Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

In Response To Restraining Order, Real Networks Pulls RealDVD

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the corporate-masochism dept.

The Courts 193

eldavojohn writes "RealNetworks' product that allows one to copy a DVD containing a movie has been pulled. You may recall us discussing RealDVD and its legal implications." According to the linked BBC report, "RealNetworks — the firm behind the software — has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software [sic]. Six major movie studios jointly sued the company on 30 September — the day the software was launched."

cancel ×

193 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST!!! (0, Offtopic)

Skeetskeetskeet (906997) | more than 5 years ago | (#25285871)

Oh yes baby...oh yes!!

Re:FIRST!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286151)

First time you squirted the special white wee in your eye the first time you masturbated?

First viewinjg of goatse

First internet porn.

First what? You douche.

first post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25285879)

As the AC! æå'çãããfã"

yeah how dare you want to do things with DVDs you own!

I'm clueless on this, but (4, Insightful)

JeanBaptiste (537955) | more than 5 years ago | (#25285897)

Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

If there isn't, can I write one and get sued ? At least I'd get my name in the papers...

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (4, Insightful)

Holmwood (899130) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286009)

There is other software -- DVD Decrypter was one popular piece of software. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Decrypter [wikipedia.org] ) In the US, it may or may not be illegal under the DMCA to use such programs to back up your own DVDs. The only controlling legal authority I'm aware of said that doing so was legal, provided it was for personal use, but that distributing software to make this possible was illegal.

Go figure.

The Controlling Legal Authority is the DMCA (5, Informative)

Alaren (682568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286313)

In the US, it may or may not be illegal under the DMCA to use such programs to back up your own DVDs.

This is not an open question.

The only controlling legal authority I'm aware of said that doing so was legal, provided it was for personal use, but that distributing software to make this possible was illegal.

This is correct--and the controlling legal authority is not a case, but the DMCA itself. You cannot circumvent protection to gain "access" to a work, but you can circumvent protection for "use" of a work provided you gained access (i.e. purchased the work) legally.

The problem being that you cannot "traffic in" tools designed to circumvent protection at all. So you likely can't buy, sell, or give away programs designed to help people take advantage of this subtle difference. You have to know how to circumvent the protection all by yourself.

Ironically, the area of law where this is not clear is whether it is legal to teach someone how to circumvent protection "on their own." Likely the First Amendment would preclude such a sweeping definition of "traffic in," but there are no test cases on this that I'm aware of. Certainly more perplexing conclusions have been reached before...

There is an obvious logical disconnect in allowing people under one section of the law to do certain things that the vast majority will be unable to do because of provisions in another section of the law. The rationale is that tools enabling DRM-circumventing "use" will naturally also enable DRM-circumventing "access," which is a no-no.

Just one more good example of how copyright law is suppressing the usefulness technology. But because this is copyright rather than patent law, the "useful article" doctrine fails to apply.

The foregoing is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer. However I am a law student and have made extensive study of the subject.

Correction (3, Informative)

Alaren (682568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286489)

Sorry, I wrote that too fast. "Useful article" doctrine is not the phrase I was looking for. The "substantial non-infringing use" analysis, which is a part of copyright law, is where circumvention devices might be exempt from the DMCA, under its own provisions.

Please just ignore the second sentence of the second-to-last paragraph. I blame mornings.

Re:Correction (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286555)

I blame your legal system if you live somewhere you actually need to add "The foregoing is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer" to a forum post to safeguard yourself against litigation.

Re:The Controlling Legal Authority is the DMCA (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286519)

but you can circumvent protection for "use" of a work provided you gained access (i.e. purchased the work) legally.

What part of DMCA [cornell.edu] exempts that? I don't see anything in there about legally gained access. Is it one of the Librarian of Congress exemptions?

Ugh. You're going to make me CITE this? (5, Informative)

Alaren (682568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287039)

Fine, fine. Here we go. d^_^b

1201(a)(1)(a) says, "No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title." (emphasis added)

So circumvention for access is explicitly forbidden, except under the Library of Congress exemptions.

1201(b) adds that "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof," that is primarily designed for, marketed for, or has limited use other than to circumvent protection.

So, circumvention for access is forbidden, and trafficking in circumvetion tools is forbidden. Notice what is omitted here. Nowhere does the DMCA forbid circumvention for use. Thus it was that the Supreme Court observed in U.S. v. Elcom (the Dmitri Skylarov case, which I feel was wrongly decided for other reasons we needn't go into):

Congress did not ban the act of circumventing the use restrictions. Instead, Congress banned only the trafficking in and marketing of devices primarily designed to circumvent the use restriction protective technologies. Congress did not prohibit the act of circumvention because it sought to preserve the fair use rights of persons who had lawfully acquired a work.

There is no part of the DMCA that "exempts" circumvention for use--because there is no part of the DMCA that makes it illegal.

