RealNetworks continues to develop DVD-copying device

The job ad RealNetworks posted last week for a Facet engineer.

(Credit: Craigslist.com)

RealNetworks continues to hire engineers to work on Facet, a DVD player that copies and stores film discs despite allegations by Hollywood that the device violates copyright.

Real has posted a job ad on Craigslist asking for qualified Linux engineers to apply.

"The Facet team is creating a rich set of consumer media experiences that will make the consumer electronics industry stand up and take notice," Real said in the job posting, first reported by Video Business Online.

But studio executives have already taken notice and they haven't liked what they see. Real's hopes of offering consumers a means to backup their movies face a serious legal challenge from the Motion Picture Association of America, the trade group for the six largest film studios.

The Facet DVD Player by Realnetworks.

(Credit: Greg Sandoval/CNET Networks)

The MPAA filed a lawsuit last fall and a U.S. District judge blocked further sales of RealDVD, a software that enables users to copy DVDs and store the duplicates on a computer hard drive. RealDVD is really the spearhead in Real's DVD-copying strategy. The MPAA alleges that RealDVD violates copyright law. Hollywood says the $30 software and Facet, a DVD player that can copy and store about 70 films, are nothing more than pirating tools.

On May 21, attorneys for Real and the MPAA will make their closing arguments for a hearing on whether the injunction on RealDVD sales should be lifted. By continuing to develop Facet amid a potentially technology-killing court fight, is Real being overconfident? After all, the public company has spent the majority of RealDVD's $6 million development costs on litigation.

"If the court keeps the injunction in place we will not bring Facet to market as it exists today," said Bill Hankes, a Real spokesman. "Nobody should infer too much from the job posting."

An MPAA spokeswoman declined comment.

[nicmart]

Real's CEO and founder, is an outspoken leftist. He adores government control of business -- except in this case. Hoist by his own petard.

"At Yale, Glaser's politics were "slightly to the left of Che Guevara," joked Jacobsen, who knew Glaser at Yale and at Microsoft before joining him at RealNetworks."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001988508_glaser26m.html

[AgentSTS]

"Though a judge made decide to retain a ban"... it's disturbing to see CNET is quickly approaching the AP's level of proofreading before publishing.

[Dead Soulman]

So I guess Real is keeping it, "Real" Or, is it "Realer."
Got to stop watching Chappelle's Show.

[jcomputm]

The Motion Pictures Association of America is furious with RealNetworks for illegal copyright DVD duplication. It is a lot of pressure when it comes to these kinds of situations.

[mburkley]

I personally think that it would be fine for DVD backups to be illegal - as long as the DVD originators guarantee that they will replace, free of charge, a DVD that has been damaged so that it will no longer play. Otherwise, let me make a copy so that when my disk is damaged I can still watch the movie.

--Michael

[tech_crazy]

Agreed. However, what happens when the company goes out of business? I would like to keep my fair use right by backing up DVDs that I have legally purchased. That would make the above question moot. Alternatively, have the manufacturer/studio/MPAA provide a digital copy (FREE) along with the DVD for archival.

[nicmart]

Non-scratchable blank DVDs have been on the market for quite awhile, but the movie industry shows no interest in using them. Every time I look at the beat up and destroyed DVDs at the public library I think of the huge revenue stream replacement disks provide to the movie industry. Not even expensive Blu-Ray disks use a non-scratch surface.

[Renegade Knight]

Movies and Music go out of print. Companies go bankrupt. It would be nice to get a replacment from the maker. However it won't be free (nor should it actually) for a token fee. However I want to protect my purchase regardless of what the company does.

[Lerianis3]

Just a question, but if you make a 1:1 copy of a DVD, wouldn't it STILL have this CSS stuff on it and play just like the actual, genuine copy would?

[Lerianis3]

Actuallly, Renegade Knight, a replacement SHOULD be free because we have already paid WAAAAAAAY more than the printing cost of the DVD when we first bought the thing in question! Even with 5 buck DVD's, that is the case.

