Laws regarding ripping a movie. [Archive]

Ghitulescu

12th March 2012, 13:23

consider a hypothetical situation
In that i ripped a dvd movie(which i own) to my Hdd
Indeed, you're talking about a hypotetical situation.
In real world you don't own that movie. The only way to own a movie is to pay all the expenses for producing that movie and, mind you, to be sure you got a written statement from its director that s/he cedes you his/her right.
In this situation what antipiracy law says. I want comment on this,also what is situation in other countries.
Nobody can answer this. Because there is no antipiracy law. There are however local laws that deal with this matter (yes, more than one, usually) and a competent answer you can get from your lawyer/attorney of choice (I specifically avoided here to name the senator you voted, as it's obvious that political persons don't have any idea of the laws they issue ;) :)).

diogen

12th March 2012, 14:17

I want comment on this... If you live by the rule "Anything is allowed unless explicitly forbidden" - go right ahead.
If you live by the rule "Anything is forbidden unless explicitly allowed" - don't do it.
The outcome in both cases will be the same. Because nobody gives a s***...
...also what is situation in other countries.Very country dependent.
But the US is working hard (ACTA) to fix this and bring at least the G20 in line of their thinking...

Diogen.

ramicio

12th March 2012, 14:39

Society owns "art" more than the person who created it. Art is not supposed to be industry. These douche bags can't have their cake and eat it too. They either want to be artists, or they want to make money off entertainment. I don't follow any laws about copyright. The industry is a dinosaur and knows that the internet has made it possible for artists to not need a middle-man to steal most of their earnings. They also don't understand that the content is just too expensive. They spend more money suing people than they get from the suits. Until the law makers deny the industry the power to be a monopoly, nothing will change, and movies and music will never be affordable. I will continue to "steal" because I believe the content is the world's, not the creator's. The idea of what they created is theirs, but nothing more. That is what a copyright is supposed to be...for ideas. I will especially do what I want with something if I physically bought it. No amount of law and punishment will ever make me give up my freedoms.

vrpatilisl

12th March 2012, 16:41

Copying/ripping Dvd (which i own) to Hdd is legal or illegal? I am not giving ripped mkv to others.

ramicio

12th March 2012, 16:42

It's yours. You bought it. Do what you want with it. If you're not sharing it outside of your home, what is the moral concern?

Ghitulescu

12th March 2012, 20:25

It's yours. You bought it. Do what you want with it.
You missed the point.
In real world you don't own that movie. The only way to own a movie is to pay all the expenses for producing that movie and, mind you, to be sure you got a written statement from its director that s/he cedes you his/her right.
What you say is like owning the movie because you bought a ticket to a movie, that you can use whenever you like it (within the time span of its availability in the issuing theater).
If you're not sharing it outside of your home, what is the moral concern?
This is again an extremely widespread misconception.

The laws do not need to be either ethic nor logic. The laws expresses in words the requirements of behavior in a given society. You want ethics, morals and stuff, please enroll into one of the mushrooming churches which pretend to provide the answers for moral and ethical questions.

Under most jurisdiction it is illegal to copy a DVD even for your personal use. This is why the only forum I know that allows the discussion of ripping DVDs/BDs is doom9. Please try to open this topic on another forum. ;)
It's not logic, it's imoral, it's counterproductive. Who cares?

ramicio

12th March 2012, 20:40

I don't see what this topic has to do with religion, but OK, nice to see some religious bashing...not.

If you are fearful of the law coming into your home, your castle, then don't do it. Just cower in the corner and let someone else run your whole life.

If you actually have your head out of your butt and realize that whatever you own is YOUR property and you can do with it whatever you want ON your own property, as long as it does not harm others, then go ahead.

It's just as silly as Apple trying to tell you what hardware you can install their software on, or what software you can install on hardware designed by them. If you really have some moral compunction about violating "laws" (that are illegal in the first place) that tell you what you can and can't do on your own property, with your own property, you're a sucker and you don't deserve anything you work for. You just become one of the mindless cattle those industries want you to be.

Do you really think the law is concerned with people making back-ups of their own stuff, in their own home? Doubtful. The laws are in place to make things seem harsh to people who want to copy them to sell them. The Euro zone must be such a lovely place to live.

diogen

12th March 2012, 20:45

Copying/ripping Dvd (which i own) to Hdd is legal or illegal?The best way to talk about this would be in terms of risk (smoking vs. cancer; DIU vs. accidents, etc.)
Unless you are a lawyer and then you would not talk publicly about it at all.