Not my morning.... (2, Informative)

Alaren (682568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287181)

Also, the quote I gave is from the Northern District of California, not the Supreme Court. Sorry for the rampant errors in my posts this morning.

Re:Ugh. You're going to make me CITE this? (1)

cfulmer (3166) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287463)

I think you may be parsing that incorrectly. If the technological measure "effectively controls access," then circumventing that measure is forbidden, regardless of the reason or purpose of circumvention. If the measure controls both access and use, then circumvention for any reason is a problem.

Re:The Controlling Legal Authority is the DMCA (5, Insightful)

Peter Simpson (112887) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287267)

Well, every time you use a licensed player to play a DVD, you (legally) circumvent or bypass the encryption (otherwise, you could not view the DVD you paid for)

It comes down to the term "circumvent", which is defined in the DMCA as:

"...to `circumvent a technological measure' means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner..."

I call your attention to the phrase "descramble a scrambled work...without the authority of the copyright owner" in the above quote.

Does viewing a DVD under Linux, for example, using a non-approved decrypter, constitute circumvention, or, have you, by virtue of your purchase of the DVD, received an implicit license from the copyright owner to view the content? Did you receive a license to view the content *only* on licensed playback devices? If so, where is that restriction listed on the media you purchased?

Re:The Controlling Legal Authority is the DMCA (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287387)

Just one more good example of how copyright law is suppressing the usefulness technology. But because this is copyright rather than patent law, the "useful article" doctrine fails to apply.

I'm not a lawyer or a law student, but it would seem to me that anti-circumvention (or rather, anti-circumvention-trafficking) laws have nothing to do with copyright, other than being written into a copyright bill.

For example, if I distribute a copy of HandBrake in the United States, with libdvdcss2 (or whatever it uses) intact, I have violated this part of the DMCA, but I am not committing copyright infringement since HandBrake is under the GNU GPL. However, If I download a ripped DVD from the Internet without permission from the copyright holder, I am committing copyright infringement but not violating any circumvention laws.

Re:The Controlling Legal Authority is the DMCA (1)

harl (84412) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287459)

There is an obvious logical disconnect in allowing people under one section of the law to do certain things that the vast majority will be unable to do because of provisions in another section of the law. The rationale is that tools enabling DRM-circumventing "use" will naturally also enable DRM-circumventing "access," which is a no-no.

From the bill's author's stand point there is no logical disconnect. You can't outlaw fair-use. That would not fly and might even face constitutional challenge. The DMCA is a rather elegant solution. Everyone still has their fair-use rights but effectively no one can make use of them.

This is a perfect example of the evil of the law. People weren't protesting it because they wanted free stuff they were protesting it because it de facto outlaws fair-use.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

ProzacPatient (915544) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286701)

Last I knew DVD Decrypter is illegal [under the DMCA] but in order for it to be continued to be distributed the developer that maintained it gave it to a guy in the UK.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287001)

Bypassing copy protection is STILL legal even under the DMCA for the purpose of interoperability.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (2, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287273)

Some code snippets for you.
(from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/)

#!/usr/bin/perl
# 472-byte qrpff, Keith Winstein and Marc Horowitz <sipb-iap-dvd@mit.edu>
# MPEG 2 PS VOB file -> descrambled output on stdout.
# usage: perl -I <k1>:<k2>:<k3>:<k4>:<k5> qrpff
# where k1..k5 are the title key bytes in least to most-significant order

s''$/=\2048;while(<>){G=29;R=142;if((@a=unqT="C*",_)[20]&48){D=89;_=unqb24,qT,@
b=map{ord qB8,unqb8,qT,_^$a[--D]}@INC;s/...$/1$&/;Q=unqV,qb25,_;H=73;O=$b[4]<<9
|256|$b[3];Q=Q>>8^(P=(E=255)&(Q>>12^Q>>4^Q/8^Q))<<17,O=O>>8^(E&(F=(S=O>>14&7^O)
^S*8^S<<6))<<9,_=(map{U=_%16orE^=R^=110&(S=(unqT,"\xb\ntd\xbz\x14d")[_/16%8]);E
^=(72,@z=(64,72,G^=12*(U-2?0:S&17)),H^=_%64?12:0,@z)[_%8]}(16..271))[_]^((D>>=8
)+=P+(~F&E))for@a[128..$#a]}print+qT,@a}';s/[D-HO-U_]/\$$&/g;s/q/pack+/g;eval