[umbrae]

"Just a question, but if you make a 1:1 copy of a DVD, wouldn't it STILL have this CSS stuff on it and play just like the actual, genuine copy would?"

The CSS prevents you from making a copy. The CSS has to be circumvented to be copied. Real's stance is they have a license (as a dvd maker) to decrypt the content, so their activity should be legal. The difference is they actually make a copy and apply a new CSS to it, so they are altering.

I would love to see them win, but I do not think the DMCA is worded in their favor. If there was no CSS on the DVD then it would be perfectly legal. Of course, it would be easy to copy with any DVD copy tool as well.

Lerianis3 -- Your argument is correct if the disc had no DeCSS (or other type) protection scheme.

The MPAA is arguing that REAL is circumventing the DeCSS in order to copy the content from the disc. It has separately argued that even if they have properly accessed the content using licensed DeCSS methods that they are violating a different part of the license by reproducing (copying) the DeCSS code without authorization. You, as consumer, do not have a license to the use of the code. You have a license to the VIEW the content. The DVD player companies have license to USE the protection scheme code.

So, here's where REAL's argument is novel.

They have a license to develop player technology. They argue that 1. They did not circumvent the DeCSS scheme (MPAA's first argument). They are a license holder to DeCSS and are using the prescribed means to access the content on the disc. Easily, proven on a technical level. 2. They are not violating the USE versus COPY argument since a computer as part of it's method for decrypting content from a disc often caches the data on disc. They are instructing the computer to read the data, put the data in a specific location on disc (normally the OS handles this function), and then access the data at the date/time that the user decides.

Further, REAL does not change the DeCSS scheme. It copies all of the data without altering the means for decrypting the content under the prescribed methods. In fact, from what I understand in reading the redacted court documents is that REAL adds another layer of even stronger encryption (SHA2).

SHORT ANSWER to your question: copying the disc through traditional means violates the license. Copy the data through the licensed approach that REAL is taking appears to be legal.

I don't know which Judge is hearing this case. Judge Marilyn Patel in San Francisco has a good record of balance between corporate and consumer interest. I think it will hinge on the substance of: contract law & technical understanding versus violations of the "spirit" of the DMCA.

[unknown unknown]

17 U.S.C. 1201 (anti-circumvention) should be repealed and prosecution for misusing take downs stepped up. DRM has only been a tool for the abuse of consumers by unscrupulous companies and has done nothing to stop piracy. The only thing it has done is let said unscrupulous companies step all over the traditional limits of copyright and invent their own. Not to mention threatening legitimate research when they don't like the results.

[Lerianis3]

I have to agree. DRM keeps on getting on my nerves with my LEGALLY BOUGHT movies and music by preventing me from recompressing them into a less 'wasteful' format like h.264 without using a TON of work-arounds so that I can take them on vacation or elsewhere with me.

[umbrae]

I agree. I have to copy every DVD I use because I have older equipment that gets mucked up with the DRM. So the first thing I have to do it remove the DRM just to watch it. Guess they expect me to lay out $5-6,000 to replace perfectly good equipment just to watch movies.

Not to mention I have an autistic child, so by copying them I have a back up for when he scratches them and he can actually pop the movies in himself since they play automatically and he does have to worry about menus. All of this is fair use, but because I remove the CSS I am committing a federal crime. Just sad...

@umbrae -- I believe that you are not committing a crime by backing up your copy of any movie if you use the DVD player and it's currently licensed output means (i.e., s-video, component, or composite cable to VHS or to a recordable DVD). It is a crime however for any company or individual to provide technology for you to back up your copy-protected disc by means that circumvent the DeCSS protection scheme (per U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, 02.20.04).

I don't think it's a matter of just removing the DeCSS since you effectively do that when you copy the disc to a VHS tape. Plenty of VCR/DVD-R combo's (e.g., GoVideo) have been on the market allowing this functionality.

REAL is just adding another means to backup that movie using the prescribed DeCSS means (this is an important difference) of accessing the content.

[CA1900]

RealNetworks is still in business? Wow...

