321 studios (DVDxCopy) files oposition in MPAA countersuit

vbimport
#1

I just posted the article 321 studios (DVDxCopy) files oposition in MPAA countersuit.

321 Studios today announced it filed a motion in the United States District Court of Northern California opposing the motion picture studios’ claims in their countersuit filed last month. In order…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/5492-321-studios-DVDxCopy--files-oposition-in-MPAA--countersuit.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/5492-321-studios-DVDxCopy--files-oposition-in-MPAA--countersuit.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.
#2

Go 321 studios! Fight the good fight…

#3

Well at least now we know why they charge so much.

#4

321 Studios can fight the MPAA all they want, but I still think they suck for betraying their own customers by offering the $10,000 award to convict someone using it for trading illegal DVD movies!!! 321 Studios can rot in hell!!

#5

Wolverine, have you ever read this? Think and read before you scream.

#6

DoMiN8ToR: Yes I have read that. I read it the day it was posted on this site. It sounds like 321 Studios is only doing this to get Hollywood off their back. However just because they are doing it for this reason still doesn’t make it right. If person A and B are friends, and person B is frinds with person C, D, and E, but person C, D, and E don’t like person A, and person B felt like he needed to tease or make fun of his friend person A to make his friends C, D, and E like him better, would that make it right for person B to tease or turn on person A? The answer is no it would not be right. This is just what 321 Studios is doing. They are trying to invite the MPAA to like them better. I know 321 Studios is saying that this DVDXCopy software is to be used only to copy DVD movies you own, but the whole point is that you should be allowed to copy copyrighted works and trade them for free. The law is wrong, not me. Anyone must admit that the copyright law is wrong. I do see other companies who make CD/DVD copy software put some kind of thing in the Help file that says not to make illegal copies of copyrighted works, but they don’t go and offer to prosecute their own customers. These companies just put that in their help file, not because they really don’t want you to make illegal copies of copyrighted material, but just to prevent themselves from getting sued by music, movie, and software industry. Most companies who make products don’t care whether their customers use it for legal or illegal purposes, they just want to sell you their product and get your money. The majority of people break the copyright law by downloading music, so why doesn’t the law just be eliminated? We live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. In a democracy, are’nt the laws based on what the majority of people want? I would think so.

#7

Welcome to the playground. Just to keep it at this level… if persons A-E are exchanging the same work without compensating the artists in any way [individually] then they need to stop. And I wish for once, that Wolverine would realize that if your invention were to be sent out into the world and everyone used it, didn’t compensate you for it, and you got NOTHING in return, you’d be one pissy customer. Promise. Yes, yes… you’ll say you are righteous and would never do that, but I really do think you be sitting next to Metallica complaining that you can’t make the mortgage on your 14 million dollar home. blah! Hate to say it, but you are kinda driving the nail home by saying “Are’nt the laws based on what the majority of people want?” [typos and grammar errors included for dramatic effect] People who download music illegally are a focus group, not the world. There are millions of people employed by the music and video industries and THAT is who the laws are written for, the effect of wiping out copyright law would throw the world into havoc as an industry collapses… you’d get bar room and coffee shop quality music from that point on because no one would be compensated. The only solution is to lower the cost of music, and THEN go after the people who abuse it still. $6-$10 an album shouldn’t kill anyone. The Constitution was written to stop mob and majority whim. Companies that sell their products with disregard of the law [even if they qualify it by putting a statement in their help file] are not exempt from prosecution, sorry Wolfy, if I were to produce a product and the world used it to violate a law, “I” would be prosecuted just as fast as the rest of the world would be if not faster since I’m the creator of the work. 321 Studios put that bounty out to show they truly want the world to not violate the law, but to enforce “Fair Use” policy, and that doesnt’ include sharing it with strangers across the internet, and the RIAA and MPAA won’t even go after the one’zy, two’zy trader, they are after traders who have their entire playlist of 5000 songs open for download. You really don’t have a grasp on reality… again, I ask you one question… Do you have a product of your own creation that is worth protecting and isn’t, that you have released into the wild and you don’t want compensation for?

#8

Hmmm. I believe that onlinetracker said it best. But trying to get your point across and what the “real world” is like to Woverine18 is like talking to a brick wall - thick and won’t understand. I hope when he gets out of elementry school, (and I mean in his way of understanding the entire picture), he will have second thoughts on some of his statements. That is unless he keeps failing.

#9

I am not in elementry school TheTarbaby. I am a senior in high school. I am not talking to a brick wall. I actually have logic in my statements. All high school students copy things and trade with each other. Also pretty much all college students copy things and trade with each other. Plain and simple. Even a lot of adults copy things and trade with each other. The whole point is that tons of people trade copyrighted works for free and still the music, movie, and software industry are making a damn good profit. TheTarbaby you say that prices would go down if no one copied and everyone bought. That is just not true. Companies would still charge the same amount and get greedy thinking “This is great”: we can make so much more money than we need to stay in business. Copyright laws are all about the greed of large corporate giants. Copyright laws are in fact not necessary to protect businesses. If everyone bought music, movies, and software, and no one copied it, those companies would make atleast 10 times more money than companies who sell physical products make. That is just all about the greed of copyright holders.

#10
  1. I said your thinking was like you were in elementry school. 2. Yes, prices would go down if everyone bought the product. The reason that most prices are high is to make up for the loss of people that give to hundreds of thousands for free. It’s based upon supply and demand. 3. Yes, some of the companies do have greed, but there are tons of other people that are trying to make a living. Think about how many people it takes to make a movie. It’s not just actors and directors, but costume people, grips, assistants, etc. I currently work for software development company and if our software somehow got out, and business started using it for free, that would put me and a lot of other people out on the street. Think about that next time you post that all software should be free. Maybe I should have you pay my bills and feed my kids.
#11

TheTarbaby: You have kids. Will you let them copy CDs and trade them with their friends at school? If you don’t, you sure are not a very nice parent. I don’t believe that intellectual information is considered property. Property to me is something you can feel and touch that’s physical. The only thing considered property to me that was made by the company is the CD the software came on. If I took that CD and copied it and gave it to a friend, that friend I gave it to actually owns the CD with that program on it. So another words stealing something is when you take something so the other person no longer has it in their possession that causes a product shortage. Copying does not cause a product shortage. The store still has every copy of their software ready to be sold on the shelves. Therefore you are not taking anybody’s property by copying something and giving it to a friend. Once when I used the example about if we knew how to copy food, what do we do? Do we solve world hunger or do we make it illegal because food retailers profit may be reduced? You replied by saying that we do copy food. We don’t copy food, because if we could, I would buy the machine that was needed to do it and copy all my food instead of buy it. I never hear food retailers complain about people who grow their own food in their own backyard to eat themselves that they are taking away from their profit. If I copied money just because I liked the way it looked and wanted to hang it up in my room, there would’nt be anything wrong with that right? However if I copied money and started to spend it like it was real money, that would be wrong and counterfeiting. It is no different with software. Copying software borrowed from a friend or giving it to a friend is like the same thing as copying money for your own look. Copying software and selling it would be like copying money and spending it like it were the real thing. When you copy software, it is not look like the real thing to the human eye. It only looks like the real thing to the computer. So another words mass producing CDs with software on them that look like the real thing with the printing and cover on them from the company would be wrong. But it is not wrong when you just copy it and lable it with a permanent marker because it is not counterfeiting and not pretending it to be the real thing.