#include<stdlib.h>
typedef unsigned int uint;
char ctb[512]="33733b2663236b763e7e362b6e2e667bd393db0643034b96de9ed60b4e0e4\
69b57175f82c787cf125a1a528fca8ac21fd999d10049094190d898d001480840913d7d35246\
d2d65743c7c34256c2c6475dd9dd5044d0d4594dc9cd4054c0c449559195180c989c11058185\
081c888c011d797df0247074f92da9ad20f4a0a429f53135b86c383cb165e1e568bce8ec61bb\
3f3bba6e3a3ebf6befeb6abeeaee6fb37773f2267276f723a7a322f6a2a627fb9f9b1a0e9a9e\
1f0b8f8b0a1e8a8e0f15d1d5584cd8dc5145c1c5485cc8cc415bdfdb5a4edade5f4bcfcb4a5e\
cace4f539793120692961703878302168286071b7f7bfa2e7a7eff2bafab2afeaaae2ff";
typedef unsigned char uchar;uint tb0[11]={5,0,1,2,3,4,0,1,2,3,4};uchar* F=NULL;
uint lf0,lf1,out;void ReadKey(uchar* key){int i;char hst[3]; hst[2]=0;if(F==\
NULL){F=malloc(256);for(i=0;i<256;i++){hst[0]=ctb[2*i];hst[1]=ctb[2*i+1];F[i]=\
strtol(hst,NULL,16);}}out=0;lf0=(key[1]<<9)|key[0]|0x100;lf1=(key[4]<<16)|(key\
[3]<<8)|key[2];lf1=((lf1&0xfffff8)<<1)|(lf1&0x7)|0x8;}uchar Cipher(int sw1,\
int sw2){int i,a,b,x=0,y=0;for(i=0;i<8;i++){a=((lf0>>2)^(lf0>>16))&1;b=((lf1\
>>12)^(lf1>>20)^(lf1>>21)^(lf1>>24))&1;lf0=(lf0<<1)|a;lf1=(lf1<<1)|b;x=(x>>1)\
|(a<<7);y=(y>>1)|(b<<7);}x^=sw1;y^=sw2;return out=(out>>8)+x+y;} void \
CSSdescramble(uchar *sec,uchar *key){uint i;uchar *end=sec+0x800;uchar KEY[5];
for(i=0;i<5;i++)KEY[i]=key[i]^sec[0x54+i];ReadKey(KEY);sec+=0x80;while(sec!=\
end)*sec++=F[*sec]^Cipher(255,0);}void CSStitlekey1(uchar *key,uchar *im)
{uchar k[5];int i; ReadKey(im);for(i=0;i<5;i++)k[i]=Cipher(0,0);for(i=9;i>=0;\
i--)key[tb0[i+1]]=k[tb0[i+1]]^F[key[tb0[i+1]]]^key[tb0[i]];}void CSStitlekey2\
(uchar *key,uchar *im){uchar k[5];int i;ReadKey(im);for(i=0;i<5;i++)k[i]=\
Cipher(0,255);for(i=9;i>=0;i--)key[tb0[i+1]]=k[tb0[i+1]]^F[key[tb0[i+1]]]^key\
[tb0[i]];}void CSSdecrypttitlekey(uchar *tkey,uchar *dkey){int i;uchar im1[6];
uchar im2[6]={0x51,0x67,0x67,0xc5,0xe0,0x00};for(i=0;i<6;i++)im1[i]=dkey[i];
CSStitlekey1(im1,im2);CSStitlekey2(tkey,im1);}

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287027)

Personally, i don't care if its illegal ( which it is if you break the encryption to do it ) to back up my own DVDs.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287559)

Put it on the torrents. Make sure that everyone has the software for eons to come. Power to the people!

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (3, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286097)

Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

Not commercial. There are open source tools that you can accomplish this with and there are certainly shady products you can find online that aren't supported and probably aren't owned and operated inside the United States. The important thing is that they are not sold at Best Buy nor are they easy to use. I know ways of doing it with Ubuntu but your average person is still mystified that typing something on a command line causes my DVD player to do something.

DVD X Copy comes to mind although I've never used it, that's the most commercial looking stuff I've ever seen. And this is what its site [dvdxcopy.com] says:

Authentic DVDXCopy software is no longer being sold anywhere.

In response to:

If there isn't, can I write one and get sued ? At least I'd get my name in the papers...

Sir, you need look no further than the RIAA/MPAA to be sued. Why bother writing software when you can simply create a single backup copy of a CD or DVD for your personal use and notify them that you have done so. Your name won't make the papers but you will be sued. I'm certain they will be able to show that since you had it on your computer and your computer was connected to the internet, you were distributing it to several thousand other people who had no legal right in owning it. You won't be sued for the additional price of that media, you will be sued $75,000 because that's how much money you thieved from them! And thus you can be part of the ridiculous system that is digital music today!

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (5, Informative)

homes32 (1265404) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286237)

Isn't there other software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs ?

Not commercial. There are open source tools that you can accomplish this with and there are certainly shady products you can find online that aren't supported and probably aren't owned and operated inside the United States. The important thing is that they are not sold at Best Buy nor are they easy to use. I know ways of doing it with Ubuntu but your average person is still mystified that typing something on a command line causes my DVD player to do something.