"I rip my DVDs and keep digital copies on storage media."
"Can I get in trouble?" - Yes, you can (depending on many factors).
"What is the risk to get in trouble?" - Zero.

Diogen.

ramicio

12th March 2012, 20:49

Exactly. There is zero risk, unless you know a snitch. Even then, the authorities could care less, as you are small game and doing it for no personal gain.

mariush

12th March 2012, 20:53

Technically, when you buy a DVD you buy a LICENSE TO VIEW the contents on the plastic disc in a private space, alone or with members of the family or a A FEW friends only (aka not a public performance). Legally, you're not even allowed to bring friends over and watch the disc on a big TV and serve popcorn or whatever, as that would be almost a "public" performance.

The license doesn't give you the right to transfer the contents to another medium (hard disk, flash usb sticks, floppy discs, other cd/dvd/bluray etc) and says so, imposing these strict terms to you. If you don't agree with the license you're not supposed to buy the discs.

HOWEVER, the license can not subject you to some terms that are against local laws - everything that's against local laws is NULL AND VOID (not applicable, you can ignore). So for example if your a country gives you the right to create a backup copy of the disc (note bit-by-bit identical including the drm, play the iso with a player that removes encryption on the fly such as VLC) for safety or there's a copyright exception for format shifting (dvd to avi/mkv/mp4), then those particular terms in the license on the disc are VOID (not applicable). But as far as I know, all the laws say that once you no longer have physical posession of the item you created backup for, you're supposed to destroy the backups.

So in the end it varies from country to country.

In some countries, like US for example, there are copyright exceptions like using fragments of a video for education use (presentation in schools) or for news (ex saying that a movie did a billion at box office) but even if there are those exceptions in copyright law, there are other laws such as DMCA which does not allow you to remove the protection from the disc.

Every few years there is a review process where people and companies can propose DMCA exceptions and some are accepted - for example some of the latest are jail breaking smart phones to be able to use it in another network or removing the security from some old software if the software was provided with dongle (physical things you plugged in parallel or usb ports) and those devices no longer work with modern hardware: see http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100726/09564610361.shtml , http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20031028/2326234.shtml , and http://depts.washington.edu/uwcopy/Copyright_Law/DMCA/Exceptions.php

Do note that DMCA only applies to US, every country has its own laws. ACTA and other treaties were supposed to bring the legislation in various countries the same and make it much more restrictive (and good for mpaa and riaa, not so good for actual customers) but so far some Europe countries are against it.

ramicio

12th March 2012, 20:59

You don't sign a contract when buying it, so you aren't bound to the terms listed on what you buy. Now if the movie companies sold the discs directly, and you had a sign something saying you will abide by some license, that would be a completely different story.

You're not allowed to bring friends over to watch a movie and feed them? WTF?!?! Who comes up with this crap. It's your house, your movie, your TV, and your food. Would it be acceptable if each person owned the disc?

The only rules I follow are: don't kill, don't steal, don't adulterate, and don't gossip. Other than that, all laws are simply preventative, and only serve to punish people for big fat "ifs".

Ghitulescu

12th March 2012, 21:32

ramicio

12th March 2012, 22:12

They do contradict centuries of common law...

hello_hello

12th March 2012, 22:35

What you say is like owning the movie because you bought a ticket to a movie, that you can use whenever you like it (within the time span of its availability in the issuing theater).

No it isn't. When you buy a ticket to see a movie, you don't get a copy of it on a disc which you own.

The laws do not need to be either ethic nor logic. The laws expresses in words the requirements of behavior in a given society. You want ethics, morals and stuff, please enroll into one of the mushrooming churches which pretend to provide the answers for moral and ethical questions.

The laws express in words the requirements of behavior in a given society, based on a consensus of ethics, morals and logic. At least they should. What else are laws for?
Not everyone might agree with a particular law, but that's because of their own ethics, morals and logic.

Under most jurisdiction it is illegal to copy a DVD even for your personal use. This is why the only forum I know that allows the discussion of ripping DVDs/BDs is doom9.

Seriously? Most other forums not only allow the discussion of DVD ripping, they allow a discussion of downloaded content.

It's not logic, it's imoral, it's counterproductive. Who cares?

I assume anyone posting in this thread does, otherwise, why post?

You don't sign a contract with Microsoft either, yet once you opened the package and installed windows you are legally bound by EULA (unless its provisions contradict the current laws).

