People ripping people (2nd Round): DVDx versus DVDBackup [Archive]

dragongodz

27th May 2002, 05:08

taken a while for my clearance to post so sorry i havent posted sooner.

i am one of the helper programmer of DVDx. look in the file mpeg_encodedlg.cpp in DVDx 1.8a source and do a search for dragonogodz, couple of lines added by me :)

anyway i have emailed leo ,the webmaster of topdownloads (the website with backup dvd), and gotten the run around basically. first he says its made by another company for them (which they pay for) and then in the latest it was gooten from www.rentacoder.com . also paid for of course. in the latest email he also claims he has copyright etc because he paid for the source code etc. i have replied that trying to claim copyright on stolen material is illegal aswell. he even tried to claim initially that maybe DVDx was a clone of their software. i pointed out that in his own forums there is a post about the message "DVDx error wnaspi32". also the images in the image drawer (for the guide) are all called DVDx1.jpg etc. i have even offered to send hi the source to compare with what he has. have told him links where DVDx is available for download. finally i told him to do the search for dragongodz in the above mentioned file. the error message alone should have told him something was up. he just seems reluctant to believe anyone (other DVDx users have emailed him aswell). i have simply asked him to remove the webpage and offending program. havent try to claim money or anything like that.

i am waiting to see what he has to say to my last email. if he doesnt do something soon i will have to take more action which helps no one really. unfortunatly Jean Luc is away on one of his long holidays and cant be contacted but i have left several messages about it on his work email.

if all else fails you could very well see DVDx 2.0 be released without source code. that would be a pity since its the availabilty of the source that allowed me to get involved in the first place. no there wont be a DVDx 1.9 since a lot of major things are being done to DVDx that deserves a jump to 2.0.

it is nice to see the support from you guys though and i will let you know if/when i get a reply.

dragongodz

27th May 2002, 06:33

latest news. still no email from leo but go to the backup dvd website www.backupdvd.info , the downloads have been removed but there is a link to a faq/guide. now on tucows its apparently just been upgraded to version 6.7. i d/l the demo and it was still the same DVDx rippoff. the thing is look at the faq/guide page. hmm remind people of another dvd to avi/vcd/svcd program ? they didnt even change the blue with yellow slash for the main window.

for those who may not have worked it out the program being ripped off is Xmpeg. since you cant download from there anymore and tucows have just the same old download i cant confirm they have actually changed to ripping off Xmpeg. but if that is what they are now selling well it speaks volumes doesnt it.

RadicalEd

27th May 2002, 07:47

Lookie lookie what I've found at rentacoder.com...
http://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder/misc/BidRequests/ShowBidRequest.asp?lngBidRequestId=17003
or if for some reason that dosent work (you know how these wierdo websites work) I copied the source (what ironic terming ^.^) to a new page on angelfire. Of course it dosent have any of the images and the links dont work... but if you cant get to rentacoder, read it here (http://www.angelfire.com/anime3/airanime/ripoff.html)

What a total rip. Looks as though the poor idiots who made 'backupdvd' were the ones who got scammed if they purchased compilations of DVDx for $500-$5,000. I found this one under 'multimedia' on the side menu bar. So... is this the source of the problem??? I think I understand why DVD2SVCD never released his code, and a damn good thing he didn't. How completely ridiculous...

jonny

27th May 2002, 10:43

LOL

World is full of lamers...
I think closed or "limited" open source is the only solution to don't get stoled

avih

27th May 2002, 10:53

damn, the ppl behine dvd-dup are shameless indeed.
this is taken from their main page ( http://www.dup-dvd.com/ )at the bottom:

Warning:
It is against the law to reproduce copyrighted material for the purpose of selling it to third parties. Some countrys' laws only allows for you to make one backup copy of any software or media for personal and archival purposes. By entering this site you acknowledge that you are the sole "Owner" of all DVD copyrighted media that might be duplicated and in no way is DUP-DVD responsible for any violations of copyright enfringement.
.

this is funny, instead of saying (the bold section) that anyone that's entering this site must comply with copyright law (which will prevent them from enter their own site), they made it easy for them for 'reducing' the limitation for entrance only to dvd material. software was 'forgotten' ;)

oh my...

avi

ps.
is there anyone that reads this thread has some relation to dvd-dup? i'm sure a lot of ppl will be glad to hear educated respond, instead of making all these rumours about the way they 'bought' the license or other stuff. official respond will me most welcome.

Ookami

27th May 2002, 11:26

Thank you all for your contribution in this thread!

Dragongodz, it's nice to have you here..

> if all else fails you could very well see DVDx 2.0 be released without source code

This cannot be done! And if it's done DVDx must be rewritten. I was the one who pointed Jean Luc to the GPL, as he didn't knew about it. Remember, he used the sources of many GPL programs so he must GPL his program too.

BTW, Dragongodz, could you please give me a valid e-mail from Jean Luc? I have mailed him to the yahoo.com adrees a few times but it keeps bouncing back!

I would gladly do some beta testing for the upcoming 2.0 version.

These people who change a few lines in freeware programs and then sell it can be beaten with pressure. If people (who know better english than I :) ) write to the shareware portals like Tucows etc. Such programs will have a hard time to live. We could also write to their ISP's etc. So there is no need to abandon good programs because of a few greedy lamers.

All the best,

Mijo.

P.s.: Keep posting all the other stolen programs here, so that we have a list of such programs. Thank you.

dvd2svcd

27th May 2002, 11:49

afaik dup-dvd is not on the blacklist of ripoff programs. dup-dvd is not build from open source. Only problem with dup-dvd is that the quality is really bad imho.

dragongodz

27th May 2002, 13:15

sorry if i didnt make myself quite clear about with out source. what i meant was it could be released without source code, but that would be available through an email request (which is covered in the gpl as i have read it, correct me if i have misundertood it). this would make it possible to see who exactly is getting the source code and if its then ripped off would give a starting point to find out by who. it would be possible to embed something small in each emailed source (that doesnt effect DVDx itself) to identify who the source went to. as i said before i love open source as its what got me involved in DVDx to start with and i would hate to see such measures needing to be implamented.

sorry ookami but i dont want to give out Jean Lucs work email with out his permission. it would be pointless at the moment since he is away. as soon as he is back though i will tell him to get in touch with you. the reason the yahoo email bounces back is because it has a limit which Jean Luc told me (some time ago) is filled in a matter of days if he doesnt check it.

as for beta testing DVDx 2.0, join the queue :)
not much point at the moment as most of the work being done is on the gui and things related to that. Jean Luc said he is going to get into the decoder/encoder sections but that wont be til he gets back (and he didnt say when that would be). so i am only working on the gui for now so there is no speed or quality difference over DVDx 1.8a yet.
oh and yes i emailed tucows aswell. only got an automated reply so far.

RadicalEd

27th May 2002, 17:27

Yup, I've downloaded DUP-DVD previously in order to see whether it was real or not and it looked totally valid. Anyway Bach that may be one reason developers dont release their source, but obviously this is another. Programs developed with the intention of being freeware going around the internet at $500-$5000 to companies being sold to customers for $30 a piece, and on top of that the real developers dont get to see a penny of it. Need I say more?

jj59

27th May 2002, 18:50

Did anybody checkout BHV Mein DVD-Studio; according to Chip 06/2002 page 135, it is also using DVDx as grabber without the P4version.
(On page 204-210 is a workshop for DVDx.)
The site of this program doesn't mention it's using DVDx
http://www.bhv.net/bhv/software/bildvideo_8500_x.html

"Mein DVD Studio besteht aus zwei wertvollen Einzelprogrammen. NeoDVD standard ermöglicht es Ihnen, digitale Filmdateien (entweder von einem digitalen Camcorder oder aus anderen Quellen) zu bearbeiten und in DVD-fähiges Material umzuwandeln.
Mit dem DVD-Grabber können Sie handelsübliche DVDs auslesen und und zu Sicherungszwecken kopieren. Bitte beachten Sie dabei die jeweils gültigen Copyright-Bestimmungen."

especially the last sentence is a "bit" peculiar.

jj

avih

27th May 2002, 22:54

nasty, nasty :(

dragongodz

31st May 2002, 05:53

well finally got another email from leo. ok i had to send another one saying Jean Luc is back and has been informed so he can take further action if he wants. this is what i got back

"Dear Dragonodz ,

We take of the software already and we investigate it also , the maker of the software is Arihant Software
E/2, Nilharsh, Anjali Cross road,Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat India -.380007
Phone :- (91)-(079)-6609497, 2190899 Email :- ashah@arihantsoftwareindia.com

Regards

Leo"
i have emailed back that it is still available from tucows to download and i only got an auto reply from them saying they got my email. i suggested that maybe he should request it be removed from download. i noticed also that cnet has it for download aswell.
another member of the DVDx forum has said he has emailed rentacoder and they will be investigating it aswell.

ookami i have told Jean Luc that you want to talk with him. i warn you that he can be a bit slack in the email department. if he hasnt contacted you in the next week then let me know and i will get on to him. you could try his yahoo email again aswell.

dragongodz

6th June 2002, 04:55

update.

a new version of backup dvd has been released. hmm in a bit over a week they have managed to write a whole new program ? you decide.
lets have a quick look at this new version. hmm new gui true. hmm save dvd by buffering to ram (and hd i asume if you register), slightly different named resize filters but hmm still the same really. hmm is it me or does this look like a new gui for the DVDx routines ? well i emailed leo (of backup dvd) yesterday and told him pretty much what i say above. i also said for him not to bother trying to say otherwise since its obvious that all he is interested in is the money and not other peoples hard work.

goes to show that for all his complaining that he was conned aswell that he is only really sorry to be caught. and even thats not sttopping him.

phrentec

11th June 2002, 18:00

well since labdv.com is charging to register for there site in order to download dvdx it seems that backupdvd.info would be a good alternative mirror site to get the program. and you can always find a keygen anywhere out there.

