Slashdot: News for Nerds


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!

DVD Decrypter Author Served With Take-Down Order

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the hold-your-breath-if-you're-surprised dept.

Media 674

the-dark-kangaroo writes "The DVD Decrypter author has announced that he has been served with an order to cease his development of DVD Decrypter. The developer has been forced to hand over all source code and the domain that he was using. It is thought that it could be Sony who have served this notice, as it is rumoured that he broke their new copyright protection within 72 hours of its release."

cancel ×


Not Surprised (5, Insightful)

the_mad_poster (640772) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739508)

from the hold-your-breath-if-you're-surprised dept.

If I held my breath every time I was surprised by the abusive use of the abusive DMCA, I'd.... oh wait, I'd be breathing perfectly normally because it doesn't surprise me in the least that companies - which exist in a capitalist system for the sole purpose of taking money from people - are stomping all over people's rights for the purpose of fattening their wallets.

Of course, many of the people responsible for the passage of the DMCA were re-elected, and few, if any, people raked Clinton over the coals for signing the damned thing. What amazes me most about all this is not that companies are using this +5 Tool of Corruption, but that nobody outside the technical circle seems to care.

So fuck 'em. I say let the little bastard consumers wallow in their own shit until they're paying $11 every single time they want to watch the newest shitty hollywood flick that they can no longer obtain through any means but 24-hour-per-use download.

Cracking this garbage isn't going to get rid of it, it's just going to get people dragged into court. If you want it gone, let them piss consumers off enough that there's a backlash and the distributors and producers have no choice but to strike a reasonable compromise between fair use and protection against theivery.

Good summary. (-1, Offtopic)

numbski (515011) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739566)

I'd mod you +5 insightful right up until I hit your sig.

Quit grouping large groups of people together and presuming we're all the same under one umbrella. How about the trauma involved on all parties? Come back to the real world, idiot.

Re:Good summary. (0, Flamebait)

Irish_Samurai (224931) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739709)

Your not going to mod the content of his post based on his sig?

No one cares if you're offended. Come back to the real world, idiot.

Re:Good summary. (1, Insightful)

AstroDrabb (534369) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739854)

I'd mod you +5 insightful right up until I hit your sig.
I didn't' even notice his .sig until you pointed it out. With or without his .sig, I would never have modded this +5 insightful. Why?

You already pointed it out for the most part. The GP is an idiot who is probably not married and has no family to support. Look at his blanket statement about "corporations".

It doesn't surprise me in the least that companies - which exist in a capitalist system for the sole purpose of taking money from people - are stomping all over people's rights for the purpose of fattening their wallets.
This sounds like some teeny-bopper or 20-something that has never had to live in the real world yet and raise a family. All corporations are not bad. In fact, most corps in the USA have nothing to do with the DMCA. I work for a fortune 500. The DMCA has _nothing_ to do with our line of business. However, idiots like the GP, just throw out their blanket statements and assume that all corps are like MS, RIAA or MPAA.

It doesn't take much to start a corporation. You just need to pay a small fee and you can have your own corp. Some of my fellow programmers work as independent contractors under their own corporation. I guess they are just as evil? The best thing you can do is just add idiots like the GP to your Foe list and mark them down -6 or something. Being a corporation is not bad. Many/most small businesses get a corporate license to protect their own personal finances from sue happy freaks. Being a corp is not bad, it is only _some_ of the big corps that are abusing Capitalism and the corporate title.

Re:Not Surprised (2, Insightful)

Jane_Dozey (759010) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739572)

Perhaps they should stop developing dvd decryption in the US. US law doesn't apply to other countries and they'll have a hard time stopping it.

TORRENT PLZ (2, Funny)

vivin (671928) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739762)

hey anybady got teh torrent for this plz i relly need it thx!11! *ducks ;)

Re:Not Surprised (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739884)

RTFA. This take-down was in the UK, under a DCMA-like UK law.

Re:Not Surprised (1)

dethlejd (71126) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739890)

With the resounding success of the attempt to ban the exportation of encryption technology; why do the powers that be think that the banning of the importation of decryption will be any more successfull?

The beauty here is that there are more smart people like this feller outside, than there are smart people inside companies (like Sony, and others) that believe that they can hide bits that are destined to huge audiences.