I disagree. AnyDVD and DVDFAB Decrypter are straight forward and extremely easy to use, (1-2 button click) and have a pretty decent support base. Although you can't find them at Best Buy...

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286249)

Mirror Pirate Bay, and maybe a few other popular torrent sites. I'm not sure how many billion they would hit you with, but it would probably be enough to bail out a small financial institution. Oh, and end world poverty, but that's not so important now, right?

They haven't sued me yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25287307)

And I even put in "By allowing me to do this, you give explicit permission to decrypt and copy the movie for my personal consumption".

Still a free man.

I even put my address on it.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

yttrstein (891553) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287445)

Enumerated:

1. Yes, there is commercial software that allows you to copy/rip DVDs, and quite a lot of it. Here's one example:

http://www.imtoo.com/

Their stuff is pretty good actually, frightfully easy to use as well. They've been around for quite a while, and I'd hardly call them shady.

2. I've been notifying both the MPAA and the RIAA in detail of my antics regarding not only the ripping of every DVD I own, but many that I don't own as well--for nearly six years now, to prove a point to a friend of mine who also believes that they'll sue anyone who tells them they're being naughty. No, they won't, plainly.

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (4, Informative)

Zymergy (803632) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286115)

AnyDVD and CloneDVD2 are my personal favorites for a ripper/burner.
(The AnyDVD ripper will also rip BlueRay and HD DVD's nicely (if you buy the HD Key for HD) and it can also rip directly to a non-DRM'd DVD or HDDVD/BlueRay image file) :)
http://www.slysoft.com/en/download.html [slysoft.com]
http://www.elby.ch/products/clone_dvd/index.html [www.elby.ch]

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (2, Informative)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286169)

Yes, there are various freeware and commercial products that let you rip and copy DVDs. I would point you at some websites, but I'm afraid of the Slashdot Effect causing them problems.

DVD Decrypter hasn't been updated in years because it's author was given a choice between facing a very expensive lawsuit or turning over the code and stopping work on it. He chose the latter. DVD Decrypter works fine on most DVDs, but not all.

AnyDVD is a commercial ripper that works on all DVDs and is updated regularly.

DVDFab HD Decrypter is a commercial ripper that works on all DVDs and is updated regularly. There is a free version available, but it may not be very useful to novices.

Once you rip a DVD, various programs can be used to burn it. One of the best is ImgBurn, which is freeware.

Slysoft makes good stuff. (1)

maillemaker (924053) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286289)

I played around with the "free" rippers and re-encoders for weeks and could never resolve audio/video synchronization issues.

Finally I broke down and purchased SlySoft's Any DVD ripper and their Clone DVD mobile. Now I have my entire DVD collection as .avi files - with no FBI warnings, commercials, etc., etc..

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

WDot (1286728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286533)

There's DVD Fab Decryptor, the free (but effective) portion of a commercial DVD ripping program. Oddly enough they haven't been sued out of existence yet, so my guess is they just haven't shown up on the radar.

It would be nice if Real or Apple or Microsoft finagled a way to put easy DVD ripping features into their respective media players. DVD ripping would really take off and be a big win for consumers. It would no longer be solely for power users who "know where to look."

Re:I'm clueless on this, but (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286577)

libdvdcss is the package you want for Linux. There are plenty of repositories you can add which let you apt-get install it.

I installed it to get around the region restrictions since my DVD drive's firmware was broken and wouldn't let me switch.

Actually ther..... (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287317)

BUFFERING.

Working together (5, Informative)

iamwhoiamtoday (1177507) | more than 5 years ago | (#25285903)

See? The big companies CAN work together when they want to. I'm honestly surprised that 6 major movie companies could work together without backstabbing each other. On a related note: When it comes to DVD ripping... just use "Handbrake" (google it. open-source ripping software)

Re:Working together (0, Offtopic)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286015)

I prefer handjob.

Re:Working together (3, Informative)

Dr. Manhattan (29720) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286091)

When it comes to DVD ripping... just use "Handbrake"

Or, if you want something that'll play in a standard DVD player, k9copy [sourceforge.net] . I have young kids, and for some weird reasons I haven't bought them and video iPods. Backing up their DVDs is kind of a must.

Re:Working together (5, Funny)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286419)

If I had a choice between buying kids and video iPods, I'd pick the iPods any day.

Re:Working together (2, Funny)

Dr. Manhattan (29720) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287011)

Curse you, spellcheck! :->

Re:Working together (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25287205)

Yeah. Technology is getting smaller and smaller, but kids just get bigger. What's up with that?