ChristianHJW

13th June 2002, 14:00

Hmmm .... do we have any official statement from Jean-Luc Pons on this issue ? Anybody thought about the possibility he himself is behind this all ?

This is not ment to be an offense at all, i just find it strange that he doesnt react ( at least it seems to be that way, only a co-coder is complaining ). But, as always, i may be totall wrong here ... my apologies in advance ....

BuGsEy

17th June 2002, 19:44

oops

Ookami

17th June 2002, 23:11

Bravo, Christian! I mean, does Legman gives you conspiracy theory lessons or what?

Tsk,tsk,tsk...

And to apologizing after such a post is just strange and certainly not honest. I apologize if that offends you :D .

Cheers,

Mijo.

Originally posted by ChristianHJW
Hmmm .... do we have any official statement from Jean-Luc Pons on this issue ? Anybody thought about the possibility he himself is behind this all ?

This is not ment to be an offense at all, i just find it strange that he doesnt react ( at least it seems to be that way, only a co-coder is complaining ). But, as always, i may be totall wrong here ... my apologies in advance ....

temsi

20th June 2002, 14:40

Originally posted by RadicalEd
[B]Lookie lookie what I've found at rentacoder.com...
http://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder/misc/BidRequests/ShowBidRequest.asp?lngBidRequestId=17003

This is total BS. First he mentions free downloads which can do everything he needs (then why does he need this one? oh, to sell as his own, of course...), then he basically invites anyone to rip off open source code when he says:
I have done some research and there is quite a bit of free source code which handles each of these processes. There is open source for decoding the DVD to an .avi and also converting to mpeg. Hopefully these resources can speed development time.

I'm no lawyer, but isn't this an open and shut case? The guy is basically inviting programmers to violate the GPL License for a fee. Perhaps someone should threaten to sue him. :D

dragongodz

25th June 2002, 05:42

well i have been in contact with the "coder" and he says he only used Flask and DVDx as references. so i have asked him to send me some samples of the source code (not all of it just different parts). that was 3 days ago and no reply yet. will let you know if/when he does send anything.

Tatjahna

4th July 2002, 07:28

Originally posted by dragongodz
... so i have asked him to send me some samples of the source code (not all of it just different parts).

You know, it's quite easy to modify some lines of coding just to avoid any further problems. Just beware... If he's "guilty" of this treat, and notice that the things went really wrong for him, I could be really surprise to see that he could let any clues behind him!

But, you know all, I'm not a God, so all I just can say is my own opinion.. But if everything is true, give him a big b*tt shot for me please! :devil: I cannot myself, I have a "feetache" (dunno how to call it in english :( )

dragongodz

4th July 2002, 14:26

yes i know he could of changed the code he sent (and i was expecting him to) but it would have to be some major changes and would still have to work. more than a thief like this could do i hoped. seems i was right. keep reading.

well heres a reply from the "coder"

I am sorry for not replying immediately. Before I got your first email, I have used some Library of DVDX code under GNU license which allows to use the code freely without support. I didn't try to steal the code by any means. Plus, I didn't market it is as a product of myself anytime anywhere. As a programmer, I have just took this project as a different kind of application and I understand you from your email. I apologize for any inconvenience happened to you due to this and I assure that I will not use your code in future. Please let me know if anyway I can help you with.

i emailed back how he is wrong and how his story changed all the time. like 1 minute he only used DVDx as a refernce and then he reverse engineered the gui and now he says he did use some source. i have email Ian at rentacoder a copy because he said i should make a formal complaint to them (so they can remove him). i told him that if the above wasnt an admition of guilt (once you actually read the gnu) then nothing was. if a complaint (plus real name etc) is needed then i will ask Jean Luc to since most of the work putting DVDx together is his.
i also email topdownloads (who sell backup dvd) stating they should remove it as its now been admitted that DVDx source was used. hmm lets see if they do shall we ?

Arky

14th July 2002, 09:15

No programs on sale here, but I am curious as to where the intellectual DVD-2-VCD content has come from, in the following link:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1547931259

Arky ;o)

\AX

16th August 2002, 07:30

Im no lawer but i don't see how i or anyone else that is not involved with dvdx or has bought the fake can sue them or even hassle them.

It would be like knowing who stole someone's hand crafted ice scuplture telling the police that it's being sold at the flea market.

ok it's not the best analogy but i think you understand.

the big threat would actually getting a list of people who bought it, contacting them and telling them they bought something that was stolen and free in the first place. At that point it would be a good case of fraud. Those people could then sue or atleast file suit invidually and at that rate anyone to do with this fake would be pretty much blacklisted for life.

If those people tagged that company for a lawsuit, anyone connected to that company will be envolved. It might be a case of "well i just did it because he did it" or "they just paid me to do the code". Either way they will be envolved and there names will be transmitted to the lawfull authorities.

Pretty much you have here is some pathetic programmers that don't know anything to do with coding digging up newbie guide's to programming and stealing dvdx.

My feeling's is this though. I do not believe that anybody will go to jail or probably even sued, but the poor programmers that worked on it, if they get a suit filed, will never work in the complete world of IT again.

They stuck there neck's out on this one. To loose the job, product and possibly even get sued is small change to having your name pop up in the eye's of a employer or invester everytime they run a check on your work/background history. And if this would hit for even a misdermeanor they could never even bee consider for employeement in IT again. It would be hard getting a job even scrubbing toilet's because the issue of anti-trust would be a huge concern.

To sum up i hope the nearsighted programmers that decide to do this find a way out before it catch's up with them, but hey, if they get 50k off it before they drop, then sucess. 50k is not that much though for risking a black mark on your name...neither is 300k.

Goodbye to the guys who wrote it...i really hope you can make it right before you get pinched. Set the wrong right would only mean to give the money to the writer of dvdx and also stop selling your product. Can you be a REAL person and do the right thing....or hope and pray you can hide. At the very least you probably understand something about how these program's work and could write your own...but do you understand any of it at all??? I hope but probably not.

CruNcher

21st August 2002, 19:29

Arggghh i hate such people they hiding behind laws of other countrys like XXX Dialer and Spamer Operators do (maybe he even has some of this running) and the only interest for them is MONEY what they made with the work of other SMARTER idividuals but such people are existing and if this broke up now he made his money his customers will never see a dime of it. Did you looked up the Registration Information of THIS SCUMs Websites

www.dvdcopy.net

DVD COPY
#18 Liraq street
Manilla, Paranaque Metro Manilla
PH

www.backupdvd.info

Registrant ID:C2181883-LRMS
Registrant Name:LEO VAN OPSTAL
Registrant Street1:Gulod Prinsa
Registrant City:Teresa
Registrant State/Province:Rizal
Registrant Postal Code:1800
Registrant Country:PH

www.topdownloads.net

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
van Opstal, Leo (LV1596) webmaster@PIGEONS.NET
Australian Avian exports
1393 Mt.Mee rd
Mt.Mee, Qld 4521
AU
0061-754982384 (FAX) 0061-754982387

The only thing what Jean Luc can do against this SCUM is everywhere on the internet on Press give out this info what this mister LEO VAN OPSTAL (if its even his real name) is up to and try to bring this to attention if you read this mister OPSTAL you know that many time people like you becoming an answer not always but you only have to get on the wrong people like a Secret Agency Employe (Agent) that doing this work in his funtime (James bond is coding Dvd Backup Software ehh ;) )and you would have a problem soon sure it's not likely but hey this is the Net :P

But all of you can be sure this is a real Criminal who seeks now for victims online

Gunner

27th September 2002, 23:24

Hey, I got an email from a spam company trying to sell a product called DVDCopyPlus4.0. I went to their site http://www.copymydvd.com/dvdcopyplus.htm and looked at what it includes.

None of their software is their own. All they do is give you other peoples software.

SmartRipper
DVDx
VCD Easy/CD-Maker
PowerCDR

Take a look for yourself http://support.321studios.com/faqsupport.asp

dragongodz

12th October 2002, 11:43

well nothing is/can be done with DVDx vs backup dvd sadly. the guy who sold the source to topdownloads says he misunderstood the GPL and was sorry. therefore even though topdownloads didnt stop selling backupdvd when given proof (by me) that it was stolen code they have to be asumed to have been duped in the first place. there actions after being given the information is not so innocent.
what do i mean by that ? i will leave that to the end.
now they say they have a new programmer and arent using the previous code so there is bugger all that can be done really. it is interesting to see that they thank people like Jean Luc and Maven etc in the readme that comes with the new versions though. Jean Luc and i even offered to help them make a version that was not infringing the GPL. now this is the not so innocent bit.
the response i got from mr van opstal ? he wanted my name and address (since i live in Australia aswell). why ? well believe it or not so he could send me a $10000 (thats U.S. dollars) bill. this is what he says he lost in advertising etc because of my posting here and on the Labdv forum about his program. i had to laugh. i told him to go speak to his lawyers since i can not be sued etc for telling the truth for which i still have proof. also to not bother emailing me again because there was no way i was going to help (directly at least) a person like him. havent heard from him again. it was actually tempting to let him try and take me to court as i would have sued him back etc. i do have a family though (including a young child) and i dont think the stresses would have been good for them.
people should remember that when dealing with these types of companies, they are only interested in making money. if they were doing it to help people it would be free (or at most media and postal charges if supplied on cd etc)

dvd2svcd

19th October 2002, 18:45

If you want to say something to the head of 321studios (pro or con)Take a look here:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/8552

dragongodz

20th October 2002, 12:20

thanks dvd2svcd. i just left a reply. its civilised and calm. so it will be interesting to see the response (if any) to it.
have a look and see what you think. :)

sadly the thing with dvdcopyplus is a bit different than backupdvd. dvdcopyplus sold a guide and gave away the software (essentially) which enabled them to skip the GPL. if you follow what i mean. while backup dvd recompiled DVDx with string changes and registration added.

kelproit62

4th March 2003, 20:56

*spam and profanity deleted by the moderator*

Ookami

25th April 2003, 06:34

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51789

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51693

Ookami

30th April 2003, 11:34

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52004

I found this info on unite-video.com. Look like this is a "remake" (understand rip, plaggia) of DVDx

http://www.cybergame2000.com/free.htm

I took a look quickly so I can't affirm it, but if this is the case, this really sucks...