I personally think that they are trying to drive the consumer back into the theater, where they can make fat cash off of stale popcorn and swimming pool sized soda sales.

Re:Not Surprised (1, Insightful)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739766)

While I agree that sueing the people who make the tool is wrong (who is suing smith and wessen for their making guns that are used to kill), we all know most of the people using programs like Decrypter are using them to make copies of movies they rent from their favorite dvd rental place (as my friend likes to call it PirateBuster).

So this is, in all honesty, not the real reason to be upset with the MPAA. They are just trying to protect their investments.

Re:Not Surprised (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739812)

All your DVD are...

oh wait, doesn't have quite the same ring to it. :P

Re:Not Surprised (2, Funny)

climbon321 (874929) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739893)

I would love to know how many hours were spent on Sony's end developing this new encryption that was broken in only 3 days.

I wouldn't be suprised if the cost to develop this new technology ends up costing more than it helps them in loss of profits.

Why sue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739537)

If I were Sony, I'd hire this guy.. not sue him.

*shrug* Silly rabbit

Sony? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739540)

Figures it's Sony. They want you to watch Sony artists performing Sony songs on Sony computers using Sony displays controlled with Sony mice and Sony keyboards - if you're unfortunate enough to be encumbered with one of their "portable audio" players you'll be aware of their proprietary format, as mp3 isn't owned by Sony so they don't use it. They still pay the licence fee for their mp3 to atrac tool, though.

Sony have been pissing me off for a long time and I've been hitting them where it hurts. I don't buy Sony and I encourage you to do the same.

Re:Sony? (1)

NuShrike (561140) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739612)

And their Sony only batteries that cost $50 each no matter if it's 1/2 the capacity of another $50 battery of theirs

Re:Sony? (3, Informative)

ettlz (639203) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739720)

Amen to that. I too have seen the dark side of Sony music hardware; namely, the horror of SonicStage SimpleBurner. Why does that thing require Admin privileges to run? What does it write about my activities and where? Why does it not work with dual-boot configurations? What kind of way is that to run a piece of software for listening to and managing music? And why they hell are they worried about people swapping music with it when the thing only rips to ATRAC-3, which is a bloody awful codec anyway?!

Re:Sony? (1)

Aeros (668253) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739801)

I used to always by Sony up until a year ago when I got the crappiest service through their "support service" and vowed never to by Sony again. People need to be able to make backups of their products if they need to. Its not our fault "some" people decide to abuse this. Bastards

OMG REMOTE ROOT HOLE IN FIRESUX (again) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739542)

500 Internal Server Error

An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.


Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739633)

503 Server Not Available

it's /.'s servers....

Say no? (4, Insightful)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739548)

Why not just say no? you can't sue a guy for making a crowbar which broke into your house, so why sue a guy making a program which someone used to break (some may say unfair) DRM bullshit?

Re:Say no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739587)

Why not just say no?

If you'd RTFA, he addressed why he's not just saying no...

Re:Say no? (5, Interesting)

Kwirl (877607) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739591)

The main reason for a lawsuit in a case like this is to attack the defendents perseverance. While the courts will ultimately uphold him in the long run, in the short term he has a lengthy and very expensive court battle in front of him. Even with recovery of costs at the end of a trial, it will severely damage his means in the short time. Unless he has a healthy savings account, the big guys are going to wear him down financially throughout the case, hoping he will give up or surrender without a fight.

I for one hope this guy gets some backing to put up a fight, and while we are at it, lets throw him some punitive damages from a corporation attempting to bully a guy using quasi-legal methodology.

Re:Say no? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739693)

If the person making the crowbar sold it as a "Home Break-in Stick", you might just be able to sue him after your home got broken into.

Say no, goto jail (5, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739699)

Its pretty simple. Its illegal to create ( and distribute ) code that can be used to break DRM. However, its not illegal to build a crowbar.

Is this morally right? No, of course not. But its how the laws that the media bought are written.

Sometimes its easier to comply then go to jail or be sued into oblivion. You may be against it morally, but you still have a family to feed and have to cave in to 'the man'.

Re:Say no? (0)

AnonymousJackass (849899) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739726)

I get your point, but there's a big difference between crowbars and dvd decrypter software. A crowbar has many perfectly innocent uses. How many innocent uses are there for decrypter software?