I think you'll find that's not necessarily the case. Courts have ruled EULAs as being non binding in the past, although admittedly there have been contradictory rulings.
SoftMan Products Co. v. Adobe Systems Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softman_v._Adobe)
Enforceability of EULAs in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_license_agreement#Enforceability_of_EULAs_in_the_United_States)
At best a EULA is a contract. If I sign a contract with you and I break it, which law which says I can't, or puts me in jail? Breaking a contract is a civil dispute. EULA's are nothing more than software manufacturer's attempts to bypass the first sale doctrine, and it's beyond me why so many people happily bend over for them. Personally, I think EULAs should be ignored.
Mind you it's irrelevant anyway. When was the last time you bought a DVD which included a EULA?

vrpatilisl

13th March 2012, 07:16

hi
i know that transfering any material/even some part, even book to any other format like digital copy is infrigment of law,so i think ripping is also infrigment of law. Then i want to ask as our forum rule suggest that we can't discuss piracy related material then how we discus regarding ripping in our forum. Our moderater strikes those want to discus regarding pirated material.Then how could we discus on ripping Dvd (even breaking protection) on it.

mariush

13th March 2012, 08:07

It may not be illegal to rip the content for personal uses in the country where the administrator of this forum is, or where the forum is hosted.

Some members of the forum may not be located in countries that make it illegal to rip content for your personal use only. Other members may need to rip fragments for legitimate reasons using the DMCA exceptions that exist.

The simple intent of making a rip from a DVD or a legal source is not always illegal. In contrast, discussing about pirated material almost always implies the forum owner or the forum members encourage further infringement.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Not a moderator or anything here.

setarip_old

13th March 2012, 09:01

@vrpatilisl

Hi!

1) If you are TRULY seeking a LEGAL opinion regarding the specific hypothetical situation you described in Post #1 of this thread, as I've said in response to similar posts at other forums, why would you ask a bunch of absolute strangers at a forum, rather than seeking the knowledge of a copyright attorney or, perhaps, a law professor?

2) The terms "Piracy" and "copyright infringement" are NOT synonymous/interchangeable. I would suggest to you that stealing a commercial video or audio product for the purpose of selling copies (true "piracy") is most certainly a criminal act, while making backup copies of your PURCHASED discs as a means of protecting your collection has been and continues to be a bone of contention between we the consumers/purchasers and the studios and their representatives around the world.

3) This forum is owned by "Doom9". As the owner, "Doom9" is free to make and enforce any rules as he/she sees fit, whether based on legality or ethics, or even astrology.

4) This topic has been discussed at this forum ad nauseum. I'd suggest you perform a search of the forum to read what others have to say - But keep in mind that just as with this thread, you have no idea who you're "speaking to" (including me), what their backgrounds are, and whether they are expressing their true understanding or just "blowing smoke up your skirt";>}

BTW - I understand that in the Netherlands, it's legal to make backup copies of RENTED commercial media - but regardless of country, discussion of such is in violation of the rules of the Doom9 Forum.

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 09:18

It appears that everyone here (in this thread) confounds the provisions of a law with its enforcement.

If you ignore the red traffic light or drive 120 in a 50 zone, you definitively broke a law (technically it's not a law, but let's assume it is for the sake of argumentation). That you haven't been caught, that's another story, and this doesn't make you a law abiding citizen, just because. In the end, every free(not-in-jail) businessman is an honest one ;).

Because people delegated the ability to issue norms of behaviour in society (AKA laws) to a group of people (AKA the senate, parliament, duma or whatever be its name), without keeping a controlling lever (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? said Juvenal once) made the issued laws have nothing in common with morality, ethics or generally accepted behaviour.

It it's legal to rip your DVDs, why moved SlySoft in a fiscal paradise? Of course it's perfectly legal to cut things at home with a knife, stabbing someone is generally illegal, yet Sollingen factories still remained in Germany. If there have been any legal use for AnyDVD (as it is the case with the knife), they shouldn't left the Western world.

What one buys, it's nothing more than a nice coaster, a round polycarbonate disc with a hole in its center. But nobody pays 20€ for a piece of plastic. It's the information that resides there that is the interesting part. You can do whatever you want with this plastic toy, as long you don't copy the information. Likewise, the newspaper is nothing more than a written toilet paper. And buying a book cannot allow you to COPY/PASTE a chapter therefrom into your school homework .... You can however buy screws and logs and make a cabin and say it's yours (well, as long nobody else filed a design before you).