BlackSun

30th April 2003, 18:38

my bad, I didn't see this topic. You can delete my other topic if you want.

Ookami

7th May 2003, 12:36

As I've made the "Who is Johnny Owl" thread unsticky, you can find it here:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36144

mrbass

8th May 2003, 19:01

I made a list of 'my recommendations' of dvd software to buy. All are extremely excellent and priced very competitively...see here http://www.mrbass.org

dragongodz

9th May 2003, 05:08

mr.bass@ very disapointed by the list of software on your site. i mean all the ones you comment on. why you ask ?

dvdecho, dvdsqueeze and replicant are both bundled freeware with a guide etc
super dvd ripper and 1st dvd ripper, hmm geez now dont they look familiar ? look at the errors (such as avisetstream dor divx 5.03) plus much more.

if you are trying to point out that the programs are rip offs then that is in no way clear. if so then please state it on your site otherwise uninformed people could take that list seriously.

mrbass

9th May 2003, 05:29

Originally posted by dragongodz

if you are trying to point out that the programs are rip offs then that is in no way clear. if so then please state it on your site otherwise uninformed people could take that list seriously.

Are you serious? I put back the top part to links of guides, etc. back in place. Anyway if people think that's serious then there's really no hope for them and they deserved to get ripped off. See my last link about Jeff K which is a huge tip off. That stuff took me a long time to type up and I made as many spelling errors as I possibly could.

I will add this tidbit something like this.
Never buy any dvd software that doesn't have a demo and show screenshots. Never buy dvd software that only has screenshots without a demo / trial.

Problem with that is even some modified source to dvdx and make it look different so even that doesn't always apply. I guess the best advice is don't even buy software without first check doom9.org forums.

dragongodz

10th May 2003, 14:41

i have to disagree. just because someone does not understand you are being sarcastic does not mean they deserve to be ripped off.

a real life example for you. a freind of my wifes family bought a dvd burner for christmas. now he is not computer minded but just wanted to mainly backup his childrens dvds (especially the disney ones which are only very limited released). now he did do a bit of research and had a list of software that sounded like it would do the job. amongst that list was things like replicant. thankfully he had me to stear him in the right direction.

the point is that if he had found your site during his searching it would not have been clear that you were not serious about that software. spelling mistakes mean nothing.

he or anyone else does not deserve to be ripped off just because they dont get your meaning. just as those people(i wont call them companies) do not deserve to get his money for it. maybe it is too much to expect that people would want to help people just starting out instead of ridicule them.

mrbass

16th May 2003, 02:44

@dragongodz
excellent point. I stand corrected. It's a confusing world out there especially those just jumping in to backing up dvds.

One thing that made my day was stories about that 321studios court case...guess who is named as defendants
"The suit names Internet Enterprises Inc., RDestiny LLC, HowtocopyDVDs.com, DVDBackupbuddy.com and DVDSqueeze.com as defendants. None could immediately be reached for comment."

Well you gotta love it in one sense that the scam artists are having to defend themselves. Still this whole thing is ridiculous because where the profit is being generated from illegal movies and being deprived is two things:

1) People who upload/download movies (divx, dvd-r). DVD-R isn't a huge concern because while technically possible for someone to download 4.7GB it just isn't happening all that much. Sure many do it but not the masses. More are download divx because of the file size. Probably 2nd is vcd / svcd downloading, etc.

2) Biggest is people selling them in New York, L.A. on the streets making profit off of others intellectual property. That's flat out jail time and they should be prosecuted. This has nothing to do with DVD-5 (dvd-r, dvd+r) media and all these dvd backup software is not used. Instead they used $30,000 or more up dual-layer dvd copying machines to crank out perfect copies. CSS is irrelevant. This is what they do in many Asian countries and other countries.

I guess what I'm getting at is why restrict an average Joe for making a DVD backup. No revenue is being lost. Bust the factories that crank them about by the thousands. Sell them on ebay, etc. The movie box office figures are definitely NOT on the decline that's for sure.

Obviously if in the end if the court rules it's illegal in the U.S. to circumvent CSS encryption when abiding by the Fair Use doctorine then I guess there goes my site. I'll have to take out any mirrors of software that decrypt a dvd and most likely won't even be allowed to link to dvddecrypter lest mention it's name.

Belgabor

30th May 2003, 02:30

Here's another one I was put upon someone in the VirtualDub Forum (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54486). It might be 'ok' legally speaking, but probably it isnt. Their webpage is here (www.luxuriousity.com). They sell LuxuriousityVideo(VirtualDub), LuxuriousityOffice(OpenOffice), LuxuriousityPhoto(Gimp) and some other stuff I couldn't identify. Mostly no trace of origin mentioned on the page. Also nothing of the source code.

Imho their name alone is enough to hang them high.

EDIT: Fixed the link (doh!). For more info see the linked thread in the vdub forum.

mpucoder

30th May 2003, 03:41

There is a typo in the link (missing the final "i")

But I did manage to get there - you can even buy MySQL (another GPL product) for only $9.95 - the benchmark writeup ( http://www.luxuriousity.com/sql.htm ) is straight from http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL_Benchmarks.html

Well, I guess it's legal at that price, but why bother? The full download takes no more than 30 minutes on a bad day.

midiguy

31st May 2003, 05:10

HAHAHA, oh man. I'm sorry, that whole luxuriousity thing is damn funny! They actually have the balls to post virtualdub screenshots on their website... and they actually name many of the software titles that they are ripping off. man, someone needs to take these morons down.

The Edge

13th June 2003, 12:26

http://www.dvdcopydecrypter.com/

This crowd of *$£!&£$ are selling DVDShrink for $89 (was $139)
I've already emailed them a complaint.....unreal!

Edge

bilu

20th June 2003, 10:13

We should make a sticky with all the ripped applications mentioned on this thread.

Bilu

Ookami

20th June 2003, 11:03

Originally posted by bilu
We should make a sticky with all the ripped applications mentioned on this thread.

Bilu

I always wanted to make a list, but my time never permitted it :( . If you look at my first thoughts when this thread started, I wanted this one to be only temporary sticky...

If you have the time and motivation, contact Swan or Wilbert, and you can maybe do something about it, if they agree :) .

But, still, thanks to Bach this is the most important thread on this board, IMO, as it's even very important for people who don't want to fiddle with this whole scene/hobby stuff, but only want to backup their DVDs. It helps that they will not buy a product wich they can get for free anyway (and, in many cases, with a GPL license too).

Cheers,

Mijo.

bilu

20th June 2003, 12:08

Just a compilation of this thread to help making a sticky.

(Haven't put DVDBackup because I'm not sure if it's still a ripoff)

DVD to DivX
http://www.cybergame2000.com/free.htm

is ripoff of

DVDx
http://www.labdv.com/dvdx

--------------------------

DVD Copy Decrypter
http://www.dvdcopydecrypter.com

is ripoff of

DVDShrink
http://www.dvdshrink.org
---------------------------

the DVDSqueeze box is actually Ulead's DVD Movie Factory's box

Ulead
http://www.dacs.org/images/ulead_dvd_movie_factory_box.JPG

DVDSqueeze
http://www.dvdsqueeze.com/boxshots1.jpg

and they have also modded EasyDivx

EasyDivx
http://netti.nic.fi/~temp/easydivx/guide/step1.gif

DVDSqueeze
http://www.famousitalian.com/step01.gif

-----------------------------------

http://www.luxuriousity.com

a lot of ripoffs

Bilu

bilu

20th June 2003, 12:23

Some encoding tools sites on Tucows (please check if they are ripoffs):

http://www.convertdvd.info/

http://www.alldj.com/

http://www.avi-vcd.com/

http://www.dvdtox.com/

http://www.2shareit.com/

http://www.artech365.com/mpeg4maker/index.htm

Bilu

dragongodz

20th June 2003, 14:49

yep there are so many of these programs around now it is just not funny. i wish i was rich so i could take these "people" to court but the simple truth is that most freeware programmers are not. its also hampered by us living in different countries than these "programs" are released in.

as for a list, well the hard part there is i can tell you of a dozen programs i know that use DVDx source code but they have a different gui. this makes it harder to prove but believe me i can tell with the ones i am thinking of.

mpucoder, no its not legal. they are selling the program which is against the GPL. they could charge for support or for a printed manual or supply on media or others costs (such as downloading, server costs etc) but charging for the program itself is a no no. also they do not state that it is an altered version or supply the altered source code (again against the GPL).

bilu

20th June 2003, 15:02

Looks like free A/V software for Windows suffers the most, Luxoriousity is an exception :rolleyes:

Maybe this sort of software should be released in a license compatible with GPL, but not GPL, like having to subscribe using your personal data to have access to the source, free of charge. Source would have to be sent by snail-mail or something.