Re:Say no? (3, Insightful)

Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739771)

Making backups of your DVDs when you go on a road trip (kids can watch the movies rather than whine at you) so you can keep the originals safe at home so they won't get lost, damaged, stolen or scratched.

Re:Say no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739774)

Besides making backup copies of the DVD you bought, you mean?

It's just the law of the land, that's all. (4, Informative)

missing000 (602285) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739782)

107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use38

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include --

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

It's still available... (3, Informative)

bc90021 (43730) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739569) anyone whose country doesn't have DMCA laws. Check [] , and do a search for it. They ask you where you live.

Release on Freenet (4, Insightful)

James_Duncan8181 (588316) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739571)

I will never understand why the authors of software like this that is almost guarenteed to attract legal threats do not initally release on Freenet. For those converned about the slow speed, I will point out that only the inital seeding needs to be done this way, and once the code is out on the net all is normal. But risking a few grand in legal fees for no reason? This is what Freenet is designed for.

Re:Release on Freenet - not the same (4, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739706)

will never understand why the authors of software ... do not initally release on Freenet.

Because just providing the software to the world is not their only -- or maybe even primary -- intent. Freenet denys a lot of the ego satisfaction you otherwise get from being recognized on your own web-site with your own page counters.

And besides, they'd have to actually write help files since there wouldn't be a website and e-mail link for questions, problems, and enhancement requests.

Now is the time for someone to put it on Freenet -- or Usenet.

Off-topic, sig (0, Offtopic)

RM6f9 (825298) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739755)

I love it!

Re:Release on Freenet (1)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739813)

Once something is on the internet it never leaves. The more you agitate the more deeply and known it goes.

Shame to see this tool go (2, Insightful)

Stop Error (823742) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739575)

I hope someone out of the reach of the **AA's can continue the work on this project. It would be a shame to see such a useful tool die because is scares some suits.

From the author of DVD Decrypter (5, Informative)

nganju (821034) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739579)

" Hello world,

I"ve got some good news and some bad news.Let's start with the good.... (tumble weed passes by)Ok, and now onto the badVD Decrypter is the last version you"ll ever see.We hoped this day would never come, but it has, and I can promise you, nobody is more gutted about it than I am.

What started as a bit of fun, putting a GUI around some existing code, turned into something that I can only describe as 'part of me' - yes, I know that's sad ;-) As I"ve recently been made aware (by a letter, hand delivered to my door, last Tuesday), due to some law that was changed back in October 2003, circumventing copy protection isn"t allowed.

Ok so it has taken a while (almost 2 years), but eventually "a certain company" has decided they don"t like what I"m doing (circumventing their protection) and have come at me like a pack of wolves. I"ve no choice but to cease everything to do with DVD Decrypter.I realise this is going to be one of those "that sucks - fight them!" kinda things, but at the end of the day, it"s my life and I"m not about to throw it all away (before it has even really started) attempting to fight a battle I can"t possibly win.

If 321 Studios can"t do it with millions, what chance do I have with £50?! As I"m sure most of you have already noticed, the site has been down for a few days. That surprised me as much as the next person (slight breakdown in communication), or I would have issued this statement on it directly.

So anyway, from this point forward, I"m no longer permitted to provide any sort of assistance with anything that helps people infringe the rights of "a certain company".That means, no more emails, no more forum posts, no PM"s, no nothing! END OF STORY.The domain name will be transferred over to the company by the end of the week (9th June, according to the undertakings I have to sign) so don"t email it thinking "Oh, I"ll just ask LIGHTNING UK! for support on this". You"ll not be getting the intended recipient and could be landing yourself in sh1t!

With being the last version, it makes sense for everyone to disable the "check for new versions" feature, as obviously there won"t be any. Of course what I really mean is that you should all stop using the program out of respect for the company's rights.

Anyone hosting DVD Decrypter is advised to cease doing so immediately. I"ve the feeling they won"t stop with just me. I"m having to contact anyone I know of that is (at the very least, the "mirror" sites), and tell them to stop. Copies of those emails must also be sent to the solicitors so they can check I"m doing everything I"m supposed to. If I don't, I die.

