Cable Television Programs Copyrighted?

[EvilWizard]

What is the name of your state? VA

Is it a violation of the DMCA to make a personal copy of a television show such as HBO's Rome (which is on-going at the moment)? I am asking the question because I do not have an HBO subscription right now and I am sure that episodes of the program have been uploaded onto the Internet, but I don't want to download this particular program if it is a violation of the DMCA.

What are the rules guiding the copying of television and cable television shows in general? I can copy via a DVR provided from my provider and upload that to my PC and in turn burn it to a DVD for personal use. At what point is the boundary of legal/illegal crossed?

 

[divgradcurl]

What is the name of your state? VA

Is it a violation of the DMCA to make a personal copy of a television show such as HBO's Rome (which is on-going at the moment)? I am asking the question because I do not have an HBO subscription right now and I am sure that episodes of the program have been uploaded onto the Internet, but I don't want to download this particular program if it is a violation of the DMCA.

What are the rules guiding the copying of television and cable television shows in general? I can copy via a DVR provided from my provider and upload that to my PC and in turn burn it to a DVD for personal use. At what point is the boundary of legal/illegal crossed?

No, it is not unlawful to make your own copy of a TV or cable program -- that is specifically allowed under the Universal v. Sony decision (the Betamax decision). However, downloading the program from the Internet would clearly be unlawful, see AMG v. Napster.

The line is crossed when you make that copy you made available to someone else. The line is also crossed when you send the copy somewhere outside of your control -- this was part of the RIAA v. MyMP3.com decision, which basically said that even if you own a CD, uploading that CD to someplace where you can get ahold of it remotely allows the CD to move beyond your control through the Internet, and that's unlawful. The law in this area is still changing, but it is changing in the direction of restricting uses, not enabling uses.

Making a VHS or DVR or DVD copy of a TV show you receive in your home is perfectly lawful. Transferring that lawful copy to another format is also lawful, as is removing commercials, etc. Making that copy available to someone else is unlawful. Obtaining the copy in the first place from someone else is also unlawful.

 

[EvilWizard]

Thanks for the response. I did some heavy googling and had found a ton of material on how television is pretty much restricted now as well. Even copying it from your DVR to another medium can now be a violation of DMCA because newer boxes have protections in place.

Fair Use is pretty much dead and that is sad.

Its funny that Fair Use says legally I can make a copy of a DVD I own.

But...

DMCA makes it illegal to bypass the copyright protection to make a copy of a DVD I own.

All I can say is Grrrr....

(Oh and I love that HBO is getting away with poisoning Torrent DL's now, but they won't get in trouble although what they are doing is also illegal.)

 

[divgradcurl]

Thanks for the response. I did some heavy googling and had found a ton of material on how television is pretty much restricted now as well. Even copying it from your DVR to another medium can now be a violation of DMCA because newer boxes have protections in place.

Fair Use is pretty much dead and that is sad.

Its funny that Fair Use says legally I can make a copy of a DVD I own.

But...

DMCA makes it illegal to bypass the copyright protection to make a copy of a DVD I own.

All I can say is Grrrr....

(Oh and I love that HBO is getting away with poisoning Torrent DL's now, but they won't get in trouble although what they are doing is also illegal.)

Just a question, why do you think poisoning torrents is illegal?

 

[EvilWizard]

I am not sure what it would fall under in terms of law to be direct. They are actively putting fake clients out there that spit out garbage files. This makes downloads take twice as long which in turn keeps bandwidth consumption at a high rate.

The downloaders are doing something wrong, but HBO may also be negatively affecting networks in general... I think its a tightrope that HBO shouldn't be walking on as a small mistake could cost them in the long run...

 

[EvilWizard]

I found this write-up about HBO's tactics interesting.

"...Even if you only connect to a tracker to keep stats of peers and seeders (not to actually download), the bad seeders still have bots designed to capture your IP address, send it to the bad seeders and start sending you the bad data packets, unrequested! This turns into a flood with 40-50+ packets per second or more. I monitored this with peer gaurdian and an IP packet analyzer. Even if you disconnect from the tracker it does not stop. I watched these packets continue for 10+ hours after the fact until I finally changed my IP..."

If this is true then HBO is going outside of just blocking the download, it is actively DDoS'ing the box that attempted to request it and that is illegal.

 

[divgradcurl]

I found this write-up about HBO's tactics interesting.