It could avoid anonymous ripping of tools that have potential to reach the consumer comercially.

Bilu

mpucoder

20th June 2003, 16:02

I'm surprised mrbass hasn't posted. He made a list once, and received threats of legal action by one or more of the "listee's", presumably for slander.

bilu

20th June 2003, 16:19

I know :(

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54117

Bilu

bilu

23rd June 2003, 16:52

Originally posted by bilu
Maybe this sort of software should be released in a license compatible with GPL, but not GPL, like having to subscribe using your personal data to have access to the source, free of charge. Source would have to be sent by snail-mail or something.

It could avoid anonymous ripping of tools that have potential to reach the consumer comercially.

I'm quoting myself because I think it is time to investigate open-source licenses that allow source-tracking by free subscribing and making an NDA with those subscribers, and how this can conflict or not with GPL and others.

Bilu

XiS

25th June 2003, 14:59

Whoow. Does XMPEG have been ripped off like DVDx?

bilu

25th June 2003, 17:24

Don't know, people will have to try and tell, I just collected some links.

mrbass

28th June 2003, 21:43

hey what do you know I found my old scam software list in google's cache. Have at it. Search google for copiesanything and hit the cache button when you see mrbass.org
I took out dvdrabbit.com though cuz that's the guy who threatened to sue me.

About Scam Ripoff DVD Copy Software
DVD Scam artists repackage freeware dvd software and bundle it together, write a short tutorial and sell it for money. They advertise on google and other search engines and pay for banners on websites to get the traffic.

Your paying for software you can easily get for free. These scam artists are selling software even when the license explicitly prohibits distribution for sale. Most people just do a search on google for 'dvd copy' and the results are nothing but scam software. Some even sell warez versions of commerical software like copiesanything.com (sells Instant Copy) . Most sell DVDx and they modify the source which is freely available. If anyone has additional scam sites, do let me know.

If you've been ripped off fill out a form with the The Internet Fraud Complaint Center http://www1.ifccfbi.gov/ (IFCC) which is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C). Do a charge back on your credit card immediately.

Tips to avoid getting scammed by ripoff artists
-- Always pay with credit card so you can do a 'charge back'. If you pay with paypal your screwed.
-- If there is no demo or trial version available then it's most likely a scam.
-- Check out other's opinions on forums of doom9.org or dvdrhelp.com about their experiences with dvd copy software.
-- Spam dvd copy software email is always a scam.

www.1stdvdripper.com
www.4-dimwits.com
www.alldj.com/sdvdc
www.amigodvdripper.com
www.backup-dvd.info
www.convertdvd.info
www.copiesanything.com
www.copydvdnow.com
www.copydvds.biz
www.copy-my-dvd.com-download.net
www.dup-dvd.com
www.dvdbackupbuddy.com
www.dvd-burner.ca
www.dvdcopygold.com
www.dvdcopyplus.com
www.dvdcopypro.com
www.dvd-detective.com
www.dvd-ripper.biz
www.dvdsqueeze.com
www.dvds-ripper.com
www.dvd-to-svcd.com
www.dvdwizardpro.com
www.geocities.com/copydvdsoftware
www.go2share.net/dvdrip
www.howtocopydvds.com
www.idvd.ca/dvd-echo
www.nuevasoft.com
www.plymouthchurch.org
www.replicantdvd.com
www.rizalsoftware.com
www.share2.com/dvd-to-vcd
www.shareup.com/super-dvd-ripper.html
www.sofotex.com/dvd-ripper-copy-pro.htm
www.super-dvd-ripper.com
www.systemscrub.com/dvd
www.waverama.com

bilu

29th June 2003, 01:15

"Plymouth Church" ??? :confused:

mrbass

29th June 2003, 03:44

do a search on google 'plymouthchurch.org dvd' and you'll see the title had dvd copy and crap. Guess they were hacked or something.

XiS

30th June 2003, 13:37

I'm currently doing reverse engineering on all the link proposed by bilu. Keep in touch.

XiS

1st July 2003, 08:09

SuperDVD (http://www.alldj.com) is a rip off of Xmpeg 4.5. The complete web site has been stored. I can assure you that they will pay for it. I'm continuing to follow your links to check XMPEG based rip offs. Then, I'll contact Jean Luc (DVDx) to let him know that all (mostly) DVD tools different from big software compagny are simple rip off from our programs.

How to recognize a rip off of XMPEG :
In the web site :
DVD to divx tool
Optimized for P4 and AthlonXP
In the software :
It crashs.
May have a correct preview window.
Takes a loong time to open encrypted vobs.
Crashes during "chicken run" and "Eldorado" reading (VOB switching bug)
Strange similarity in options (Shutdown after encoding)

How to recognize a rip off of DVDx:
In the website :
DVD to VCD/SVCD/DVD converter
Optimized for the Pentium 4
Int the software :
Same options.
No or very poor preview window.

XMPEG/DVDx
You can also benchmark the conversion process with the old version of the original file to see if the conversion speed is similar.

http://www.alldj.com : Rip off of XMPEG
http://www.avi-vcd.com : Rip off of DVDx
http://www.convertdvd.info : Rip off of DVDx
http://www.1stDVDRipper.info : Rip off of DVDx

I'm studing a true tracing system (reverse engineering) to confirm the ripp off. Imagine how it is possible to create these kind of tools which simply have been created a few months after DVDx or XMPEG 4.5 seeing that the developpment time for these tools requiere years???? Even the big compagny just begin to outs correct DVD rippers. All the actual video converter which "looks like" are ripp-off. The developpment of : MPEG 2 decoder, AC3 decoder, MPA decoder, MPEG 2 encoder, MPA encoder, etc and integration is not possible in these time laps.
Before spreading this information all around, just let them continue. If someone send them a message, they will simply close the site, and we will not (The authors of ripped of software) able to put in front of the justice, and the Free Software Foundation (Because they use also AC3 or A52dec, MPA decoder and MPEG2 encodeur which are under GNU license)...
As soon as I've time, I can build a little tool which will search for identical parts of code to check if it's a ripp off. It depends also of the compiler. I need to find a real checking method.

Keep in mind that the working effort through with open source project makes the best softwares. And all these ripp off are crappy and a lot of them simply unworkable.

XiS

1st July 2003, 09:35

Super DVD Ripper : super-dvd-ripper.com (http://www.super-dvd-ripper.com) is bascally a simple copy of DVDx...

XiS

1st July 2003, 14:46

Ok. It seems to be network of programmers which take open source programs and simply modify a little the appearance and sell them. Very easy way to make money. I've noticed 13 open source programs ripped off from DVDx to CDEx.

mrbass

2nd July 2003, 21:56

For the people complaining about dvdfab having two nag screens it's really a great deterrent from getting it ripped off (not saying it won't happen) but it's a great way to give the program away for free while discouraging the ripoff artists.

dragongodz

7th July 2003, 13:26

hey Xis

yes this is the problem i found aswell, its easy for us to tell but mcuh harder to prove to someone who may not fully understand. that is if you took 2 programs to a judge he would need to see more than just having the same feature or doing the same job. with the many variations of compilers etc that could be used this makes it hard to prove. sucks.

Doom9

7th July 2003, 14:23

Keep in mind that the working effort through with open source project makes the best softwares.That brings me to a question I've wanted to ask for a long time. The last XMpeg sourcecode I have is v4.2. That's the only one listed on your software page as well. Now assuming that you did not rewrite Xmpeg from scratch since then, you are required to release your source as well. Now I do not want to start a whichhunt, and it's not forbidden to hand out the source only upon request, so assuming that you did not rewrite the entire application without the use of open source code, I hereby ask for a copy of the source corresponding to the latest public XMpeg release. You can contact me privately (PM) for the exchange of the source if you like (but of course once I have it, I'm going to put it on my site since I do believe that if you can, you should offer executable and source at the same place).

XiS

9th July 2003, 16:07

You will have a nice package in a few days, the time for me to do the summer cleaning :) :) :) :) :p

XiS

30th July 2003, 11:23

The source code was released a few days ago. The rip-off can start :) .

XMPEG source code here (http://www.mp3guest.com/Xmpeg_Index.asp?l=US)

dragongodz

6th August 2003, 05:29

i saw xmpeg 5.0 final is out but the source code is still rc3 version. also no source for dvd mism or avi writer ????

XiS

6th August 2003, 10:40

There is no modification of code in the source package published for XMPEG. Just Version number and splash updated. AVIWriter is a Free software, not a Open source software.

Refthoom

12th August 2003, 20:50

I think I have an idea to get back at these people selling GPL'd software. It's called a ddos attack (or distributed denial of service attack, for those who are not familiar with the lingo). Now normally the way this is done, it's VERY illegal since it involves the use of software kinda like viruses and spyware. It's too much to explain it all here, but there is some very fine reading on it on www.grc.com. Go read it and you know what I mean.

The beauty of this idea is that we use the same sneeky 'borderline' legallity that they do:sly:. But it's only possible with te power of this community.

All you need is an HTML page on your PC that points to the domainname to be 'attacked' that continuously refreshes itself (this can be accomplished with a very simple javascript). The effect is the same as browsing to the domain and continiously clicking on the refresh button and therefore it's _legal_ ;). The PC itself won't use any bandwith to speak of and also use hardly any cpu cycles.

Now of course one such page on one PC won't make much of a difference, but if all forum members (app. 35k?) start up such a page simultaniously, I know for sure that a domain will be inaccesible for as long as you keep 'it' up together.

The best part is, since a thousand PC's would easily do the trick of rendering a site inaccessible, the total community here could render 35 sites inaccessible at the same time, if properly coördinated. That's more than the number of domains on mrbass's list :).