It is of course down to the owners of those sites to react how they want to. It"s not my job to force you to do anything you don"t want to, I"m just giving you some friendly advice. Maybe it"s just me, but I see this as a bit of an "end of an era". I realise there are other tools, but there"s no telling how much longer they"ll last, and not only that, mine was the oldest! I"ve met loads of great people over the years and I want to take this opportunity to wish them every success for the future - yes DDBT peeps, that includes you lot! : "(I hope you"ve all enjoyed my contribution to the DVD scene and maybe I"ll see ya around sometime.

(Author of the once "Ultimate DVD Ripper", DVD Decrypter)"

Isn't this guy in the UK? (1)

TAZ6416 (584004) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739656)

what chance do I have with £50?

Assuming he's talking UK Pounds, we don't have the DMCA here, puzzled what happened here.


Re:Isn't this guy in the UK? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739713)

no, we don't have the DMCA. we have the UK implementation of the EUCD - European Union Copyright Directive. Under it you can break any copy protection mechanism you like. what you can't do is tell / show anyone else how to do it.

Re:From the author of DVD Decrypter (2, Funny)

payndz (589033) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739670)

Wait a sec...

I thought that it took ten years for stupid ideas from the States to reach the UK. Not seven. (The DMCA being signed in 1998.)

Re:From the author of DVD Decrypter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739716)

Someone needs to go Heemeyer on these dipshits. []

Hey dudeeo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739922)

If you surrender, thats lamo. You are in the UK, we don't fail over to some Jap companies orders, especially when they are backed up with a bullshit US law.

Seed the source, develop in your spare time, anything but let those fuckers get away it.

If you give up now you'll regret it forver. Play the dirty game back, and have fun! Just stay underground.


Source Code? Make it universal (3, Interesting)

Awperator (783768) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739580)

Probably not going to happen, but I hope that somehow, the source code can be leaked out, and made open source. If so, it would be very hard for big companies to go after it and shut it down. DVD Decrypter does have it's uses. Backups. yes, I know that everyone and their mom uses this excuse to justify things that might potentially be used for piracy, but come on? Ever made a copy of a CD because you didnt want the original to get scratched in that dodgy car stereo system? Also, how else are you going to protect your LOTR Extended edition from the grubby hands of friends that want to borrow it?

Re:Source Code? Make it universal (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739804)

One word: Freenet.

in related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739581)

a man was asked to had camera to security personel for taking photos where it was clearly posted he couldn't take them.

But, original the DVD fella, he'll be hero on Slashdot in the next few days. Go figure...

Re:in related news... (1)

jamsessionjay (802511) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739779)

wtf? Your argument is just a straw man to take away from the real point here. The guy created software for the purpose of backing up dvd's, a perfectly legal thing to do.
And you compare this to possible security breaches from people who might be cassing a potential target? You come one step close to calling the man a terrorist because he wasn't doing exactly what was best for all the businesses out there.
Oh no! Sony (or who-ever) might lose money from people losing their original dvd's! GOD HELP US ALL!

If Only... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739582)

He open sourced it, that would've never happened.

On the other hand he would've got into deeper trouble if he did.

I hope he thought (2, Insightful)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739586)

to distribute it somewhere safe before this happened. Preferrably on something like freenet where it's not very easy to stop it. Information wants to be free and all...

Re:I hope he thought (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739647)

afterdawn has it, you can get it and post it onto freenet yourself if you run freenet.

Re:I hope he thought (2, Insightful)

TheDawgLives (546565) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739837)

I wonder if it would have been as easy to shut him down if he had open sourced his code instead of just making it freeware...
Someone in China could always continue development if he had access to the source.

Ob. Simpsons... (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739589)

Ha ha...

at sony, for spending untold on a new encryption scheme and having that guy render it useless in 72 house... oh boy.

Re:Ob. Simpsons... (2, Interesting)

anonobomber (889925) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739648)

Does anybody know what cd's carry this protection scheme that he supposedly cracked?

Did Sony post the story? (1)

srs232 (201787) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739593)

One can wonder if Sony posted the story so all links to the page would get slashdotted.....

A stupid question (4, Interesting)

GalfWender (889552) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739597)

This is probably a very stupid question, but why can't the offending code which supposedly "broke their new copyright protection" just be removed?

we should know company soon.... (1)

gambit3 (463693) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739599)

.. on the letter the author posted, he states that the domain should be transferred to a "certain company" by June 9th... we'll see...

This sucks, btw..

Re:we should know company soon.... (1)

the-dark-kangaroo (848289) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739679)

Good old whois....