"...Even if you only connect to a tracker to keep stats of peers and seeders (not to actually download), the bad seeders still have bots designed to capture your IP address, send it to the bad seeders and start sending you the bad data packets, unrequested! This turns into a flood with 40-50+ packets per second or more. I monitored this with peer gaurdian and an IP packet analyzer. Even if you disconnect from the tracker it does not stop. I watched these packets continue for 10+ hours after the fact until I finally changed my IP..."

If this is true then HBO is going outside of just blocking the download, it is actively DDoS'ing the box that attempted to request it and that is illegal.

Sure, a DOS attack is going to be illegal, but that's not poisoning torrents. Anyone can put anything out on a torrent they want -- that's the point. Besides, anyone that is going to complain about the poisoning is going to find that the courts are unsympathetic that someone couldn't illegally download a movie because the copyright holder "poisoned" the torrent...

 

[EvilWizard]

I 100% understand what you are saying about sympathy, but IMO I think it is utter BS that corporate America can get away with cyber vigilantism. They are doing more than just creating bogus error-ridden files and intro'ing them into torrents. They are also targeting the downloaders and allegedly DDoS'ing them well after the download is completed. This is illegal and allowing them to do this (even by inaction) sets a bad precedent for others.

HBO's action is no different than me flooding a spammer, which may be justifiable in many a person's mind, but is still illegal...

I am not one of these people who is going to argue that downloading copyrighted material that you do not own isn't illegal. It is infringement/theft plain and simple. But saying that I do believe in fair use laws, but its total crap that the implementation of the DMCA basically threw out the former piece of legislation. (Oh its ok to create a copy of something you own for personal use, but since we put copyright protection on what you own it is illegal to bypass that, which in turn makes it illegal to create a copy of something you own...)

But in anycase I choose to live in the US where it is a mixed economy and corporations probably have more power and influence than they should...

 

[divgradcurl]

I 100% understand what you are saying about sympathy, but IMO I think it is utter BS that corporate America can get away with cyber vigilantism. They are doing more than just creating bogus error-ridden files and intro'ing them into torrents. They are also targeting the downloaders and allegedly DDoS'ing them well after the download is completed. This is illegal and allowing them to do this (even by inaction) sets a bad precedent for others.

Come on -- you seem like a reasonable poster -- if these folks hadn't downloaded (or tried to download) unlawful copyrighted works, they wouldn't be having these problems. Now, I'm not a shill for the RIAA or MPAA, and I agree that current copyright law has swung way to far to one side, but honestly, how can someone who is infringing complain about the steps that the copyright owners take to stop the infringement?

I am not one of these people who is going to argue that downloading copyrighted material that you do not own isn't illegal. It is infringement/theft plain and simple. But saying that I do believe in fair use laws, but its total crap that the implementation of the DMCA basically threw out the former piece of legislation. (Oh its ok to create a copy of something you own for personal use, but since we put copyright protection on what you own it is illegal to bypass that, which in turn makes it illegal to create a copy of something you own...)

Just FYI, the ability to create a backup copy of something is NOT a consequence of fair use, at least not directly. Yes, it is a consequence of the Universal v. Sony decision, but it was only after the codification of that decision in the Audio Homr Recording Act, followed by Quaid v. Vault Software, and extended by RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, that the right to copy a CD or other media arose. It's not part of statutory fair use -- in fact, one of the factors in statutory fair use is the amount of the copyrighted material used. Since a copy uses 100% of the copyrighted material, that would mitigate AGAINST a finding of fair use.

Be careful not to conflate the DMCA copying provisions and fair use -- copying is allowed under the AHRA and caselaw, but it only applies to computer programs and audio products. There is no current caselaw that establishes that you are free to copy DVD's. People assume you can under the current caselaw, and there is no law that says you can't, but it's not like the DMCA anticircumvention provisions are stopping you from exercising a right, because currently, you have NO right to make a backup copy of a DVD. It's not illegal to do so (other than the anticircumvention issues), but you don't have a right to do so, either.

 

[EvilWizard]

Div maybe its the bottle of Mondavi I just drank but this is where I say Thats why you are the lawyer and not me... Good points all around. I had thought through previous research (although brain is clouded at the moment due to grape infraction) that media in general was subject to fair use, but maybe that is more of an adaptation instead of actual fact...

In any case like I said I acknowledge the fact that downloading copyrighted videos via that you dont own is infringement. But I believe if you own media you should be able to make a backup copy for your own personal use in case the original is damaged. If that is unacceptable for the sellers than I believe they should be able to provide back-ups if original is damaged (what the Wall did back in the day for CDs).

Thanks for the input though. This is the section of the forums I have a lot of questions about usually and I appreciate the answers...