Now wouldn't that be one heck of signal! :devil:

I know it would mean leaving your PC running, but since such a page uses almost no cpu cycles you could do this while you're encoding you backup. So, instead of just starting D2S or DVDx or whatever, you'd also start this ddos-page on your harddisk and voilá. :D

I also have some ideas on how to make and spread such pages and coördinate stuff among forum members, but I didn't want to make this already long story even longer.

BTW, AFAIK I don't brake any forum rules with with this post (I sure hope I don't), but if I do I apologise in advance.

So, anyone ready to take these guys on?:cool:

DaveEL

13th August 2003, 17:46

Originally posted by Refthoom
I think I have an idea to get back at these people selling GPL'd software.

Ok ive read this thread a long time back so im not up to date with the current discussion but selling GPL software is perfectly legal as long as you provide source under the terms of the GPL to those who you give the binaries. So i hope your problem is not with GPL software being sold its part of the point of the GPL you have the right to do almost anything you want provided you provide your users with the same right.

The beauty of this idea is that we use the same sneeky 'borderline' legallity that they do:sly:. But it's only possible with te power of this community.

All you need is an HTML page on your PC that points to the domainname to be 'attacked' that continuously refreshes itself (this can be accomplished with a very simple javascript). The effect is the same as browsing to the domain and continiously clicking on the refresh button and therefore it's _legal_ ;). The PC itself won't use any bandwith to speak of and also use hardly any cpu cycles.

Except you are TRYING to cause a DOS so you are doing something illegal. if you pressed that refresh button a lot by hand to try to cause a DOS it would still be illegal (and your finger would hurt :) )

BTW, AFAIK I don't brake any forum rules with with this post (I sure hope I don't), but if I do I apologise in advance.

If it doesn't then thats an error in the rules that needs to be corrected IMO.

DaveEL

Refthoom

13th August 2003, 19:25

Hi DaveEL,
Ok ive read this thread a long time back so im not up to date with the current discussion but selling GPL software is perfectly legal as long as you provide source under the terms of the GPL to those who you give the binaries. So i hope your problem is not with GPL software being sold its part of the point of the GPL you have the right to do almost anything you want provided you provide your users with the same right.No I'm certainly not against GPL software being sold. Im talking about people who alter the source slightly to mask it being GPL and then sell as their own, without sources. And those that sell as their own under a different name without altering the source but who also don't say it's GPL a/o don't provide the source code.Except you are TRYING to cause a DOS so you are doing something illegal. if you pressed that refresh button a lot by hand to try to cause a DOS it would still be illegal (and your finger would hurt) OK, I think I see your point. But for the sake of argument, lets explore this a little further. Requesting a page from a webserver is legal, even if I do it a lot of times (and yes, my finger would hurt:D ). The illegality IMO lies in the intrusion of computers by software without consent of the owner, as in the ddos's are usually done. In the proposed way this doesn't happen so logically it's legal. Doing so and causing a server to be unreachable might be conceived as threatening or harmfull to a business. On the other hand, nothing's realy broken and the business that suffers in this case consists of 'bad guys'. Seeing they are braking the law themselves, I don't see them running to the courts. That's why I called it 'borderline'.If it doesn't then thats an error in the rules that needs to be corrected IMO. I suppose you're right in the sense that it's not 'nice' to use a forum to invite members to start a ddos, but remember these are not nice people we're talking about. However, should the rules change, then delete this post. I like being able to vent my ideas here but always within the rules. Even if they change ;)

Wilbert

13th August 2003, 19:41

@Refthoom,
No I'm certainly not against GPL software being sold. Im talking about people who alter the source slightly to mask it being GPL and then sell as their own, without sources. And those that sell as their own under a different name without altering the source but who also don't say it's GPL a/o don't provide the source code.
The point is that the sources are included (but hidden a bit), implying that they are doing nothing illegal.

The illegality IMO lies in the intrusion of computers by software without consent of the owner, as in the ddos's are usually done. In the proposed way this doesn't happen so logically it's legal. Doing so and causing a server to be unreachable might be conceived as threatening or harmfull to a business.
That's exactly why we discourage it, even _if_ they do something illegal.

OK, I think I see your point. But for the sake of argument, lets explore this a little further.
I suggest we don't explore it further ...

Refthoom

13th August 2003, 19:47

I suggest we don't explore it further ... OK, let's not. And if you really think this thread shouldn't be here, please delete it. Thanks for your thoughts.

EDIT: Sorry, I mean delete my posts, not the thread.

DaveEL

13th August 2003, 19:54

Originally posted by Refthoom
Hi DaveEL,
OK, I think I see your point. But for the sake of argument, lets explore this a little further. Requesting a page from a webserver is legal, even if I do it a lot of times (and yes, my finger would hurt:D ). The illegality IMO lies in the intrusion of computers by software without consent of the owner, as in the ddos's are usually done. In the proposed way this doesn't happen so logically it's legal.

Nope. DOS attack is just that denial of service its not about breaking into a computer. It is about DENIAL OF SERVICE, stopping someone using the computer.

Doing so and causing a server to be unreachable might be conceived as threatening or harmfull to a business. On the other hand, nothing's realy broken and the business that suffers in this case consists of 'bad guys'.

It is harmfull to them. Morals of the company don't matter what YOUR suggesting we do is wrong (whatever your morals on the issue its legally wrong.)

Seeing they are braking the law themselves, I don't see them running to the courts. That's why I called it 'borderline'.

Rememeber the GPL is not legally tested, what they are doing may not even be illegal.

Edit: Oh so they do bundle the source in which case they are doing nothing wrong legally even if the GPL does stand up in court.

I suppose you're right in the sense that it's not 'nice' to use a forum to invite members to start a ddos, but remember these are not nice people we're talking about.
So cos they are bad we should be?

DaveEL

Refthoom

14th August 2003, 13:33

Hi DaveEL,
First of all, the point's taken. The reason I brought the idea up in this thread was that I saw a lot of opinions but little ideas to actually do something about it. And I wanted to do something about it. I mean, isn't that the purpose of a forum? To come up with and exchange ideas, to discuss and improve them and do something with them? Ideas followed by action, _within_ legal boundries of course. I hoped that would happen here but unfortunately it didn't.

And just to clarify some things:denial of service its not about breaking into a computerI was referring to the IRC-bots or that sort of software that are placed on people's computers to enable a _distributed_ dos. There's a big difference between a ddos and a dos. what YOUR suggesting we do is wrong You're right. I'm sorry.the GPL is not legally tested I seem to rember that with Vidomi there was some 'test' so to speak. It never made the courts AFAIK if that's what you mean. But it was a fine example to me what you can and can't do.Edit: Oh so they do bundle the source in Nope. I'm talking about the category that doesn't bundle the source and no reference whatsoever to the original author or software. The thread is quite long by now so maybe these are gone by now. If that's the case no action's needed and my point (and I believe this thread) can be closed.So cos they are bad we should be? Now that's a deep thought. I guess that's a question going much further than this topic and even this forum. And I think discussing it here would be like the discussions on Iraq which are banned (and rightly so).

Although I think my intentions were good, you are right that it's never good to invite someone else to do something wrong. Not so much for the act itself being right or wrong which can be debated, but for the fact of trying to persuade someone else to stoop to my level ;) So I'm sorry for bringing it up. I can only hope this has been educational to someone.

DaveEL

14th August 2003, 16:29

Originally posted by Refthoom

And just to clarify some things:I was referring to the IRC-bots or that sort of software that are placed on people's computers to enable a _distributed_ dos. There's a big difference between a ddos and a dos.

Difference between a DOS and a DDOS, DDOS uses lots of machines against one to make it easy to deny service - not really very different and a DDOS is still a DOS. A non distrbuted DOS in general uses some weakness in the software but DDOS don't in general rely on them they just make so many "legitimate" requests that the server can't cope.

What your refering to is a worm which happens to carry a payload that executes a DDOS. The DDOS itself does not break into the computers.

I seem to rember that with Vidomi there was some 'test' so to speak. It never made the courts AFAIK if that's what you mean. But it was a fine example to me what you can and can't do.

The vidomi case caved to community preasure not to legal preasure. Same with the real magic codec (some issues about that remain unresolved). The community said it was wrong and vidomi decided that much bad press in the community was bad for them - the legality of what they were doing is still unknown.

DaveEL

bilu

14th August 2003, 17:58

Speaking of rip-off protecting, I still would like an opinion about these posts:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=333600&highlight=source#post333600

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=333628&highlight=source#post333628

Nobody said anything and I think it has its valid points.

Bilu

Refthoom

14th August 2003, 18:44

@DaveEL
Exactly what I mean. Only you worded it better :) .

And the 'DDOS uses lots of machines' part is what I meant by intrusion because the worm you speak of doesn't get on all those machines by choice of the owners. BTW, could that be worms with IRC bots 'in' them? I haven't reread the grc article but I seem to remember that it stated the use of IRC-bots?

Wasn't the FSF involved with the Vidomi case? Oh well, maybe my memory's fading, must be the age thing :D :D .

@bilu
Hmm, sounds good. I think your proposal might be a way to circumvent future misuse but not current misuse. And many applications build on previous sources so at some point you'd get mixed sources, partly old-gpl and partly new-gpl so to speak. Also, what would you do if someone 'illegaly' sold the source they obtained through this way? How would you find out and how would you veryfi who's the bad guy? I think these 2 points are the first to be resolved before such thing could work.

Do you have maybe a solution to fit into your proposal?

bilu

14th August 2003, 21:27

I think good models are already used in not-open-source-but-open-standard development of new tecnologies like Symbian for example.