Re:Working together (1)

WDot (1286728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286687)

Handbrake is DVD reencoding software. It may work with your DVDs, but DRM can easily trip it up, so you'd want to find another program that rips the DVD bit for bit but takes out any copy protection. Encode the result to your codec of choice and delete the lossless rip.

maybe there were other motives... (5, Funny)

ChienAndalu (1293930) | more than 5 years ago | (#25285905)

I mean, have you ever *used* a Real(TM) product? Maybe the film studios only want to protect us...

Re:maybe there were other motives... (1)

p0 (740290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286775)

... buffering!

Re: other motive: pak chooie unf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25287351)

"we are here to protect you ... do you have stairs in your house? ... please go stand by the stairs"

http://uploads.ungrounded.net/33000/33440_secret_of_space.swf [ungrounded.net]

What, No Balls?? (0)

Zymergy (803632) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286017)

As much as I am no fan of Real Networks and their 'products', I would have hoped at least they would have shown some balls here.
Nobody can say this about Real now! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ren3azMgViU [youtube.com]

Re:What, No Balls?? (5, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286081)

Huh? You mean ignore a restraining order? That would be totally suicidal. Coming out with the product in the first place is pretty ballsy, and I think Real should be congratulated for that move.

Re:What, No Balls?? (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286333)

Going to a gun fight with a knife is pretty ballsy too, but I'm not sure "congratulations" are the first thought that would be offered to such an act.

Re:What, No Balls?? (4, Insightful)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287407)

Going to a gun fight with a knife is pretty ballsy too, but I'm not sure "congratulations" are the first thought that would be offered to such an act.

Inside or outside 21 feet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill [wikipedia.org]

Re:What, No Balls?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286547)

Rejoyce! Think of all the money Real caused the stupid movie studios to waste on lawyers! And without ever shipping anything!! Maybe we should all get into this business...

Re:What, No Balls?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286621)

They can't possibly have developed the software without knowing this was the probable outcome. I hate Real, but I don't think anyone there is that dumb or naive. Either they think they can win the court battle, or more likely, they're media-whoring.

It seems like a slow and expensive way to mount an ad campaign, but maybe its cost effective, somehow.

Why this one? (3, Interesting)

sTERNKERN (1290626) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286021)

I can count several other program doing exactly the same job and there are some which are not freeware but can be bought. Probably only because they got too much attention?

Re:Why this one? (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286411)

How many of those companies/developers are located in the US?

DVD decrypter + nero (2, Informative)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286037)

just use an old copy if DVD decrypter floating around and Nero

to copy DVDs to other DVS's or mp4 files

How to rip DVDs for nothing (5, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286047)

DVDs are easy to rip. Commercial tools like AnyDVD and Nero Recode make a good job but you can do it for nothing quite easily.
  1. Install DVD Decrypter. Google for it
  2. Install Handbrake [handbrake.fr]
  3. Rip DVD with Decrypter to a folder on the HDD
  4. Run Handbrake, choose DVD folder
  5. Select main movie feature or anything else
  6. Tweak bitrate and other settings and / or pick a target device (iPod, PS3, 360 etc.)
  7. Click Start
  8. Wait a bit, shiny digital copy pops out

Handbrake is a front end over xvid and x264 encoders so you get either an MPEG-2 ASP (DiVX) or H264 AVC file from the process. Depending on your target device you might want to choose one or the other or fiddle with the other settings but the defaults are pretty sane if you don't know what you are doing.

Sure the process might skip supplementals and there may be edge cases with alternate tracks or subtitles that require more effort but x264 is an excellent encoder and the quality is very good. I really don't see why anybody would want to use RealDVD when it DRMs the resulting movie in the process.

Re:How to rip DVDs for nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286343)

WAYYYY too much work/time.
On a mac you just:

MacTheRipper DVD to a folder
Burn Folder to DL DVD with Toast.

Backup Done.

Re:How to rip DVDs for nothing (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286529)

I'm talking about ripping the movie out for a portable copy. If you want to backup a movie then just use DVD Decrypter and your favourite burner to make a copy. If you want to shrink it first to a single layer, google for "DVD Shrink".

Who am I supposed to hate more? (5, Insightful)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286057)

This is Sauron versus Palpatine. Is there a good guy? Don't think so.

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286135)

But I like Sauron and Palpatine.

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (2, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286299)

Except that in this case, Real Networks is doing the right thing.

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286327)

Good/evil isn't the way to look at it. Assailant/victim is. You can condemn the aggression even if you don't like the victim.

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (1, Interesting)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286403)

You can condemn the aggression even if you don't like the victim.

Or I can laugh at one pack of assholes beating up on another pack of assholes. Each to his own, I guess. ;-)

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (2, Interesting)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286625)

The problem with laughing at injustice to assholes, is that some day you will be the asshole. (And in Soviet Russia, asshole laughs at you.)

Re:Who am I supposed to hate more? (1)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286611)

Nice try, Greedo.