What about the author's intellectual property? (3, Interesting)

yeremein (678037) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739601)

What claim does Sony (or whoever) have on the DVD Decrypter source code? I can understand forcing him to take it offline--an unfortunate yet very real aspect of the DMCA's anti-free-speech provisions--but what right do they have to make him give it up? Might makes right, I guess.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (2, Insightful)

abulafia (7826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739691)

They don't have a claim to the code. They do, however, have the right to sue. That right can be leveraged to coerce the author into handing over rights to the code and signing all manner of "voluntary" agreements.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (1)

Dare nMc (468959) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739749)

> What claim does Sony (or whoever) have on the DVD Decrypter source code?

Same claim as msft has for the original Internet Explorer code...

Sounds like Sony (or whoever) made a agreement with the author to take over controll of the code, and the author agreed, sounds like they clearly have the legal right to do with it as they want.

now their choosen method of getting controll of that code was dubious, in my opinion, but their is no dount in my mind they have 100% rights to that code now.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (4, Insightful)

dougmc (70836) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739761)

What claim does Sony (or whoever) have on the DVD Decrypter source code?
None. Same goes for the domain in question.

But as you suggested, might makes right. Or, more accurately, money makes right.

I'd like to see the author fight it, but the risks for him are far greater than the possible benefits, so it make sense for him to simply give them what they want. Overall, the world will have lost, but he'll personally come out better for having just caved. It's not ideal, but it's the way things are. Fighting this would cost money.

The ACLU or EFF probably would like to help him, but they only have limited funds to work with as well, so they're going to pick their battles carefully and pick the fights that they have the best chances of winning and which will provide the most overall benefits to their causes.

Also note that the announcement said nothing of the DMCA -- he only mentioned a C&D (cease and desist) letter. The DMCA may be involved, but he hasn't mentioned it that I'm aware of. But judging from what he said, he's talked to them a lot more than just having read a C&D that they sent him.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (4, Insightful)

GOD_ALMIGHTY (17678) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739795)

What claim does Sony (or whoever) have on the DVD Decrypter source code?
Terms of extortion. They don't have any rights, in fact, if you read the author's post he states that he's also got to contact anyone who was mirroring the site and ask them to stop, then turn over a copy of that request to Sony (or whomever).

This is what their lawyers came at him with if he wants the gun pointed somewhere besides his temple. I have no clue what license DVD Decrypter was under, but this is why the Free Software Foundation encourages authors who license code under the GPL to turn the copyright over to the Foundation. The FSF has more than $75 (approx conversion), to fight things like this.

If you're going to write cool stuff that might get a legal posse out to lynch you (legally), you should consider a strategy like the one the FSF offers to protect your personal assets. It is still possible to stick it to the man, but you better act smarter than the man.

IANAL, yet.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (2, Insightful)

Experiment 626 (698257) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739822)

It would appear that the company more or less approached him and said. "We get to hijack your domain, steal all your source code, you stop all work on the project, tell your mirrors to do the same, and avoid referring to our company by name. You can either agree to this extortion, or fight it out in court where we have millions to pay a legal staff and you have jack." Okay, they probably spun it with language a bit more favorable to their firm, but that would be the gist of it.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739935)

What claim does Sony (or whoever) have on the DVD Decrypter source code?

I don't see anything about a court order here. I suspect he received a Cease & Desist letter saying "hand everything over or we'll sic a 100-strong pack of lawyers on you, sue you for millions and get you in jail you lowdown little shitbag".

Most people will cave on the spot.

Re:What about the author's intellectual property? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739946)

Simple: "you give us copyright or we sue you". It's all legal (if not moral).

Offshore website for hosting (4, Interesting)

Ath (643782) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739607)

How many people do you think would pay a subscription fee to an offshore site that hosted such utilities? The issue is one of reimbursement to the software authors (for those who want it).

There are plenty of countries that have no DMCA-type laws for such tools. If this were a just rule, the WTO would be suing the shit out of each media company that even put out region encoded DVDs, which clearly are intended as a restraint of free trade.

Re:Offshore website for hosting (0)

JVert (578547) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739734)

Maybe if the offending code was hosted offshore and never imported. You send the data to a hosted provider where the data is modified in the country where the proccess is illegal. Then the *clean* data is shipped back. Might be functional for DVD backup because I assume most of the encryption is a fraction of the video size.