I subscribed at Nokia page and received development tools and documentation for free. Of course it is as hard for them as for us to know when someone sells your source.

But I think the key here is specifying your need for source: besides subscribing you would need to request access to the different parts of the software with a proper justification.

We would then know who had access to what part of the source. Of course both "moderators" and hosting machines would need to be trustful security-wise.

But then I also like the completely different BSD perspective: nobody can stop us from doing better software. If they steal it by improving and not giving something back, we'll focus on doing something even better and open instead of loosing energies crying in rage.

And just look how organized and academic the BSD communities are :)
There's a lot of arrogance around, such as in Linux, but products are more coherent and well documented. And they get used in getting better commercial products, like what happened to Apple, who couldn't afford bad press from stealing their OS, so they give back what they can.

So the world gets better with our efforts, even when the world doesn't give back :)

Bilu

dragongodz

23rd August 2003, 13:26

i think some things need clarifying.
there are 2 typs of rip-off.
1. is selling a guide and bundling freeware programs(and no the source is not usually included but maybe available on their ftp). the rip-off factor comes from the fact that its is not clearly stated you are buying the guide. i have had plenty of emails from people thinking they bought the programs.
2. is ones that change some text and maybe rearrange the gui(or add a new one) and then sell that as their own creation.

while a new liscence is a good idea the current GPL does not allow holding back the source code. so if we wanted to release DVDx(as example) without the source then it would have to be rewritten without using any other GPL code. also if we wanted to make it only available by request then we are suposed to guarentee that it will be available for 3 years from us.

xplatinum

14th September 2003, 17:41

http://www.exdim.com/20022/

Ripoff DVDx and TMPGenc

TerryHau

1st November 2003, 05:29

Can someone explain to me what this post is about?
I'm completely lost.
I was searching for info on this program called DVDx.

So is it bad ? or something?

dragongodz

2nd November 2003, 04:02

this post is about programs such as DVDx and/or people being ripped off.

that doesnt mean ripped off by DVDx but some companies sell a guide plus ree software(including DVDx) that it is unclear to the customer they are buying just the guide. that is they think they are buying the software. the other rippoff is opensource programs such as DVDx being used by companies changing the gui and then selling it as their own.

i know this is a pretty long thread but please try to read the first few pages and you should get some idea of what we are talking about.

so is DVDx bad or something ? maybe i am biased but i think its pretty good(yes there are bugs etc but we are working on them). i mean it cant be too bad if its one of the most highly ripped off pieces of software can it ? :)

Movie Maniac®

22nd November 2003, 13:46

Hi, look at this screenshots

http://www.mad-soft.info/adv142/?broth

one seems to be taken from DVDx and the other from TmpegEnc.

Bye

P.S. I received this link in my mailbox (spam!!!), and they call it Easy DVD KIT

Wilbert

22nd November 2003, 15:40

I notified the people of dvdx and TMPGEnc about this. I will keep you informed ...

Wilbert

26th November 2003, 13:58

I received a reaction of the TMPGEnc guys:

This is effectively TMPGEnc, and we never authorized this scam to sell our product. The best you can do is to ignore them and tell your friends not to buy this product (wich is a set of freeware in fact).

Movie Maniac®

26th November 2003, 16:05

Ok

I'll do it for sure.

Anyhow, let me give a suggestion.
I think that the best thing that can be done, is to create a sort of database of this kind of softwares, and put it online, so that it can be linked from any site who discuss about ripping etc.
By this way people who own sites and trust in the free software politic, like I do, can aware their users and direct them to the database, so that they can have an idea of what they're going to buy, or simply signal fraudulent softwares they have seen.

I think that a resource (a kind of public black list) like this would be very appreciated by everyone, from Software writers to Software users.

Bye

mpucoder

26th November 2003, 16:34

Mrbass did just that, and was threatened with legal action by one of the alledged scammers. Even though mrbass had proof that the software in question was a ripoff, he decided to take the list down. As anyone who's been involved in a legal dispute knows (and mrbass must also know) being right doesn't make the legal process any more pleasant.

DDogg

26th November 2003, 17:02

Hmm, a US citizen can easily be clubbed over the head with the law whether they be right or wrong. Somebody living elsewhere, where false litigation is less do-able/easy, might want to take on this challenge. It is certainly an effort worth the hassle.

dragongodz

27th November 2003, 04:19

problem is also that litigation also requires money. if you live in a different country times it by 10. most of us simply dont have it.

also the GPL is aimed at protecting consumers aswell and they would actually stand a better chance with a law case. could file charges such as decepetion, fraud etc.

Wilbert

9th February 2004, 11:53

Another rip-off: dvdcloner 2

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=70436

taken from DVDShrink 3.05 Beta.

ChristianHJW

5th May 2004, 16:21

Why on earth am i shown as the thread starter ?

shevegen

25th July 2004, 12:41

But the thing is that you can abuse the GPL very easily if noone will manage to enforce it.

Consider any big company trying to obtain the source code, merging it into their proprietary products and clubbing at the original developers with law cases and threats of patent infringing.

dragongodz

28th July 2004, 17:38

that doesnt make it right.

also there are other ways to combat it. bad press can hurt some companies as an example.

yes the majority of breachs will probably never be seen or fully stopped but that does not mean we should just roll over and say die.

Mug Funky

5th December 2004, 14:23

i was a little bored, and decided to see if tucows still had that awful DVDx fake... they still do.

although the GUI is changed (a little), on uninstall it attempts to remove registry keys "software\dvdx" and "software\dvdx\SK".

suspicious?

why the F are tucows still providing this ripoff for download?

dragongodz

5th December 2004, 15:27

why the F are tucows still providing this ripoff for download?
because they dont give a damn. several download sites such as they were asked to remove hat crap when the issue first came up. they wanted proof. it was provided(by way of things like DVDx error messages saying DVDx etc). guess what, none of them removed it.

Marcel

10th December 2004, 11:09

I'm not sure, but in my eyes Yasasoft's DVD to VCD AVI DivX Converter (http://www.yasasoft.com/magicdvdripper/) is just a nice GUI with DVDx in the background.

buzzqw

17th December 2004, 14:01

not sure but vso divxtodvd (www.vso-software.fr) i think is using some code from "FFmpeg0.4.9-pre1b4736" (just found it in avcodec.dll)

from read.me
"This version is free, future versions will implement new features and may not be free anymore."

don't know. I am not a coder or a glp expert.

BHH

EDIT: FreeEnc (a QuEnc/NuEnc like gui) is fuctional with avcodec.dll from vso software !!! :angry:

dragongodz

19th December 2004, 00:12

avcodec is released under the LGPL unless you enable GPL components.

back in the early QuEnc threads this was discussed and concluded that you do not need to release your program as open source if it just uses the dll(freeenc isnt open source is it?). however they should be supplying the source code for the dll if they have the are distributing the dll.

Wilbert

26th April 2005, 19:43

Two new ones:

Recently I've notified about these two products that they use code from the guliverkli project, one of them is free but closed source and not GPLed player (KMPlayer, http://www.kmplayer.com/), while the other is a fully commercial product (http://www.vx30.com/). There are boundled dshow filters, string, toolbars, dialogs, command line switches, etc..., which can be verified easily by just running the applications and taking a look, or a bit harder by analysing the memory dump. Since I have no better idea about what to do now (I got no reply to the email I sent to kmplayer's developer, it would probably be the same with vx30's too...), (...)

The vx30 project uses more GPL/LGPL code (XviD, LAME, ...) without complying to it, according to the following analysis

http://www.drunkenblog.com.nyud.net:8090/drunkenblog-archives/000534.html

dcoder

2nd May 2005, 10:12

http://www.magicvideo.net/ - Magic DVD Player
Using Valex' AC3Filter

I´m wondering why noone cares about LGPL and MPL Violations. There are so much Companys using and modifying such code without writing what 3rd Party Librarys are used and without publishing these modifications.

i.e http://www.kworld.com.tw/ using the DSPack Components in their DVB Software.
or http://www.geovid.com/Video_mp3_Extractor_PRO/ using the LAME Encoder and MPG123 Decoders.

Sirber

3rd May 2005, 12:59

OpenSource ripoff :scared:

dragongodz

8th June 2005, 11:48

I´m wondering why noone cares about LGPL and MPL Violations.
let me know exactly where we are suposed to get the millions of $ to fight these from. especially considering not all of us live in the same countries as these "companies".

a new one just sent to me.

http://www.aheaddvd.com/
DVDx ripoff.

first look at all the different controls/settings and the exact names used. all from DVDx.
mp3 encoding done via the nlame.dll, DVDx being practically the only program to use this besides these ripoffs.
incode find a heap of messages, yes all DVDx ones ,especially telling are ones that have to do with things DVDx does that this ripoff doesnt.
finally ,if ripping off the program wasnt bad enough they cant even come up with an original intro.
from the DVDx read me
DVDx allows you to convert DVD to VCD2.0/SVCD1.0/AVI in one step (Including multiplexing, splitting). It produces good quality movies in AVI/MPEG1/2 format and you don't need to have 5Gb free on your hard disk !
from the ripoffs help
Ahead DVD Ripper allows you to convert DVD to VCD2.0 , SCVD1.0 or AVI (DivX...) in one step (Including multiplexing, splitting). It produces good quality movies in AVI , MPEG1/2 format and you don't need to have 5GB or more free on your hard disk.

i have to wonder what Nero(formerly Ahead) would say about the name aswell.

also apparently if you register it activates internal decss. hmm wonder if the MPAA would be interested in that. :devil:

mpucoder

8th June 2005, 15:22

Registrant:
Flyers software Inc.
#281 beijing rode
hangzhou, zhejiang 310002
CN

Domain name: AHEADDVD.COM

Administrative Contact:
Ainan, Jan jxh175@yahoo.com.cn
#281 beijing rode
hangzhou, zhejiang 310002
CN
8607918621008
Technical Contact:
Admin, Powweb sysadmin@powweb.com
2168 S. Atlantic Blvd.
#232
Monterey Park, CA 91754
US
+1.3102788926 Fax: +1.3102785401

Registration Service Provider:
PowWeb, Inc., hostmaster@powweb.com
310-278-8926
http://powweb.com
This company may be contacted for domain login/passwords,
DNS/Nameserver changes, and general domain support questions.

Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
Record last updated on 16-May-2005.
Record expires on 16-May-2006.
Record created on 16-May-2005.

They don't expect to stay around long - one year purchase of domain name. Also supposedly Chinese (flyers software - or is it "fly-by-night"), but hosted in California (area code 310 is Long Beach, California)

dragongodz

9th June 2005, 03:08

and why am i not surprised by any of that ?

Wilbert

9th June 2005, 11:00

Filmshrink ripoff?

http://www.musicalsky.com/dvd2real/index.html

Sirber

9th June 2005, 19:15

Seems not:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=666399#post666399

dragongodz

28th July 2005, 15:11

another one found and its one thats been mentioned on this forum in several threads.

Magicdvdripper - http://www.magicdvdripper.com/dvd-ripper.htm

rippoff of DVDx.

proof -
-well the pretty blatant use of the same controls, settings and names is a good start. :)
-uses nlame.dll to encode mp3, renamed dll and upx'd as mdr2.dll
-and my favorite to see, "DVDx" text still in a file, eg. mdr.dll has "*ERROR_SECTION* DVDx Error".

oh and it uses libdvdread i am guessing(renamed mdrutils.dll) since those are the function names. libdvdread is another GPL project for those that dont know.

netterpaladin

14th August 2005, 19:57

I just want to mention those guys. If they actually can help or do something, I dont know: http://gpl-violations.org/

netterpaladin

dragongodz

19th August 2005, 11:51

netterpaladin - thanks for that link but i dont know if its much use but i will contact that site and see whats what. :)

new one found thanks to a newbie appearing to try and advertise it here.

magicdvdripper, no a different one than the other listed. this one can be found here
http://www.yasasoft.com/magicdvdripper/
DVDx rippoff.

proof consists of the usual stuff.
uses nlame.dll for mp3 encoding.
practically all the same options including names and settings etc.(basically they shiffled some of the gui bits around to make several different new guis)
and my favorite, "DVDx" text and messages found in the unpacked file, yes they UPX packed it.

i sent these a nice email, and yes i do mean i was nice, so lets see what they say.

Wheelie4

21st August 2005, 16:52

Does DVDx rip the full dvd without converting? Does it burn a standard dvd structured dvd movie to dvd?

dragongodz

22nd August 2005, 04:26

Does DVDx rip the full dvd without converting?
no it doesnt but if i was interested it could. DVDx already uses Vstrip source code for reading the ifo.
Does it burn a standard dvd structured dvd movie to dvd?
no but again there is source code out there if i was really interested in adding that.

heres some questions for you wheelie.
do these other programs do dvd to avi ?
do these other programs do dvd to vcd ?
do these other programs do dvd to svcd ?
do these other programs use nlame.dll(sometimes renamed) for mp3 encoding ?
do these programs have practically all the same input/output settings as DVDx ?
do these programs have DVDx text and messages etc in them ?
dont worry, i will answer those myself....YES THEY BLOODY WELL DO. :angry:

now are you trying to suggest because they have added a few extra functions that they havent used DVDx source code ? or are you saying because they have added the extras then its ok to rippoff open source software ?

Wheelie4

22nd August 2005, 16:35

All I did was look at DVDx website out of curiosity and saw no mention of what I asked about in my post. So I asked. Nothing more.

dragongodz

23rd August 2005, 08:28

All I did was look at DVDx website out of curiosity and saw no mention of what I asked about in my post. So I asked. Nothing more.
sorry but maybe you can understand why this stuff makes me angry sometimes.

as for just ripping a dvd, dvddecrypter still does a fine job. read the post by BSpielbauer here
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=86353&page=4
the other rippers he is talking about means things like anydvd, dvd43 and dvdfabdecrypter. i dont see any need to add another to the mix at the moment.

Wheelie4

23rd August 2005, 15:46

Yes, I know those rippers. I use dvddecrypter, I've used DVD43 and although I have downloaded dvdfabdecrypter I've yet to use it. I was just curious.

setarip_old

29th August 2005, 01:23

@dragongodz

If you are certain that the "Magic DVD Ripper" is a ripoff of the open source program "DVDx" and not merely the same author converting it to a commercial venture (rightly or wrongly), you might want to share this information with other folks in the community. In particular, the Digital Video Forums at Digital Digest, where an entire forum is dedicated to this program at:

http://forums.digital-digest.com/forumdisplay.php?f=81

The author, "sam", is one of the moderators of that forum...

feedback

29th August 2005, 15:28

sorry but maybe you can understand why this stuff makes me angry sometimes.
If they ripped off some of your hard work, and as one of the helper programmers of DVDx, you have every right to express your outrage to the program Magic DVD Ripper,

Regards,:)

MACC

26th October 2005, 17:26

Does anyone know if DVDx was relicensed other than GPL. I have found more
DVDx rips at the moment I know of more than four that use DVDx.
and they have not been posted here.

dragongodz

30th October 2005, 01:15

Does anyone know if DVDx was relicensed other than GPL.
not that i know of. Jean Luc disappeared about 2 years ago. i have been the one maintaining and releasing DVDx since then and i certainly havent. also the fact that DVDx contains GPL source code from other programs means it can not be made closed source either.

MACC

1st November 2005, 17:12

I'll try to make this as short as possible since this post may be long enough.
I used an app called BINTEXT to look at and compare strings of text. There
are five apps that I have found to contain DVDx. I'm sure I will find more.
Hopefully not.
I am just studing these at the moment. This is not to start a FLAMEWAR or to
advertise but to inform in case noone knows of these.

First the Freeware app. I found this but the site went down and I can no longer
find it. It was a app called DDR-DivX DVD Ripper. I'm sure it can be googled for.
When it is opened same window setup, menus, even in the Read Me 1st you can find
the GNU License.
There are some strings inside that might give a clue as to where it came from but maybe not. One
other thing is look at these and compare them with the lines in the DVDPean Pro 3.6.2
text below.

001209C4 005209C4 0 ;C:\Release Apps\dvd_master_backup\andrei\mpeg2_lib\wavefs44.c;_InitialSRC;79;79;;
00120A2C 00520A2C 0 ;C:\Release Apps\dvd_master_backup\andrei\mpeg2_lib\wavefs44.c;_InitialSRC;94;94;;

The next one is Plato DVD Ripper 1.09
http://www.dvdtompegx.com
SevenWolfs Software
This one was a little bit more hard to figure out. But I did find one instance
inside of the executable in which this line is placed.

001244A8 009654A8 0 c:\DVDx-temp.tmp

This one is called DVDPean Pro 3.6.2
http://www.dvdpean.com support@dvdpean.com
The SOFTWARE PRODUCT is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties,
as well as other intellectual property laws and treaties.
Don't they follow their own licence.
This one DVDx is not in the executable. It is a dll called DVDRipperCore.dll.
This is some of what is inside. Including if it is compared with DVDx has the menus
and all.

000F09F8 105399F8 0 DVDx Player (%s)
000F0A0C 10539A0C 0 DVDx Player (%s) %6.1ffps
000F0A28 10539A28 0 DVDx Player (done)
000F0A3C 10539A3C 0 DVDx Video Player (%s)
000F0A54 10539A54 0 DVDx Video Player (%s) %6.1ffps
000F0A74 10539A74 0 DVDx Player (done) %f sec

000E7BC0 100E7BC0 0 ;D:\MyDoc\DVDPean Project\3.4.0\src\DVDRipperCore\MPEG2_LIB\wavefs44.c;_InitialSRC;94;94;;
000E7C20 100E7C20 0 ;D:\MyDoc\DVDPean Project\3.4.0\src\DVDRipperCore\MPEG2_LIB\wavefs44.c;_InitialSRC;79;79;;

000FA19E 1054319E 0 DVDx 1.4 : FREEWARE DVD Copy tool (for ever)

Wow we even get to know what version is used.

Is anyone sick yet I am. The next may make you more sick.

Flash DVD Ripper http://www.flashdvdripper.com support@flashdvdripper.com
12-JUL-2004
Another product that contains others work.
All copyrights to Flash DVD Ripper are exclusively owned by the author of this software.

Not according to this. One of the dlls that is installed with this product is
cygwin1.dll
00095AF6 610BE0F6 0 CompanyName
00095B10 610BE110 0 Red Hat
00095B26 610BE126 0 FileDescription
00095B56 610BE156 0 POSIX Emulation DLL
00095B86 610BE186 0 FileVersion
00095BA0 610BE1A0 0 1.3.1
00095BB2 610BE1B2 0 InternalName
00095BCC 610BE1CC 0 cygwin1.dll
00095BEA 610BE1EA 0 LegalCopyright
00095C1E 610BE21E 0 Red Hat. 1996-2000
00095C4E 610BE24E 0 OriginalFilename
00095C70 610BE270 0 cygwin1.dll

Also installs this VCD Imager.
00001044 00401C44 0 GNU VCDImager 0.6.2rc2 [cygwin/i586]
0000106A 00401C6A 0 Copyright (c) 2001 Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvr@gnu.org>
000010A3 00401CA3 0 GNU VCDImager may be distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public
000010EE 00401CEE 0 Licence; For details, see the file
00001112 00401D12 0 COPYING', which is included in the GNU

Also the flash DVD ripper seems to be just DVDx with a different gui. This is well hidden.

