DVDRanger loses lawsuit from Sony, comes with new Cinavia solution

vbimport

#1

DVDRanger loses lawsuit from Sony, comes with new Cinavia solution.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2012/11/LTKrlk.png[/newsimage]The developers of DVDRanger claim to have lost a lawsuit from Sony and have announced a new solution to bypass the Cinavia protection. 


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/dvdranger-loses-lawsuit-from-sony-comes-with-new-cinavia-solution-66551/](http://www.myce.com/news/dvdranger-loses-lawsuit-from-sony-comes-with-new-cinavia-solution-66551/)


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

#2

lmao I figure it was coming someone that makes claim and yet puts it’s customers whom bought the software to pasture and then flames people asking for actionable software and now they get slammed by Sony. Looks like they are now getting what they deserved… lol… so long you fake…can’t produce or make a good product that even begin to work the rest of us doesn’t need a fraud…to sell snake oil…


#3

If all this is really what happened, they wouldn’t be able to offer it to other developers, they would be under an NDA ( non disclosure agreement). I really wanted this to be a fact, that they cracked it but alas nothing is real until you can see it.


#4

The only credible evidence is that they simply discovered that decimating the HD audio by transcoding to a lossy and poor sounding stereo codec made the watermark non-functional. There’s absolutely no evidence that they have a way to remove the watermark and retain quality HD audio. Big deal.


#5

Sounds like a lot of assumptions are being made, without knowing all the facts.


#6

Question…what the hell does Sony have to do with Cinavia other than being a consumer of it? The AACS LA are the ones who require it for all licensees. Verance owns the Cinavia technology. And on what grounds could they be sued by any of those companies? Intent to release a product is not the same as claiming to do so. Just something to think about. :slight_smile:


#7

[QUOTE=SamuriHL;2682215]Question…what the hell does Sony have to do with Cinavia other than being a consumer of it? The AACS LA are the ones who require it for all licensees. Verance owns the Cinavia technology. And on what grounds could they be sued by any of those companies? Intent to release a product is not the same as claiming to do so. Just something to think about. :)[/QUOTE]

Sony is at present the ONLY consumer of Cinavia/Verance technology, so they would have a legal right to protect their content - which is Cinavia-encoded.

Most likely, the real issue was the use of the word “Cinavia”, and of course bypassing it on Sony titles.

It’s unlikely that there was ever any actual “law suit”, since there’s no record of one. This would have been nothing more than threats and an eventual settlement out of court.


#8

[QUOTE=CDan;2682230]Sony is at present the ONLY consumer of Cinavia/Verance technology, so they would have a legal right to protect their content - which is Cinavia-encoded.

Most likely, the real issue was the use of the word “Cinavia”, and of course bypassing it on Sony titles.

It’s unlikely that there was ever any actual “law suit”, since there’s no record of one. This would have been nothing more than threats and an eventual settlement out of court.[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure what the threat would be, though. The point is, they never released anything Cinavia related other than the INTENT to distribute something at some future point that removed Cinavia. Did they get threatened over a press release? And if it was over the use of the word “Cinavia”, then Verance would have had to threaten legal action, not Sony, as they don’t hold the trademark to it. The whole thing just doesn’t seem right IMO.


#9

Personally, I find it interesting that the article doesn’t mention anything about why this lawsuit was even started. Since we don’t know this, I think it’s safe to say we don’t know anything. Perhaps DVDRanger was sued, and signed a non-disclosure agreement, which would explain why we know nothing. Or maybe they pulled this “lawsuit” out of there…

Who knows?


#10

Here’s something we do know, however. Let’s say they did get sued. The claim is now that they had to give away all the developed code, yet, somehow magically they’re able to make a new version of a supposed Cinavia killer without being sued…again? Is that what we’re supposed to believe in all this?


#11

I have no trouble believing that Sony is able to muscle a small company into submission on any number of alleged issues. An army of lawyers has that effect. That said it was stupid for DVDRanger to use the Cinavia name in any way, and we’ve surely seen ample additional evidence of stupidity there. Sony has a huge investment in Cinavia and wants to see it adopted by other studios, which isn’t happening.

But I still say that DVDRanger never had anything more than a cheesy conversion engine that destroyed video and audio quality in many ways, and whether it effected the Cinavia watermark is a moot point.


#12

…This is a filter that according to the DVDRanger developers should discard any disturbances of Cinavia in audio tracks.

And this is useful how? Add it to a video player software? Oh snap. Most non-commercial video player software already ignores Cinavia! I suppose it might be usable to re-record the audio track, but other than that seems like a novelty.