Last I reacall FBI has no problem raiding a country if they dont like the data stored on their servers. Which isn't all the FBI's fault, they would certanly have asked permission first. But maybe this is close enough to legal for the hosted country to say, "stay out".

Re:Offshore website for hosting (1)

Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739824)

FBI can't raid other countries. Our authorities invading a sovereign country would cause a war.

And after the public outcry, expense and casualties (over 1000 dead, many maimed and otherwise injured) of Iraq, I don't think we are going to go to war to defend movie studios.

I sure hope we aren't THAT far gone.

And the moral of this story is... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739608)

...don't try and be teh big 1337Z0r with 'look at me! I can hack your shit'.

Instead make your code Open Source; share it, publish it immediately, don't publish just working binaries in the US on an American host. If you are from the US get someone else to publish it anonymously in a different country. Share. Share. Share. Why do people keep making the same mistake over and over and over ?

Otherwise you are just trying to say I'm cool look what I can do. If you genuinely believe DRM is wrong then share your code and publishly anonymously.


Wow, what coincidence. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739611)

Just a few days ago, I was trying to make a backup copy of "Before Sunset" (yes, bite me) and DVD Shrink would fail on me giving something like "Wrong access method for this track.". I knew it must be a new trick by the ***** at these studios. I was thinking of returning it, when I came across DVDDecryptor. I tried it and with only 3 read errors, I made a backup copy sucessfully.

I have now decided to not buy DVDs from these ***** studiosa anymore.

What good does this do? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739615)

The developer has been forced to hand over all source code

To which he replied simply, "I've posted it all to Usenet... you can get it off of there!" Seriously, cat's out of the bag, and even confiscating the developer's PC isn't going to make all those other copies go away.

Google Cache (5, Informative)

Spad (470073) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739628)

Thank You Google Cache []

For now at least, that's the list of mirrors for the software - most still seem to be hosting it.

Rant (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739631)

Thank goodness we live in a country where criminals like this can be easily dealt with by men of that most esteemed profession: lawyers. Can you imagine a world where consumers could backup their IP products so as to prevent repurchasing them in case they were lost/damaged? Or a world where consumers can use IP products on non-sanctioned deviced? And just thinking about a world where consumers could share things without paying? Thankfully we've effectively silenced the abomination that is the "Public Domain" (as if consumers could ever create quality IP worth preserving). But I digress...

Hopefully this criminal will get what's coming to him: full forfeiture of all property and property owning rights, plus several years in an east Asian manufacturing compound for good measure.

Re:Rant (1)

jeffasselin (566598) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739790)

Damn, where's the +1 sarcasm moderation when you need it.

OpenSource anybody? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739632)

A great advancement would be if the guy GPLed his code and released it so it would piss whoever is sueing him off.

How ironic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739635)

That sony is suing someone over making something that enables people to copy copyrighted materials.

Re:How ironic... (1)

timmy_otoole (516019) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739840)

I think the word is hypocritical.

Arr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739645)

Arr matey, one thing about bein' a pirate, folks don't take too kindly to your activities, shiver me timbers.

That's one reason we keep to sea, floating around in these ships, arr, it makes it harder to track us down.

Arr, one thing we don't do, is announce to the world our exact whereabouts so any landlubber can serve us with a cease-and-desist or a subpoena, ta say nothin o' a belly full of grapeshot.

Just a word of advice, matey. I'm not even going to go into the advantages of keeping detailed treasure maps, arr.

Might as well make ripping audio CDs illegal!!! (2, Informative)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739651)

Seriouslt, FUCK THEM!!! I was looking forward to getting one of those DVD players with a harddrive. I want to rip all my DVDs into DivX format so that I can just play them from the unit. For me, the application of ripping DVDs to another video format is the same as ripping audio to portable MP3 format.

Fuckers! I will rip all the god damn DVDs I want. I will crack the encryption and encode the files. Go for it, jail me! Next time I get a job, they will laugh off my jailtime because I broke the DMCA law.

Re:Might as well make ripping audio CDs illegal!!! (1)

zxnos (813588) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739874)

i think you inadvertantly just made the best point against DRM. i currently have my entire music collection of 3 seperate devices: home computer, office computer and mp3 player.

i should be able to have my entire movie collection stored on a couple devices as well. that way if i have multiple tv's or residences i can watch a movie that i purchased, in different locations. my bedroom, tv room, beach house, etc. (not that i have a beach house, but someday...)