The last one is called
Lavavo DVD Ripper
http://www.lavavo.com
I won't write anything about this except that it uses DVDx for the DVD Ripper and uses CDEX
for its CD Ripper. A Friend posted about this on the GPL Violations site.
http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/2005-October/000529.html
Other things used in LAVAVOs software products I found to be others also. Aside from the GPL
issues there is commercial things as well.

This is not everything I have found out about all these apps just what I could post to make it short
and to the point.

MACC

3rd November 2005, 01:42

Here is another curiosity for those who want to follow this.

The Lavavo DVD Ripper when it is installed installs some files
into the system32 folder found in the windows folder.

cddvdburner2.ocx
cddvdburner2.lic

If the cddvdburner2.ocx file is opened with a hex editor of
some sort there is this bit of text
0000D484 1000D484 0 DVD-RW DVR-105
0000D498 1000D498 0 DVD-RW DVR-104
0000D4AC 1000D4AC 0 DVD-RW DVR-103
0000D4C0 1000D4C0 0 EL TORITO SPECIFICATION
0000D4D8 1000D4D8 0 Magic CD/DVD Burner
0000D4EC 1000D4EC 0 failed to sort path table
0000D508 1000D508 0 ROOT_DIR
0000D540 1000D540 0 .?AVCNoTrackObject@@
0000D560 1000D560 0 .?AVAFX_MODULE_STATE@@
0000D580 1000D580 0 .?AV_AFX_DLL_MODULE_STATE@@

This fle contains the string Magic CD/DVD Burner.
Don't know if this is the same as the one talked about on this thread
but I have not checked YET.

jonny

3rd November 2005, 13:57

http://www.pspadvance.com/

The PSP binary (EBOOT.PBP) contains:

This software is derived from the GNU GPL XviD codec (1.1.0).
Your software distributor has to give access to its source code.

Sirber

3rd November 2005, 13:58

Site has been doom9ed: dead ;)

jonny

3rd November 2005, 14:02

lol so fast? :D

MACC

8th November 2005, 00:38

A lot of the stolen apps that I have posted about can be found here
http://www.mymusictools.com/download/ripper/

MACC

13th November 2005, 22:49

Another interesting bit of info about the app DVDPEAN PRO. If you read my post at the top about this one and the DVDRipperCore.dll being DVDx.

There is another application out there called DVDZipPro. It has all the same files and dlls that DVDdean has including the DVDRipperCore.dll. I compared the two cores from DVDZippro and DVDpean and they are the same. So that means DVDZIPPRO also is using DVDx.

The funny thing is the price.
dvdzip US$34.95
DVDPean US$29.95

ITS THE SAME APP
find them at the site that I posted also.

MACC

27th November 2005, 20:28

Here are some more sites that sell some of this type of stuff.
http://www.8864soft.com/
http://www.cd-mp3.org/

On the 8864soft site there is an app called GoGo DVD Ripper
Another rip of DVDx. An interesting thing in this is if its opened with
a resource editor, look at the dialog 152. It has the DVDx name.

dragongodz

9th January 2006, 00:49

heres just another DVDx rip.

#1 dvd ripper
http://www.createdvd.net/dvd_ripper.htm

as usual all the normal controls are there just moved around to different windows etc. also other evidence found in code etc.

the funny thing is i didnt fix the angle bug when key search is turned off(all angles show 1 after the other) and this shows this bug quite nicely since it doesnt appear to have the option to turn it on or off. i am assuming they have only set that to activate if done from a dvd drive or load dvd button or something. :)

shows that people should just download the real thing, in this case DVDx, and not support these con artists.

MACC

9th January 2006, 05:20

Its funny you mention this. I was just looking at that site today.
http://www.createdvd.net

The other stuff from Apollo I have not checked fully but their Apollo PSP Video COnverter does contain this

ffmpeg version 0.4.9-pre1-based-MobileHackerz030
Copyright (c) 2000-2004 Fabrice Bellard
Including the gnu lic. inside the exe but no where else to be found.
The others I do not know but they do use this CDRip.dll.

dragongodz

9th January 2006, 11:46

well i only looked because of this post
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=764690

upon finding the evidence it doesnt surprise me in the least another of their "products" show a similar situation.

MACC

16th January 2006, 19:29

The links above don't work hmmmm. Here is another site with these
http://www.dvdtox.com/ Also notice the maskbit software on that
site to the left. Then read this
http://lists.gnumonks.org/pipermail/legal/2005-November/000588.html
More cons??

hailmyname

9th March 2006, 21:10

stolen programs can be good sometimes. some old rips that were lifted from the market can be obtained from stolen markets, but still i agree that its not good.

MACC

9th March 2006, 22:44

How are stolen programs good. There are a lot more than one might think. It is theft no matter how one looks at it. Companies stealing free code and using it their apps for a profit and not even one mention of Oh yea this guy or gal did it. That is not only very rude but very shady business practices. If I could I would list all the companies that have done this.
Sometimes all this theft even drives the developers away from actually developing because of so much theft of their code.
Look up akrip. Read this thread from the beginning or do a search for CDex.
For the consumer it is very difficult to find apps geared towards the CD/DVD market that isn't the same stolen code.
DVDx can be found in a lot of apps, CDex can be found in a lot of apps. Its the same code with different interfaces sold at different prices. One buys this program and it stinks or does not do its job so they buy this other app. Guess what its the same app with only a different interface. So the consumer got screwed twice by two different companies. But the only thing is the general public aka average user has no clue because they don't really look that far into it or just don't know. Or just don't care. Although if they knew they just bought something that they could get for free. They would be upset. Can you say fraud.
Also I found a few companies that are getting the short end of the stick by outsourcing their projects and these outsourcing companies are stealing Gpl code to make applications for these companies. They then turn around and sell it to the public. Problems arise when someone runs across this app with stolen GPL code because the public gets screwed see above and the companies gets screwed. Which if they were paying attention and did their homework they would not but that is a different matter.
I think it is not good at all. Or if you do use it say you are. Read this thread and you will see most of these companies do not give credits or release the source and that is the worst thing of all.

Its not new innovative technology if it already exsists

MACC

9th March 2006, 23:18

Actually there is other things that are worse along with above. Expecting people to adhere to their lic. when they have already defiled someone elses.
Driving developers to not want to develop anything anymore.

dragongodz

9th March 2006, 23:59

MACC - :goodpost:

PaulC010

30th March 2006, 00:45

MACC

30th March 2006, 02:54

Sadly developers develop. There should be a statuatory "Personal IP (c)" law passed to protect the innocents.........

Companies rise and companies fall. It's the nature of the business. "Developers Suffer" has also been part of the business, but the smart ones just cash in and move on.

Paul

Paul

Yes developers develop otherwise they would not be called developers. As far as personal IP law how far would it reach would it cover the entire globe and would it cover the parts of the world that seem to be where all this Clone
software is coming from.

Companies rise and companies fall, some also know when to sell off their assests and get out because their software would make them more of a profit selling it to other companies rather than tring to stick it out. But read this thread and see what it is about. it is about the GPl and theft of code.

MACC

13th April 2006, 18:16

This is a follow up for my comments a couple of posts up. While I have not looked at all the apps on these sites time will not allow it at the moment. This is mostly for those who don't
really get my comments that I posted. So some examples.
First Plato DVD ripper found here http://www.dvdtompegx.com/ is still using DVDx in the main exe so no surprise there.

However at that same site you will find Plato Video To iPod PSP 3GP.
Price is 35.00

Then if you go here http://www.yaomingsoft.com/html/product_videotopsp.htm
you will find an app called A-one PSP Video Convertor
Price is 24.98

You know where I am going with this. Looking in the applications directory structure with
these apps side by side they look the same. There is a folder called app there are also
some interesting things in there as well.

scanner

16th May 2006, 17:34

striker9

17th May 2006, 01:29

I actually have this prg "No1dvdripper". Paid 60$ bucks for it because of a article in a magazine. Their support is nothing but the absolute worst, I eventually got it for nothing after complaing for 6 weeks with hardly any replies from them. I still can't get the thing to work. Gave up trying after I got "dvdxcopy" and "shrink" which are superiour prgs by far.
Scanner

So what exactly does this have to do with this thread? Are you claiming that they were ripping off someone else's work? If not that's not really the point of the discussion here.

dragongodz

17th May 2006, 02:10

i assume scanner means #1 dvd ripper which i mentioned when he wrote no1dvdripper.

scanner

18th May 2006, 14:23

i assume scanner means #1 dvd ripper which i mentioned when he wrote no1dvdripper.
:scared: Sorry I didn't mean to offend anyone I was just meationing about how bad this prg is. Yes that was what I was refering to Thanx DragonGodz Maybe I just didn't make my point clear enough.

v1rtu0s1ty

8th October 2007, 17:41

Is this a good approach? I did this back in 1991-1993 when my classmates would always copy my pascal compiled .exe program. I had a bmp file's hex directly included in the program. If some of the hex got modified, the program will not run at all. So, on the program's screen or somewhere like about, we can have a text saying that if you paid for this software, you have been scammed or ripped off. The author's name can also be included in the graphic. We can also add a note that if it was downloaded from doom9.org, it's a good copy. Also, we can sha1 the hex bits to make more obscure or harder. We'll just have to use decoder func. Also, someone can write a proprietary image format that we can use there. What do you think folks? Or do you think these big fish thieves will just remove those codes and compile by themselves?