#13

[QUOTE=lukewarmwater;2682212]Sounds like a lot of assumptions are being made, without knowing all the facts.[/QUOTE]
If you know all the facts, please enlighten us. I would love to hear some factual evidence of something in this thread. So if you say we do not know the facts , you must know what they are, so again please enlighten us. I want DVD Ranger to succeed.:flower:


#14

[QUOTE=CDan;2682268]I have no trouble believing that Sony is able to muscle a small company into submission on any number of alleged issues. An army of lawyers has that effect. That said it was stupid for DVDRanger to use the Cinavia name in any way, and we’ve surely seen ample additional evidence of stupidity there. Sony has a huge investment in Cinavia and wants to see it adopted by other studios, which isn’t happening.

But I still say that DVDRanger never had anything more than a cheesy conversion engine that destroyed video and audio quality in many ways, and whether it effected the Cinavia watermark is a moot point.[/QUOTE]

Ok, let’s say that’s the case and they got sued for using Cinavia. Wouldn’t they be in violation again with their new claims of a Cinavia filter? And how would they be able to publish a Cinavia white paper in that case? Nothing in what is being claimed makes any sense at all to me.

As for conversion…I performed an extensive amount of tests when Cinavia was first released in 2010 and I can tell you 100% that it survives any and all attempts at re-encoding. Even down to an analog, mono microphone with horribly bad quality. So while it may be a moot point in terms of people not accepting a loss in quality, it’s also moot because no amount of conversion removes it.


#15

My legal take on this is Sony has no legal standing to sue DVDRanger .

Sony’s legal standing would be to sue Verance for Cinavia not providing the undecrytable protection it claimed .

Verance might have legal standing to sue DVDRanger . At this point it would have to be a copyright infringement for using the name “Cinavia” if it is trademarked or copyrighted. I haven’t verified it either way.

Other than that Verance would need to prove that DVDRanger had reverse engineered Cinavia & used some of Verance copyrighted programing.

I don’t see how that would be possible for Verance to do since the DVDranger
never released the Cinavia decrypting part of their software.
I might be incorrect but to me a judge would require a demonstration from Verance that DVDRanger software removed Cinavia protection . Before issuing an injunction.


#16

That’s my understanding, as well. They have to show damages. What damage did a press release cause? We intend to… != we have released… And since Verance owns the trademark on Cinavia, I still don’t quite get what Sony has to do with anything. If it were released, maybe. But for a press release stating intent? Sorry, but, color me skeptical at best.


#17

[QUOTE=cholla;2682321]My legal take on this is Sony has no legal standing to sue DVDRanger .

.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=SamuriHL;2682322]That’s my understanding, as well. They have to show damages. .[/QUOTE]

You need to understand how this stuff works in the real world. Its not about who has “legal rights”. Its about who has the money and muscle to make a threat and follow it through.

A small company has no resources to wage a court battle against the likes of Sony. It makes no difference who’s right or wrong, the small company goes broke fighting it. Sony (or any of its divisions) can bankrupt a small company without even trying, just by filing a suit and forcing them to respond. Right or wrong, Sony wins.

Sony has further political muscle in the form of licensing for BD and even DVD playback. This kind of muscle doesn’t even involve the courts, it hits straight at a tech company’s ability to do business. They use this political muscle every day.


#18

I can’t disagree with you CDan .

Ideally a judge would deny Sony the right to sue with a “no standing” rulling.

The thing is I haven’t seen any proof posted that this lawsuit ever existed.
So before I place any blame on Sony (which I have no problem doing) I would like to see proof that Sony used its’ political muscle this time.


#19

I agree there’s no credible evidence that any court action existed. My point was that a big corporation can get the same job done without ever setting foot in a courthouse. They do it all the time.


#20

Finally some one who understands the system and how Non Disclosure works once your hands are slapped hard .

[QUOTE=CDan;2682334]You need to understand how this stuff works in the real world. Its not about who has “legal rights”. Its about who has the money and muscle to make a threat and follow it through.

A small company has no resources to wage a court battle against the likes of Sony. It makes no difference who’s right or wrong, the small company goes broke fighting it. Sony (or any of its divisions) can bankrupt a small company without even trying, just by filing a suit and forcing them to respond. Right or wrong, Sony wins.

Sony has further political muscle in the form of licensing for BD and even DVD playback. This kind of muscle doesn’t even involve the courts, it hits straight at a tech company’s ability to do business. They use this political muscle every day.[/QUOTE]