Technically, one has to agree to EULA (as a generic term) before accessing the information (break the seal). The non-ethical part of the law however prevents you from doing this, because to access the terms and conditions (that are inside the package) you need to unseal the package, which means you can't give it back if you don't agree.

QuantumRand

13th March 2012, 11:33

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 11:57

Yes, this is an exception. The legal use is an exception to an otherwise adverse law.
The knife example is the opposite - its normal use is lawful, the exception is not.

vrpatilisl

13th March 2012, 12:56

it is illegal to backup rented Dvd in our country india.

Guest

13th March 2012, 13:00

Then i want to ask as our forum rule suggest that we can't discuss piracy related material then how we discus regarding ripping in our forum. Our moderater strikes those want to discus regarding pirated material.Then how could we discus on ripping Dvd (even breaking protection) on it. Please read the forum rules again, specifically rule 17.

mariush

13th March 2012, 16:25

In the US, there is the FAIR USE Act.

Section 3, article 3:
"an act of circumvention that is carried out solely for the purpose of enabling a person to transmit a work over a home or personal network, except that this exemption does not apply to the circumvention of a technological measure to the extent that it prevents uploading of the work to the Internet for mass, indiscriminate redistribution"

Basically, it says that as long as it's not for any sort of redistribution, making a backup is ok. The way I see it is that it doesn't matter if you've damaged or lost the DVD (what else would a backup be for, right?). What matters is whether or not you actually purchased it, so keep the receipt. Heck, just scan a copy of the receipt and keep it in digital form with the backup.

The exception is valid, but it's for ONE LAW. The DMCA which keeps you from decrypting or breaking the DVD protections is ANOTHER LAW.

So if you do rip a movie, you have the Fair Use which allows you to make a bit by bit copy of the encrypted content FOR YOUR USE ONLY/ BACKUP.

Cracking the Macrovision and CSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Scramble_System) and any other anti-copy protections the disc may have are illegal illegal in US due to the DMCA, no matter what your Fair Use says in the other law.

There are some DMCA exceptions and every few years more are added:

http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2006/index.html
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2003/index.html
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/anticirc.html

So yeah, if your dvd unit can not read the protected discs and you don't fit in one of the exceptions in the links above, tough cookies, the DMCA doesn't allow you to break the encryption.

You're allowed to find a way to make a bit - by - bit copy with all the protections, for example you can get an electronic microscope and scan the surface of the DVD and figure out each individual bit.

note... all this is in US where DMCA applies. Other countries have more lax versions of DMCA or no similar law. So it depends from country to country.

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 16:44

Yes, CSS, no matter what lame it is, is still regarded as a protection, and as such, any software removing the CSS code for copying purposes (not watching, mind you) is illegal across EU. Fair use or not.

ramicio

13th March 2012, 16:54

It's never illegal because it's your property, done in your own home. You're not bootlegging it. I really don't care what zany laws anyone wants to bring into this. Nothing trumps possession. Common law established that most of the world follows means all of these new laws are null and void, and if you want to even take them seriously, they are at best civil, not criminal, meaning police will not enforce it. The knife analogy is completely stupid.

The only laws that anyone needs to follow for society to function are those relating to directly hurting others...not what could happen if other things happen to cause it. I speed, I've driven after drinking a lot, I will partake in illegal drugs, I text and drive, I buy foods that liberals don't think I should be allowed to eat, I "pirate" (ban me if you don't like it.) Does that mean I am not law-abiding? No. None of those things apply to me because I harmed no one in the process of doing them. Speeding harms no one unless there is an accident. Yes, an accident. Meaning not on purpose. Still, if a person is speeding and harms someone in the process, then they should be duly punished. Same applies to drinking and driving. The same applies to texting and driving. Drugs and food...no one has any business telling anyone what they can put in their bodies. Piracy...the industry is not needed to be a middle-man anymore for "artists." They are fighting hard to make it so you don't physically own the content anymore. Once it's on their cloud, they can delete and censor content at will. If they made physical media affordable, people would buy them and not feel inclined to steal them. They spend millions and tons of hours on copy protection only to have it broken by someone in hours after release. I really don't understand their psychology.

You're mixing up copying someone else's work and claiming it's your own and doing something with something you possess. That's plagiarism, which is why copyrights exist. A copyright has nothing to do with using something you've bought however you want to. The only copyright that needs to be applied to "art" is the intellectual property, meaning another "artist" can't go do the same song and claim it's their own. People who want to make a living being an artist are complete idiots from the get-go. I can only respect those who do it as a hobby for no financial gain. Those whose works become priceless when they die.