Surprise? (1, Interesting)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286099)

I'm not really sure what Real Networks was thinking when they came up with the idea of this software. How could they not assume that this software would attract a lawsuit? The MPAA are a bunch of assholes anyway. I recently moved to Europe, and I was reminded of the BS when I found out that I can't lend my DVDs, which I had legally purchased in Canada, to my friends because of region encoding. Now that I'm reminded of this BS, I will no longer purchase any DVD movies.

Re:Surprise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286361)

I'm not really sure what Real Networks was thinking when they came up with the idea of this software. How could they not assume that this software would attract a lawsuit? The MPAA are a bunch of assholes anyway. I recently moved to Europe, and I was reminded of the BS when I found out that I can't lend my DVDs, which I had legally purchased in Canada, to my friends because of region encoding. Now that I'm reminded of this BS, I will no longer purchase any DVD movies.

Perhaps they are doing it purely for establishing a legal precedent? Fight in court for the right of people to make backups of their DVDs with legal software.

Why are we thinking by default that they are stupid? I'm sure they knew exactly what they were getting into.

Re:Surprise? (0, Flamebait)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287287)

Perhaps they are doing it purely for establishing a legal precedent? Fight in court for the right of people to make backups of their DVDs with legal software.

Why are we thinking by default that they are stupid? I'm sure they knew exactly what they were getting into.

The cynic in me will wait until the case is over before guessing at Real's motives. If they get slapped with a tiny judgement, then I'll be satisfied that my distrust was well-placed, and Real colluded with them in order to get an ANTI-backup precedent set.

Re:Surprise? (3, Insightful)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286473)

Who in the UK doesn't have a region-ignoring player? You need better educated friends, perhaps.

Re:Surprise? (1)

jriding (1076733) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286779)

Actually Real was the one who filed the lawsuit first. Then the movie company filed after them.
They did this to establish it was not illegal and to set precedent. The RIAA/MPAA filed after words to get there 2 cents in. At the end of the day the court was put where Real filed instead of Hollywood Court where MPAA filed.

Fine. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286103)

I'll stick with DVD Decrypter and DVD2One, then.
 
I'd be more than happy to have a DRM-locked archive on my external hard disk, still with the content protection intact, but oh no, I have to reach behind me, search through the 200 or so properly licensed DVD's stacked in the bookcase behind me for the one I want, open the case, find that I put it back in the wrong box / brother borrowed it and it's not there, go hunting around the house for it, find it under a stack of papers on my desk, and finally get to watch the damn thing 45 minutes after I wanted to, when I more than likely no longer have time.
 
Sometimes, I think they just do it out of spite. They do it because they can.
 
I don't think i'll buy any more DVD's. It's too much hassle.

Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (5, Informative)

InspectorxGadget (1230170) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286113)

1. (DVD) -> DVD Decrypter -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.

2. (BD) -> DVDFAB -> TsMuxeR -> MeGUI, X264 -> Done.

3. (CD) -> Exact Audio Copy -> FLAC -8 -> Done.

Next question.

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (3, Funny)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286305)

Next question.

8-Track?

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (2, Interesting)

rugatero (1292060) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286457)

8-Track -> Line-in -> Audacity -> Vorbis -> Done.

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (1)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286593)

Thanks! Finally a digital copy of Pac-Man Fever!

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (1)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286975)

> Finally a digital copy of Pac-Man Fever!

You could have just downloaded that off one of many podcasts at the Mad Music Archive [themadmusicarchive.com] .

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287309)

I've had that for four years...

It's drivin' me crazy.....

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25287521)

[ANYTHING] -> Line-in -> Audacity -> Vorbis -> Done.

welcome to the analog hole!

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286587)

Don't joke about ripping 8-tracks. I've spent many hours and made a little bit of $$ ripping music onto CDs from reel-to-reel. Not really much direct interaction involved, but it takes a while if you've got a big stack.

Re:Nobody with a brain used that crap anyway (2, Interesting)

HiVizDiver (640486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287253)

Holy crap, that's awesome. My dad was the original h4x0r... he actually wired up a reel-to-reel in the family van and would play music on it while we roadtripped to visit my grandparents in Florida. His music of choice? "Alabama", "The Statler Brothers", and John Philip Sousa marches. It's a wonder to me, sometimes, that I even made it to adulthood. Might explain some things, too. 0_o

Hate Wiki, but.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286187)

Isn't this still covered under the Home Recording Act? Why is still so often overlooked or not referred back to?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Home_Recording_Act

Re:Hate Wiki, but.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286303)

It may be legal to copy DVDs for personal use. What isn't legal, thanks to the DMCA, is selling a device which can be used to defeat copy protection measures, which is what Real is doing here. So you can copy that DVD, but no one is allowed to give you the tools to do so.

Because it's the AUDIO Home Recording Act. (4, Interesting)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286417)

I'm guessing it's because it's the audio home recording act and this is video.

