Log in

View Full Version : RipIt4Me - Update 22 March to v1.7.1.0

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15]
G_M_C
14th June 2007, 11:22
Well, someone in Finland could put the newest version of RipIt4me back up offcourse; Since the courts in Finland dont recognize CSS (DVD-protection) as a viable content-protection sceme ;-)
greath
14th June 2007, 11:51
Well, someone in Finland could put the newest version of RipIt4me back up offcourse; Since the courts in Finland dont recognize CSS (DVD-protection) as a viable content-protection sceme ;-)

ARCCoS is not CSS so even though CSS has been broken and cannot be updated, ARCCoS can be changed on newer discs so perhaps as an on-going content protection scheme it is still viable.
G_M_C
14th June 2007, 13:53
ARCCoS is not CSS so even though CSS has been broken and cannot be updated, ARCCoS can be changed on newer discs so perhaps as an on-going content protection scheme it is still viable.

Too bad ...sniff...

Looks like there is not other thing to do than wait untill Sony goes bankrupt. They're loosing money so fast that it wont be long now I hope :p
kis2005
14th June 2007, 17:14
I had to get a new disc and Ghost Rider wouldn't play in my LiteOn but would on my standalone and with my Samsung. I think another issue with SONY is their poor quality control. I have had issue with more than a few SAP and DVD Drives and when they pulled the Rootkit stunt, that was the end. There are too many other places to spend my money. There is a saying, "Keep your customers happy and they will keep you happy." SONY has to learn that they are here for us, we are not her for them.
Rich86
16th June 2007, 06:52
ARCCoS is not CSS so even though CSS has been broken and cannot be updated, ARCCoS can be changed on newer discs so perhaps as an on-going content protection scheme it is still viable.

Maybe - but has anything stubbed RipIt4Me's toes yet?
Wombler
16th June 2007, 11:21
Maybe - but has anything stubbed RipIt4Me's toes yet?

It won't cope with 'ProtectDVD' but that's only been used on a handful of German releases so far.


Wombler
Rich86
16th June 2007, 14:42
It won't cope with 'ProtectDVD' but that's only been used on a handful of German releases so far.
Wombler

I keep reading that a fair number of standalone dvd players cannot cope with 'Protect DVD' either . . . .
blutach
16th June 2007, 15:46
@Rich86

I will not comment on the decryption issues, for what are now obvious reasons, but will add this:

AFAIK, a DVD only needs VIDEO_TS.IFO in its filesystem. Of course, the other files need to be on the disk, but not necessarily in the FS, since (at least standalone) players are really dumb and work only on sectors and the sectors in VIDEO_TS.IFO are sufficient to identify where all the relevant files are. I have made several test DVDs like this and they all play on my players, which are heavily standard compliant.

Players which do not like these "corrupt" filesystems are probably not fully compliant. Now, for all practical purposes, the DVDs produced needs to play on all players (including software ones which tend to like filesystems to be intact) - otherwise, the disks will be returned as defective, and this is just not economically viable.

So, while ProtectXDVD may, in actuality, be standard compliant, it may not (thru no fault of its own) be a workable, practical system, as people must be able to play their DVDs - even on their non-compliant players.

Regards
SamuriHL
16th June 2007, 15:48
@blutach

I surmise that a lot of players are internally just PC components and that's why they have issues with these discs. IOW, if it can play on a PC in a software player like PowerDVD or WinDVD, then these cheap players made with standard PC components will probably be fine. But, any protection that causes a PC to fail to read it will in all likelihood cause these players to fail, as well. That's just my theory and take on this situation...
blutach
16th June 2007, 16:01
In the end, I guess I am saying (and so was Rich86, if I interpret him correctly), that this system may fail to reach the wider audience because of this fact, not due to its lack of ingenuity.

An SAP simply reads sectors, however, which is undoubtedly different to at least some software players (which are looking for files). IMO, those SAPs which do not simply read sectors from VIDEO_TS.IFO have design defects.

Regards
SamuriHL
16th June 2007, 19:11
I'm hoping they drop all stupid protections on DVDs, personally. They're a nuisance to people who purchase DVDs and do NOTHING to prevent people from pirating the DVD if they so choose. Once again, the model is to irritate your paying customers and do absolutely nothing to stop the people ripping you off. The music industry is SLOWLY waking up to this concept...people are going to pay for your work or they're not. Technical measures like DRM do nothing but annoy people....at least the ones that buy it.
Rich86
16th June 2007, 21:20
I'm hoping they drop all stupid protections on DVDs, personally. They're a nuisance to people who purchase DVDs and do NOTHING to prevent people from pirating the DVD if they so choose. Once again, the model is to irritate your paying customers and do absolutely nothing to stop the people ripping you off. The music industry is SLOWLY waking up to this concept...people are going to pay for your work or they're not. Technical measures like DRM do nothing but annoy people....at least the ones that buy it.

Amen. My purchase this week of "Ghost Rider" wasn't because I could not copy it from somewhere if I wanted to. It was because I was interested in the movie, the dvd (at least the extended edition) dedicated its available space to large video files with decent bit rates and included a dts soundtrack - instead of wasting the available optical media with pollution via intentional flaws, corrupt sectors and phony/misleading files. If the industry ever settles on a high definition standard, I will spring for a high def player and buy those releases instead of standard dvd. But until then, watching standard dvd's via my upconverting player to my Sharp 1080p tv will serve just fine.

As far as ProtectDVD goes - Sony has effectively trained me to test every dvd purchase in every device - and if it fails anywhere - it goes back as defective. And I advise anyone who will listen to do the same thing.
blutach
17th June 2007, 09:10
I'm hoping they drop all stupid protections on DVDs, personallyAmen indeed, but IMHO, fat chance.

Regards
SamuriHL
17th June 2007, 15:23
@rich86

Definitely a good idea to test all purchases on your players. For me that includes 2 HTPCs and my Xbox 360 with HD-DVD drive.

@blutach

I know...It was a hope not a realistic event. ;)
morpork
20th June 2007, 05:31
Ripit4me cannot handle PrtoctDVD but the newest release of
DVDFab can cope with it.
Fator.br
22nd June 2007, 18:11
With Ripit4me i ripper Apocalypto.

Logs.:
http://share.gulli.com/files/1420787392/apocalypto_0.rar.html

R4 Brasil :):eek::p


Look, remove 498 packs???? analise please this log
setarip_old
22nd June 2007, 18:17
@Fator.br

Hi!

The reference to "remove 498 packs" means nothing by itself. Is there any problem with the rip?
Fator.br
22nd June 2007, 18:35
No problem. Works
setarip_old
22nd June 2007, 18:57
No problem. WorksThat's really all that matters ;>}
zsb
11th July 2007, 08:18
Well, someone in Finland could put the newest version of RipIt4me back up offcourse; Since the courts in Finland dont recognize CSS (DVD-protection) as a viable content-protection sceme ;-)
Unfortunately, this is not true. The previous decision in lower court is no longer as valid as the prosecutor has taken the case to higher court. We are still waiting for a new trial on the case. A bit off topic, but I still felt I had to point it out :)