A businessman is far from honest. Most should be behind bars.

In what world can you not return opened software?

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 17:16

The cloud issue it the only argument of yours that is correct.

Offending the law means exactly what its name says - it is irrelevant whether you're caught or not. You may be - shall you call it bad luck or law enforcement :) ? You may not - shall you call this luck or maybe even legal?

As in the analogy with the newspaper, once the information was used (read, watched, listened) its support becomes nothing else than toilet paper or fill material or grill starter. You don't need the support anymore.

Whether the copying for personal uses infringes or not the copyright, or is in line with the ethical principles governing (or should govern) the copyright is pointless. If the traffic regulations prohibit the smoking at wheel, this has nothing to do with the fire department, or with the air pollution (CO2 noxes) or with your concepts about life and death and Nirvana and free spirit.

You don't like it, fine, move somewhere these peculiar laws do not exist (or do not have any practical effect) or change the law. This is how a democracy is supposed to work. The real Robin Hood ended hanged IIRC and his fellow citizens did not live better, either with him or afterwards ;). As the history showed us several times, playing Robin Hood ended badly on the long run. Al Capone still had to pay the taxes :)

ramicio

13th March 2012, 17:20

vrpatilisl

13th March 2012, 17:25

About 6 to 7yr back it is legal to take backup of your audio cd collection to harddisk. Now it is illegel. Laws becoming more strict.

ramicio

13th March 2012, 17:26

It's not illegal unless you don't consider your home your property.

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 17:39

It's not your property, either ;)
If it's your property, you should not pay taxes to anyone else (why would you?), and you could issue whatever laws you like.
But you (your ancestors) delegated these rights long time ago. Now you can see the effect of delegation of duties .... (you delegated your security to police and military, the education to public schools, the cleaning to the Mexican woman, the politics to political class, should I continue ....?)

But you don't own the content of a DVD.

Guest

13th March 2012, 17:42

I simply just don't follow the pointless laws, and I will defend with my life my right to not follow them. They don't exist to me. Democracy is just an illusion for the people who feel small and obsessively need to feel part of something greater. It's to keep the masses of sheep/slaves pacified. Please re-read the forum rules, specifically rule 15. Your political opinions are not a valid topic of discussion here. Thank you.

ramicio

13th March 2012, 17:43

Why is it not my property? I long to not pay taxes. I can't help it, as it is directly taken out of my pay check. I don't need the police and military to be safe. Police are supposed to be peace officers who don't go around looking for trouble like the common thug. It's everyone's duty to be part of a publicly-run militia. We don't need a military industrial complex. I don't need public schools brainwashing my children with socialism. I can clean up after myself. I'm not some elitist snob who needs a Mexican slave. I have no idea what you're even trying to get at anymore.

ramicio

13th March 2012, 17:44

Please re-read the forum rules, specifically rule 15. Your political opinions are not a valid topic of discussion here. Thank you.

I'll talk about what I want, where I want, and you only keep suspending me for 30 days. If you want it to stop, then permanently get rid of my membership or have me physically killed.

Guest

13th March 2012, 17:46

One more time, ramicio, your political opinions are off-topic and must not be discussed. Is it clear?

ramicio

13th March 2012, 17:48

I don't take warnings. The whole nature of the topic is political to begin with. It should have been stopped instantly. As I said, I will not stop unless you permanently ban me or kill me. I've also decided a while ago to boycott any of your software products. It's not my fault you lilberal retards can't make an off-topic area.

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 18:03

I was off-topic myself.

The DVD is a supporting medium for the information. You can do whatever you may want with the support (the plastic), but you actually paid the biggest part of the price for the content (the plastic itself cost some 1-2ç apiece). For cloud systems, it's the internet said supporting medium. It's like buying milk from a farm - either you need to have a bottle of yours or you get one from the milkman. That bottle keeps the milk together .... the disc was the necessary evil for the media industry, otherwise they couldn't "sell" you the content.

Now they can, the "wire" reached almost every house in the world, so they prepared the next move - I said it years ago, the cable and the virtual storage (VOD).

For 19$ you got the right to see the movie encoded in a standardised format (DVD or BD) for technical reasons, in certain conditions. Like alone, or with your family, maybe some friends, but definitively not with your whole neighbourhood .... If it were yours, who's gonna prevent you do this? If you don't believe me try to open an "open air cinema" and see what happens ;) You'll be given the possibility to explain exactly your opinions before a chairperson that knows the law ...

