures -- if present -- in order to do so. Catch-22 Click to expand Exactly. Well, sort of. The letter of the law is far less important to me than the spirit of the law. In this case it's about revenue and, to a lesser extent, protection of intellectual property. I tend to almost 100% disregard the DMCA as it is a bad law that serves no honorable purpose. In this case, if strictly interpreted, it completely removes fair use of DVD. How fair, or good, or useful is that? It's not. As to BigMike's point, I could probably find a tutorial on how to do this on a number of sites. It wasn't so much that I was dying for the information, as that I was curious why this legal topic keeps getting squashed. I'll wait for a moderator to comment. Dr. P [Link]
Bill All-Star Member 5334 Posts 6/00	Posted - May 20 2007 : 10:27AM All of the above answers are correct. Given that the information is available elsewhere and because we have a significant presence of adult company representatives at ADT, we choose not to permit discussions about how to steal their movies here. I agree that the same techniques can be used legally to make backups and compilations. But, in reality, these techniques would be used far more often to make copies of titles discs that he copier doesn't own and therefore, doesn't have the legal right to copy. [Link]
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 20 2007 : 10:52AM DrP0rn0 wrote: BigBobxxx wrote: While this is exactly correct, it doesn't limit your right to fair use copying, it just makes it a crime to defeat/decrypt copy-protection measures -- if present -- in order to do so. Catch-22 Click to expand Exactly. Well, sort of. The letter of the law is far less important to me than the spirit of the law. In this case it's about revenue and, to a lesser extent, protection of intellectual property. I tend to almost 100% disregard the DMCA as it is a bad law that serves no honorable purpose. In this case, if strictly interpreted, it completely removes fair use of DVD. How fair, or good, or useful is that? It's not. Click to expand Agree that the DMCA is bad law. Disagree about your conclusion as to "if strictly interpreted, it completely removes fair use of DVD." There are many DVDs out there with no copyright-protection employed at all. Also, if one were to simply "play-on-one-machine-record-on-a-second-machine" (like has been done with every music and video format since the Stone Age), you have not violated the DMCA. Fair Use is not just an opinion, it is, in fact, provided for within U.S. copyright law itself. The rub, as Bill correctly sums up, is that most copying of video being done is NOT Fair Use: I agree that the same techniques can be used legally to make backups and compilations. But, in reality, these techniques would be used far more often to make copies of titles discs that he copier doesn't own and therefore, doesn't have the legal right to copy. Click to expand [Link]
Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99	Posted - May 20 2007 : 8:36PM Thanks to all of those that have chimed in. In the early days of ADT the methods and software to steal content from DVDs weren't readily available all over the place. It was way back then that we set the policy of never being a facilitator of defeating copyright protection mechanisms. It's like the folks that claim to sell water pipes for tobacco use only. What percentage of users actually use them for tobacco? I bet about the same percentage that uses DVD ripper software for "fair use". [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 20 2007 : 10:17PM DrP0rn0 wrote: Exactly. Well, sort of. The letter of the law is far less important to me than the spirit of the law. Dr. P Click to expand The consequences are not limited to you and those who enforce laws aren't interested in which is more important to you. [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - May 21 2007 : 1:01AM The bottom line is that the owners of this forum can set any rules they wish. It's their forum. They don't have to let us discuss the properties of air if they don't want that being discussed. They don't have to give a reason. In the case of something that can be used to facilitate pirating, it's not hard to see the reason. [Link]
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 21 2007 : 12:09PM croy wrote: DrP0rn0 wrote: Exactly. Well, sort of. The letter of the law is far less important to me than the spirit of the law. Dr. P Click to expand The consequences are not limited to you and those who enforce laws aren't interested in which is more important to you. Click to expand You surprise me Croy with this response. I'll be brief: Good lawmakers, judges, etc, know the difference between wording and legal intention. Dr. P [Link]

DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 21 2007 : 12:12PM I have asked a question and have heard the answer. While I think it's rather overcautious to continue to have this policy (given the history as outlined by Drew), I appreciate hearing why and certainliy won't try to violate the policy. Thanks, Dr. P [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 21 2007 : 10:05PM DrP0rn0 wrote: Good lawmakers, judges, etc, know the difference between wording and legal intention. Click to expand That is not the limit of what exists and consequences are not elimated by that response. Neither is a good legistlator, judge, or anybody else in the process too concerned about which is more important to you. Rather they are concerned with the enforcement of the law, whether the letter or spirit. [Link]
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 22 2007 : 12:41AM You confuse me Croy. You seem to be putting the difference between letter and intention on me, as if it were a new concept. I don't think I'm particularly unique in seeking the intention of the law, rather than the perversion of it. I would hope that all honorable, ethical persons in the business of writing and interpreting laws share this goal. I'm only bothering to answer because you seem intelligent and further, I thought we shared similar outlooks on these types of things. Perhaps I'm projecting because you and I agree on other issues. I realize that I'm hopelessly off topic, so I will end here. Dr. P [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 22 2007 : 6:00AM The differences aren't on you - as I say, those who enforce don't care what distinctions you choose to make. What matters as far as consquencesis how those who enforce the law decide to interpret and prioritize it - because all subsequent actions stem from this. You may be theoretically right, but you or others must deal with the mechanisms of society. Gallileo was (partially) right, but he still suffered house arrest - others have died being right. I am not arguing your intent - I am arguing what happens when others don't decide to see it your way. [Link]
Harri Patel Senior Member #SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03	Posted - May 22 2007 : 5:58PM In other words, tell it to the warden. [Link]
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 23 2007 : 8:29PM Harri Patel wrote: In other words, tell it to the warden. Click to expand I'll try not to sink to personal attacks, even though I think this is quite obviously one directed at me. I think I'm more upset that you don't seem to understand the issue and choose to make a joke at my expense instead. I think I'm officially done with this thread. Dr. P [Link]
Harri Patel Senior Member #SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03	Posted - May 23 2007 : 11:36PM No, not a personal attack; just a more blunt and succinct way of saying what Croy and others in this thread have also told you, and that you are apparently unwilling to accept. If you find it comforting to tell yourself that I just "don't understand the issue," and that your own subjective views regarding what the "spirit" of the law is (as opposed to what the clear and unambiguous statutory langauge says), and whether a law has an "honorable purpose," would somehow have any significance whatsoever should you ever be prosecuted under the DCMA, fine; whatever. Enjoy living in fantasy-land. [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 23 2007 : 11:42PM Its true, I purposefully went the wordy route. [Link]
DrP0rn0 Senior Member 1836 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 24 2007 : 10:00AM Sheesh Hari. You both seem to imply that I advocate illegally copying DVDs or other media. I DO NOT advocate this practice. I just asked about why talk of making compilations, which is a protected act, is forbidden in this forum. I recieved my answer. Then I made a statement that the contradication of DMCA and fair use bascially points towards fair use in my mind. Now suddenly you both point to me as "watch out for the law hippie boy." Perhaps my language on the subject (I just re-read it) invited this type of response. Let me be specific: I believe that fair use supercedes DMCA in a legal sense and that any thinking judge would easily back this up. I don't even think a true "fair use" case (making backup copies of DVDs and/or compilations NOT for sale) would even make it to court. As to my thoughts on "bad laws", perhaps that's a subject for another time. Finally Harri, perhaps your comments weren't an "attack", but they were certainly snide and intended to deride me. Please don't pretend otherwise and expect me to not respond. Dr. P [Link]
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 24 2007 : 11:47AM Dr. P, The truth is this (all previously posted here): (1) The software required to decrypt copy-protected DVDs is illegal under the DMCA, whether or not you are claiming that you wish to do so for "fair use" purposes. (2) While this is exactly correct, it doesn't limit your right to fair use copying, it just makes it a crime to defeat/decrypt copy-protection measures -- if present -- in order to do so. (3) There are many DVDs out there with no copyright-protection employed at all. Also, if one were to simply "play-on-one-machine-record-on-a-second-machine" (like has been done with every music and video format since the Stone Age), you have not violated the DMCA. Fair Use is not just an opinion, it is, in fact, provided for within U.S. copyright law itself. (4) You were correct when you said, "Perhaps my language on the subject (I just re-read it) invited this type of response. Let me be specific: I believe that fair use supercedes DMCA in a legal sense and that any thinking judge would easily back this up. I don't even think a true "fair use" case (making backup copies of DVDs and/or compilations NOT for sale) would even make it to court." The absurdity -- the Catch-22 as I called it -- is that fair use is legal, but defeating copy-protection (if present) is now against the law. You will never be able to reach an ending-point with those who want to pick-apart your opinions. So, my advice would be to just ignore them. Let them have the Proverbial "last word," and we can all move on. For whatever its worth, I think you've expressed your opinion and explained yourself more than satisfactorily Move along now, nothing to see here... [Link]

Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99	Posted - May 24 2007 : 12:15PM Speaking of Fair Use, has anyone been following the Perfect 10 vs. Google copyright infringement lawsuit? An appeals court recently ruled in Google's favor stating that it's fair use for Google to display thumbnails of Perfect 10's copyrighted images in the Google's Image Search. It's an interesting Internet law case. [Link]
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - May 24 2007 : 4:18PM A Fair(y) Use Tale Pretty funny [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - May 24 2007 : 9:58PM DrP0rn0 wrote: Sheesh Hari. You both seem to imply that I advocate illegally copying DVDs or other media. I DO NOT advocate this practice. Click to expand He did not say that you advocate it at all. Since nobody can know what you really want to do is to merely make a copy for yourself, that the act of copying can require the breaking of another law, and that the very same information can be used for illegal purposes that it isn't wise for others - to whom greater real liability may fall - to get an answer out. [Link]
Gentleman Jon All-Star Member 1881 Posts 6/05	Posted - May 25 2007 : 12:55PM BigBobxxx wrote: A Fair(y) Use Tale Pretty funny Click to expand Brilliant. And funny. [Link]
jonfr Member 12 Posts 2/07	Posted - Jun 7 2007 : 2:15AM I believe that in the U.S the problem is the draconian law called DMCA. [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jun 10 2007 : 12:53AM ^ No. In the US, the problem is not with any particular law. The problem here is persistent, systemic draconian syndrome. Everybody professes to be a staunch opponent of draconian law.....until it comes to something they oppose. That will never be easily solved by simply changing a law. Edited by - randomprecision on 6/10/2007 1:04:13 AM [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - Jun 10 2007 : 6:20AM Laws (in general) here are draconian? See the world a bit. But if everybody backs the laws in that way, there is no problem - they are living under laws they don't have enough issue with to change. [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jun 10 2007 : 9:33AM Ah. I suppose just because we don't dip people in acid or boil them alive or something for prostitution or drugs, that makes the fact that these things are still illegal here in 2007 just fine. How many times have they tried to outlaw porn now? Heard about the guy who's on a sex offender registry for selling a dildo to an adult? Nice, eh? Great way to get to know your neighbors whereever you go. People still get arrested for blowjobs and anal sex. Not all the time but it still happens. And what about Max? Yeah...OK. He's Max but it's still fucked up. The charges aren't that he's Max Hardcore. The charges are selling adult videos in America. Oh, wait. They're "obscene". I bet most people see something more obscene than a Max video when they look in the mirror so fuck their community. And fuck them too. [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - Jun 10 2007 : 10:24PM Actually, though there is no law against being Max, he was certainly picked for being Max. Which puts some who don't like him in the position of defending him on principle. It is always the ones you don't like that are easy targets and defended on principle. In a state like Georgia, selling sex toys can be illegal. Whatever you think of the law, breaking it isn't so smart an idea. But you are really changing the subject. If people were so against these laws and penalties, they could do something about it. They don't. It doesn't bother people enough to change them. Now if you are going to argue that these laws are wrong in principle, they would be wrong regardless of the penalty. If it is the penalty and not the law you have an issue with, that is merely a question of the extent of punishment. If it is both, then simply changing the law will take care of both. If, however, these are the laws the majority chooses to live by, you don't have much choice - and it is what they chose for themselves. Democracy is about majority rule. [Link]
Hardware All-Star Member Your other left 14594 Posts 3/02	Posted - Jun 11 2007 : 12:59PM Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. [Link]

RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jun 12 2007 : 1:10AM croy wrote: If it is both, then simply changing the law will take care of both. If, however, these are the laws the majority chooses to live by, you don't have much choice - and it is what they chose for themselves. Democracy is about majority rule. Click to expand It isn't possible to change a (club fisted) law like the DMCA because that law (and most like it) is/are bought and paid for. Of course, I guess Democracy ultimately ends up living up to it's "mob rule" cousin. Except for in this kind of Democracy, you don't even need a majority. You just need money and you can buy a majority. There's no virtue in that. It's the same old ugly story that's been played out for ages everywhere more than a few people formed a group in order to more easily facilitate the bludgeoning of everyone else. And the same people have always been the ones who really make the laws and (ultimately) decide how everyone else is going to live. They've just perfected it to the point to where most people don't realize they have absolutely no control over anything and ultimately, positively no choices whatsoever. As long as what you wish to do falls directly in line with what you're supposed to do, you'll have no worries. The moment you deviate from your set course, you'll have nothing but problems. Now. As to the topic of this thread. I really don't see why it's so hard to believe that some dude would want to make a comp DVD so he doesn't have to juggle 50 DVDs every time he wants to beat off. I used to do that with VHS tapes. I would have gone crazy trying to swap all those tapes and figure out what was on which tape. So I made a couple of tapes with the best scenes on them. And I'm sorry but I didn't feel a bit of shame or guilt about it. I wasn't doing anything wrong, despite that ominous FBI warning. The DMCA may not have a clue what fair use is, but again, it was designed not to. The knowledge of how to copy a DVD could be used for piracy. Say hello to Mr. Obvious! And my steak knife in my kitchen drawer could be used for murder. I use it to slice those helpless steaks into little pieces just the right size and shape for my fork and my smiling mouth. My baseball bat could be used to crack somebody's skull. And indeed, I don't play baseball and that's exactly what it's for. But I'm not out at night roaming the streets looking for a victim. I have it by my bed so I have something to defend myself with. It very well might be used to beat the fuck out of someone. But only of they deserve it. Not everyone is a scheming criminal. Those who are will figure out how to commit crimes easily enough anyway. Edited by - randomprecision on 6/12/2007 2:04:26 AM [Link]
croy Platinum Member Discovry 4574 Posts 3/04	Posted - Jun 12 2007 : 5:53AM Drew and Steph don't sell baseball bats either. It is hard to argue in court about a sporting good store too. Is thre a good reason why they should take the chance here? Sure it is easy to believe and undertand the motive of making your own compilation. I don't think one person here said it wasn't. But there is that potential hassle for the people running this place. Of course change is possible, it always is. But people thinking it isn't doesn't make it easier. History is all about change. Defeatism just makes it easier to do nothing, grumble, and blame others. [Link]
Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99	Posted - Jun 12 2007 : 11:47AM Is this thread still about our moderation policy here? I stopped reading it a while ago. [Link]
Bill All-Star Member 5334 Posts 6/00	Posted - Jun 12 2007 : 3:51PM No. It's now about how bad a law the DCMA is (as if the policies of ADT would be any different if the DCMA didn't exist). [Link]
LubeNLuv Senior Member 1854 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jun 12 2007 : 5:29PM The software required to decrypt copy-protected DVDs is illegal under the DMCA, whether or not you are claiming that you wish to do so for "fair use" purposes. Click to expand While true, most porn DVD's implement ZERO encryption. [Link]

All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 34Why is making complication DVDs a forbidden topic?

Previous topic: How do you do...
Next topic: YouTube Videos

Link to this post

Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post.

URL of this thread

Link to this post with HTML

Link to this post with Forum Code