[tehrani625]

Go real... I think its great that a company is willing to do something that is perfectly legal... I still don't get the reason that the MPAA is mad at them in the first place. If ripping a DVD for archival purposes violates DRM then burning an iTunes track does also, this means that iTunes is not legal in Europe this also means that the MPAA is being stupid, and the studios that they represent can't sell their movies in Europe.

[umbrae]

The MPAA does not care about music: that is the RIAA. In the US, removing DRM is a federal crime punished by the FBI. There are a very few exceptions written into the DMCA, but these have not been tested.

Basically, if you remove DRM per the DMCA you are committing a federal crime: even if copying the content falls under fair use.

[Altotus]

MPAA is political and they have to show something for the costs or have the funds cut. If they loose they will say you gotta give us more money were loosing and if they win they will say its working you gotta give us more money were winning. As far as this product goes it looks like its trailered around fair use?

[Sausagebiscuit]

+1 for good comment.

-1 for loose vs lose fail.

Have a great day.

[ArtInvent]

I always have trouble understanding why I can rip my CD's to my hard disk and put them on my computer and MP3 player, which seems to be legal everywhere under fair use, but ripping a DVD to my hard disk so I can put them on my computer and portable video player is not.

The advent of small go anywhere video media players is going to make this a losing battle on the MPAA's part. Everyone's phone will be able to play movies. People clearly want and will have video as digital files so they can pack their video onto their hard drives and transfer those files at will into a tiny memory chip - not as a gargantuan ungainly shelves full of fragile discs.

You can't stop this technology because it's vastly better and more convenient for the consumer. And this is exactly and only why the CD and the DVD in their day became popular. The disc had it's day, but that day is quickly coming to an end.

[Lerianis3]

Actually, in Canada, it is NOT legal under fair use to do that with your CD's, but the companies know that if they were to push the issue, seeing how anti-DRM most Canadians are, they would be shooting themselves in the foot and would have a lot of unwanted laws being passed to make DRM totally illegal.

[umbrae]

Actually, in the US this is not legal. CD's also have DRM built in, and using rippers to turn those into MP3's is illegal. The RIAA has not taken a firm stand on this, nor enforced it, but you are still committing a federal crime. The RIAA to date has only gone after "sharers", but if that had gone better for the RIAA then CD rippers would have been next.

The MPAA, however, has a been a little more nazi on the subject.

@umbrae -- Sorry, to disagree with you again but I need to point out that part of what you've said here is incorrect.

"Actually, in the U.S. this is not legal. CD's also have DRM built in, and using rippers to turn those into MP3's is illegal."

Actually, it is legal.

First, the technical part from Wikipedia on CD/DVD Copy Protection: The Red Book audio specification does not include any copy protection mechanism. Philips has stated that [any] such [copy-protected] discs are not permitted to bear the trademarked Compact Disc Digital Audio logo because they violate the Red Book specification. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD/DVD_copy_protection>

Second, the legal aspect in review: Take a pragmatic approach on this and notice that Apple has and still does promote their computers for "RIP. MIX. BURN." functionality. As noted in several court cases around copyright infringement and contributor damages, Apple would have been liable for promoting, teaching and condoning all users of their HW to rip CD audio. Further, as this function was challenged in court and lost against several ISVs the point is now dead. You can rip your CDs into MP3 tracks.

Sharing is the illegal part. The RIAA is going after users and IAPs as it violates portions of the DMCA code.

[cohaver]

Fair use DVD & CD cost to use and Break down of the Media Demands Fair use
Buy your kids Disney Movies if i had this Facet Device it would save me Hundreds of US Dollars from Damages Done So easily to DVD and CD buy Loading them to a central point and letting my kids choose from Central Menu . If Real Player Fails with MPAA than every DVD and CD Buyer Should be able to File a Law Suit against MPAA &RIAA for selling Sub standard Media that breakdowns with little and no effort. If MPAA is limiting my use to there Media than they must have a higher accountability to their media breakdown. Fair Use