However, enforcing a law might be difficult in some cases, thus some offenders are tolerated, like the healthy organisms tolerate some microbs. So if you do this at home, under its protection, be sure you keep a low profile.

ramicio

13th March 2012, 18:08

What a completely moronic and sheepish stance. There is a local theater that is unconventional, serves food and beer and such, and doesn't use cinema equipment. They play older movies from discs. I doubt they went through any proper channel to do so, as the only channel would be to spend a million dollars on "real" equipment and get movies directly from the studios. The content is in my house, and it is MINE. I can invite over as many people as I want to my house to watch it, and even charge for it. In the public domain, I can no longer do with it as I want, like sell copies or claim it is my work.

Ghitulescu

13th March 2012, 18:23

I didn't say that I like it. But, like it or not, this is how the things are.
I hate to repeat myself, but as long as people do not understand these things (erroneously thinking that who cares what the law says, I'll download AnyDVD/DVDfab and do my backups anyway, thus taking no action) the situation develops and develops, from bad to worse. At this point, the history taught us that it is usually needed a revolution, because the laws to be "changed back" are so numerous, that no roll back can be smoothly done. What lacked the society was exactly what in electronics is called feedback, and it's what EFI did for years, but alone. No feedback, no correction....

Years ago, like the OP said it already, the laws permitted the digital copy for personal use. Unlike RIAA/MPAA liked to say, it was not tolerated (like they closed one eye), it was a right. Then it was restricted to non-games (what a lobby), then the whole software was excepted from the exception, and finally the protected A/V discs. The only legal "whole" was the so-called analog loophole - which circumvented the protections by routing the signal through the analog domain. Now this last bastion will be closed this year.

GAME OVER!

burfadel

13th March 2012, 18:44

This argument goes all the way back to VCR's. Technically it was illegal (and still is in some places) to record TV channels for later playback, and yet they still allowed the record function on VCR's! The same goes today with PVR's (the digital TV replacement for VCR's that record to a HDD), TV's with PVR function, TIVO (which is just a type of PVR), digital tuner cards in computers with recording software etc. I wouldn't worry about the legalities of it. If in the infinitesimal probability that you do get caught you will win, because loosing would cause too many hassles to the government and companies in regards to using those devices.

When you purchased a DVD (and also for bluray), you purchased personal viewing rights to the disks content. So, you have viewing right to the disks content, and ownership of the physical disk. This means that you can transfer the contents of the disk to another viewing medium, as long as its for personal use, since you still have the rights to view the disks content. Technically you aren't allowed to show the content to anyone else, including your partner, or watching with friends, but in reality its okay as long as its for private viewing. This means you can't play it at school, uni, at work, to the public etc without prior consent to the copyright owners. In reality though, people don't give a **** about that! and they could probably get away with showing it at schools, uni, or work, as long as its NOT public.

If they completely banned everything except for persona viewing, it would probably hurt the industry more than promote it. For example, if a friend or work colleague etc likes the movie when viewing, they may actually go buy it. Remember for most movies, people don't actually buy them if they haven't already seen it! The same goes with music. People only become aware of new artists and songs through radio play and TV music shows, unless they have prior awareness of an artist and will buy their latest album without hearing it...

In terms of piracy, the states figures of loss and the actual figures aren't anywhere close to each other. The stated figures are for total estimated piracy which includes a whole lot of people who have no intention of buying the movie, show, or song but have downloaded it. The actual piracy loss therefore is much less. The problem is people who were going to buy it downloading it instead (not sure of what percentage of the stated piracy loss this is). Part of the reason why people do this is because purchasing the viewing rights for a movie or tv season can be pretty expensive! A lot of people didn't see it worthwhile, especially for DVD's etc made from original transfers of older shows, instead of remasters of the original. The original transfer suffer the poor NTSC colour gamut, balance, and resolution, whereas the original masters for analogue were usually done on 35mm. Examples of shows that look superior with these original masters instead of transfers is Friends and Seinfeld. The DVD versions of these are off the original transfers, the proper digital TV widescreen versions are remastered from the original 35mm, its very much more enjoyable to watch. In other words, they charge a crapload of money just to chuck the transfers onto DVD's, people didn't see value for money in that. If people see value, they are more likely to purchase the viewing rights.

Hope that superfluous rant makes sense!