Having owned a home audio CD recorder for many years, I can tell you that the AHRA was an interesting compromise. Home audio CD recorders do not accept standard CD-R media, but require special "audio" or "music" CD-R media that contains some encoded information that tells the recorder that it's an "audio CD-R."

The system also incorporated a technical mechanism that allowed for only first-generation bit-for-bit digital copying--you could make a bit-for-bit copy of a commercial original, but you couldn't copy the copy. (The machines, however, make a really excellent analog copy of a digital copy).

It was, I thought, really acceptable. It made casual copying convenient, you paid a quite reasonable amount for doing it, you were paying for the copy and not "pirating."

Manufacturers of audio CD-R media are required to pay a small amount of money to an agency that divvies it up between artists and music publishers.

One of the things that pushed me over the edge into a raging anti-RIAA crank was that when they started fooling around with "copy-protected" CDs, they made them uncopiable in audio home CD recorders.

In other words, here I was, an honest user, paying for every copy and keeping my end of the deal, and there they were, reneging on the deal.

I'm now utterly opposed to DRM because I'm convinced that the publishers cannot be trusted to limit themselves to enforcing rights that they actually possess. When allowed to use technical means to enforce their rights, they always overreach. They do not possess a six-year-old's sense of basic fair play.

Re:Hate Wiki, but.. (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286603)

I doubt it, as that explicitly in the law (not just the name) limits its coverage to "digital audio and digital audio devices", not video. Also, the DMCA largely expands the anti-circumvention provisions, which is the issue here, rendering the law fairly redundant for this purpose.

Re:Hate Wiki, but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286917)

DMCA is newer than AHRA. Anything AHRA gives, DMCA can take away.

Re:Hate Wiki, but.. (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287079)

Well, aside from the video vs audio, and the DMCA precedence issues mentioned elsewhere, one reason is that the act refers to devices that are designed or marketed as having the primary purpose of making digital copies. RealDVD is not a device, nor is it used in a device which as a pimary purpose of making digital copies.

The home recording act doesn't apply for oh so many reasons.

[sic]? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286189)

Why is there a [sic] in the summary? It makes no sense to me.

Re:[sic]? (2, Informative)

ameyer17 (935373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286351)

Because someone thought

RealNetworks -- the firm behind the software -- has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software

is grammatically incorrect and wanted to say "The BBC screwed up, we're just directly quoting them".
Whether it's correct or not, it doesn't sound quite right to me.

Re:[sic]? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286599)

It's a run on sentence. They need an "and".

RealNetworks -- the firm behind the software -- has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software

should be "RealNetworks, the firm behind the software, has responded to restraining order issued by a US court, and stopped selling the RealDVD software"

Re:[sic]? (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286401)

it should have said "to stop" instead of "stopped" - an editor doing a meticulous job on slashdot ... woohoo!

Re:[sic]? (1)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286471)

[sic] is used to indicate a word-by-word quote. Even if the quoted passage is obviously flawed or wrong. In this case the BBC source is grammatically incorrect because they literally write:

"RealNetworks - the firm behind the software - has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software."

Which is wrong because it makes no sense. It should be "has responded to a restraining order issued by a US court by stopping to sell the RealDVD software." or "stopped to sell the RealDVD software." something like that. The author of the original post was quite clever in that he used [sic] as it is used in an academic environment to direct corrections not to him but to the author of the original source because he simply quoted the erroneous text using [sic] to indicate so.

Re:[sic]? (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286541)

I fail to see what's clever about it. It seems to me that it would have been less distracting to simply write:

According to the linked BBC report, "RealNetworks --the firm behind the software-- has responded to [a] restraining order issued by a US court [and has] stopped selling the RealDVD software.

Seems to me that somebody just wanted to point out that they're smarter than the BBC...

Re:[sic]? (1)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286783)

Seems to me that somebody just wanted to point out that they're smarter than the BBC...

Maybe so, but usually you do that because the authors intention for making the mistake is not clear and the person quoting it doesn't know if that's some weird figure of speech that the BBC uses all the time and their readers know what it's supposed to be. So he went the safe way and just quoted it literally. Basically saying "That's what they said, I think it might be wrong but that's what was on the page after all". It's confusing, I'll give you that.

Re:[sic]? (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287399)

Which is wrong because it makes no sense. It should be "has responded to a restraining order issued by a US court by stopping to sell the RealDVD software." or "stopped to sell the RealDVD software."

That's an interesting construction in itself. I don't know if it's an American grammar issue, but usually when you have "Stop[ping] <infinitive>" it means to pause or cease doing something in order to do something else. "Stop [working] to smell the roses", "Stopping [driving cross-country] for a meal and a potty break", etc...

