I thought as consumers we had the right to make a single copy.

Otherwise, every time I insert a CD into my computer and iTunes rips it, I'm violating the law. Right?

"the MPAA argued a single copy, no matter what the purpose, is a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The only backup copy Congress imagined, MPAA attorney Bart Williams said, is a pure archival backup copy that goes unplayed until the first copy is defunct."

Seems to me that the first sentence conflicts with the second one.

"The only backup copy Congress imagined, MPAA attorney Bart Williams said, is a pure archival backup copy that goes unplayed until the first copy is defunct."

And how are you supposed to truly verify [before the first copy is defunct] that any archival backup is intact short of actually playing it? A bit-to-bit verification program maybe?

Since backup copies are allowed, shouldn't it be illegal to burden the discs with copy-protection and not provide a method for users to make a backup copy?

Heh. You forget who has the money. Companies > consumers. Remember that.

Legal backups are allowed, however they are saying what if you simply rent, netflix, or borrow a movie from a friend and back it up in to their system- when you never legally bought it.. I can see both sides arguments.. I have a feeling the movie industry is going to win this one.

The rent, rip, return issue is the Movie and Rental industries problem, not that of Real. There are already plenty of apps out there with which people can exploit the current system. I agree with Real that rental companies should be sold special disks which can send a flag to legit backup software to forbid making a copy.

I think it's ludicrous to punish Real for the Movie Industries lack of foresight.

giwo's comment really has nailed the problem of the movie industry.
They want everybody to buy movies, but not own them.
That's not such a good position to be in it.
And they are to stupid to realize how software works (not context sensitive) and that people want to enjoy the media they have bought.

And about the archival backup thing in the DCMA.
What If I want to use the original as archival and a copy to play.
Shouldn't that be allowed?
It should.
This way the artwork on the original disk gets better preserved.

It's the studio's and copyright association's own fault.
Go after the pirates, now they try to limit the consumers with all sorts of crap like Digital Restrictions/Rights Management, but pirates don't go in those waters.

Quote:
The company suggested that it should be the studios' responsibility to mark discs sold to the rental channel, and without studio cooperation, there is no way a piece of software can tell if existing discs have been purchased or simply rented, and that CSS is so broken that there are literally hundreds of different programs that circumvent it to facilitate copying.

The company has a very good point there:
--It's the studio's own fault, instead of cooperating with the industry and adapting to the current technologies, they try to remove every way of keeping media intact.
This won't work any more now there is a large demand for digital media.
And companies with money are now seeing there is a market opening there.
And again they should realize that software isn't context sensitive but is just a chain of commands.
They should have made it possible to have some flags on a dvd to flag it as rental, bought and such like giwo has said.

If the studios are concerned about copy of rented disc they should either only put copy protection on rented disc or put a special marker on rented disc so software can know when it is rented.
Then there will be no excuse for trying to by-pass that copy protection since it only appears on rented discs and you do not own it so you have no reason to copy it.

The issue is that the Supreme Courts years ago says that consumers has a right to copy music/movies for their own personal use and RIAA et-al are trying to circumvent the court with the use of DMCA etc. DMCA should only have been used on documents/Media that the consumer has no right to copy.

I think until consumers takes a stand and insist that their rights are respected we will always have people like these that force our rights from us. At some point we must say that we will not buy movies/music from these Cartels until they respect our rights.

Look at every industry that these kind of abusive association exist, OPEC, RIAA, MPAA. enough said.

Said by dblxf "until consumers takes a stand and insist that their rights are respected we will always have people like these that force our rights from us."

Good luck with that. The US is failing and the economy is in the tank well hundreds of thousands are out of work and you think the **AAs register something more then a blip outside of computer land?

Here is a novel approach to the **AAs. Stop stealing from them and stop buying their products.

Edit* Added quotation marks.

are you freaking stupid

if they sold disc to the rental like that what would you do
when block buster no longer needs 500 dvd of the same title and goes and sells them

now where is your legal right to make a backup copy at for when the disc fails from the 800 too 1000 rental people that had the disc before you

sorry this was a dupe deleted

and your my friend are a joke
what is your right when you by that disc from the rental place

you now have no rights to a warrrity or to backup you disc

you wanta know what would be fair

that they should be forced to provide two disc with each purchase
one that will be are back up and the other for viewing

When someone buys a used copy of anything they aren't necessarily granted the same rights as the original purchaser. I see no problem with letting folks know if they want to save a few bucks and get a used DVD from a rental company, not only will they need to pray their DVD player will still be able to read it through the myriad of scratches sure to be on it, but they won't be able to make a backup either.