Usually (again,I speak only from US English experience), the construction you want to show something was ended is "Stop[ped] <present continuous>" ("Stopped selling", eg)

Re:[sic]? (1)

edbob (960004) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286609)

The preceding sentence is grammatically incorrect. It seems to be missing an article and a conjunction. Since that is how it appears in the source, it lets you know that it wasn't an error by the poster or editor. Thus, it denies the grammar nazis on this site from having a little fun.

You know what would be a great act of spite? (2, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286431)

"Oops, someone broke into our network and stole the source code to RealDVD. Guess it's out of our hands now!"

let freedumb ring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25286475)

greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/environment_arctic_dc;_ylt=A0wNcwhhcb5It3EBoy2s0NUE
(talk about cowardlly race fixing/bad theater/fiction?) http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/19/news/economy/sec_short_selling/index.htm?cnn=yes
http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=ApTbxRfLnscxaGGuCocWlwq7YWsA/SIG=11qicue6l/**http%3A//biz.yahoo.com/ap/081006/meltdown_kashkari.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/opinion/04sat1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
(the teaching of hate as a way of 'life' synonymous with failed dictatorships) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081004/ap_on_re_us/newspapers_islam_dvd;_ylt=A0wNcwWdfudITHkACAus0NUE
(some yoga & yogurt makes killing/getting killed less stressful) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081007/ap_on_re_us/warrior_mind;_ylt=A0wNcw9iXutIPkMBwzGs0NUE

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=weather+manipulation&btnG=Search
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying

'The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."
consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

Ulterior Motive? (2, Interesting)

m509272 (1286764) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286715)

Perhaps there is an ulterior motive? Is this some collaborative ploy to get DVD fair-use copying to be officially declared illegal?

Other Countries (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286899)

Does this prevent Real from selling the product in other countries? If so, how?

A simple solution for RealNetworks (1)

Hanners1979 (959741) | more than 5 years ago | (#25286945)

There's one really easy and completely legal way that RealNetworks can get around this restraining order, and tha Buffering...

My Method is the best!! (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287015)

I pull up the DVD in a HEX editor and open another HEX editor and look at the DVD and do all the decoding in my brain.

On the Plus side I can convert to any format, but converting to cinepak gives me a headache.....

America goes crazier day by day (0, Flamebait)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287077)

and its people are increasingly becoming bitches to the big corporation's unfair and inhumane practices.

each day im becoming happier because i live in turkey. yes. i live in turkey. unbelievably, each passing day its seeming a better place than america, despite having a lot of shortcomings and issues.

I prefer DVDFab - Bless those Chinese Capitalists! (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287175)

There is a free version available that will rip the Video_TS and Audio_TS files to your hard drive, but I ponied up $50 for the pay version and it's one of the most useful software packages I've ever owned. The pay version lets me rip ISO's of my DVDs which I can then store as backups, or I can encode the movies to a number of formats (h.264, xvid, wmv, etc.), with customizations for different video platforms (Xbox 360, AppleTV, PS3, cell phone, Nintendo DS, etc.). Whenever a movie comes out with a new encryption scheme (ie, Blades of Glory), there is a free software update that's usually available the next day to handle it. China's disregard for our asinine IP laws allows me to get the most utility out of my entertainment purchases.

And, no...I don't put any of my files on p2p networks. Why should I share the rewards of my hard work with a bunch of freeloaders?

Ees a conSPIRacy! (0, Flamebait)

halcyon1234 (834388) | more than 5 years ago | (#25287627)

Personally, I think this whole think stinks of bullcrap.

Real, which is, admit it, an evil, worthless company that pumps out defective, DRM ladden software, suddenly decides to be "the good guy" by releasing what could be a very useful piece of software. What prompted this? The goodness of their heart? Or...

... a nice big fat check from the MPAA?

They'd love to have DVD copying not only made Extremely Illegal, but also want it to be Very Publicly Known so that no one gets any funny ideas about actually owning that content. So they encourage a very, very visible company to make a product that is used for "backing up" DVDs. They get that product's name and purposed splashed all over the place.

Then, just before it comes out, they swoop in and fucking DESTROY the company making it with a swift, unquestioning and decisive lawsuit that is right in the public's eye. A stern warning to every Dave DVDCopy out there: We will fuck you up!

Think about it. Real announces this product right before its release. That was rather quick, don't you think? Then, just in case it gets "out there" by accident, they fill it full of DRM so that it can't actually do any harm.

Then to be extra sure, they collude with the MPAA by filing a "preemptive lawsuit" over the product. How blatant! They might just as well be mugging to the audience, going "wow, that sure was a coincidence we got sued over THIS ILLEGAL PRODUCT here!"

How quickly do you think the Real lawyers will flub the case, leading to an early and precedent-setting decision about ANY and ALL "dirty illegal theft"? There'll be a hefty $X million settlement (after which, the MPAA will make a "technology investment" in Real for, shall we say, 2*$X million?

Bullshit, bullshit, bull McCallingIt Shit de la Poo!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>