The Rush is on (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739652)

And the rush to the mirror sites is on.

I mean, it's got to be good, doesn't it, if a big corporation has gone to the trouble to take it down.

Maybe it could find a new home on Sourceforge -- if the code is available.

the-dark-kangaroo is Big Media's tool (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739654)

Submitter wrote:
it is rumoured that he broke their new copyright protection
No, it is rumored that he broke their copy protection. The only way he could have broke their copyright protection, is if he hired lobbyists, or bribed congresscritters to repeal copyright law, or bombed a federal courthouse.

It's "copy protection" not "copyright protection." Why are you helping them to frame the issue and taint the language?

Slashdot wrote:

Slow Down Cowboy!

Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 14 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.

Ok, I'll wait until 12 minutes ago.

vote with wallet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739655)

I'm in the market for an HDTV. Now it won't be a Sony. I will not buy another Sony product of any kind. I can vote with my wallet.

Re:vote with wallet (1)

nuggetboy (661501) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739736)

I'm in the market for an HDTV. Now it won't be a Sony. I will not buy another Sony product of any kind. I can vote with my wallet.

Eh, well, I'd disagree there. I like their TVs too much. I'd go ahead and buy the idiotbox, but refrain from purchasing (emphasis on purchasing) any DVDs or CDs to play in the obligatory DVD player. Just my $0.02.

Hypocritical. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739657)

But just recently at E3, Sony was talking about the Playstation 3 being able to rip DVDs [] to the harddrive to improve the quality.

(If anyone can find a better link or direct quote to what the Sony drone actually said, please post).

As a result of their heavy-handed actions against DVDDecrypter (which I had no desire to obtain until I read this article and I now have copies of from two different sources), Sony should expect to be sued into oblivion if they have ANY sort of ripping ability in the Playstation 3. Hell, it makes ME want to sue them.

Refresher course in cryto theory (5, Informative)

foo23 (722487) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739661)

Yes, I made nearly the same post before, but it remains true:

Cory Doctorow explained it very nicely (in his talk to the Microsoft Research group to be found here [] ):

Cryptography - secret writing - is the practice of keeping secrets. It involves three parties: a sender, a receiver and an attacker [...]. We usually call these people Alice, Bob and Carol. [A few explanations of cipher, ciphertext and key] In DRM, the attacker is *also the recipient*. It's not Alice and Bob and Carol, it's just Alice and Bob. So Alice has to provide Bob - the attacker - with the key, the cipher and the ciphertext. Hilarity ensues.

DRM systems are usually broken in minutes, sometimes days. Rarely, months. It's not because the people who think them up are stupid. It's not because the people who break them are smart. It's not because there's a flaw in the algorithms. At the end of the day, all DRM systems share a common vulnerability: they provide their attackers with ciphertext, the cipher and the key. At this point, the secret isn't a secret anymore.

When will they ever understand?

Re:Refresher course in cryto theory (4, Insightful)

ssj_195 (827847) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739839)

When will they ever understand?
They understand perfectly. They also understand that, thanks to bullshit laws like the DMCA, they can threaten to sue the (usually penniless) authors of the "cracks" and they will instantly cave, as has happened here. If, for whatever bizarre reason, the "offender" did not cave, they understand that they could financially drag the guy over the coals and ruin his life, making an effective example for anyone else who has any bright ideas about breaking their DRM schemes.

They understand perfectly that technical solutions on their own aren't always tenable; they also understand that technical solution + threat of lawsuit == "teh win".

Re:Refresher course in cryto theory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739859)

True dat, when will they give up? Fuck it, if the movie or song can play on your TV or stereo, it is copyable. I'll rent the damn thing from Blockbuster, pop it in my player, and then use my camcorder to record it off of my TV screen. Then they will ban camcorders. After that, I'll plug my 'sound out' wire into my 'line in' jack on the sound card to steal the newest Britney Song, and they'll ban sound cards too. And wires.

How long until they are putting the brains of pirates in jars? **AA companies could care less if they ruin your whole life for a minor crime. I swear, if I had mafia connections, a lot of people would be dead. Spammers, **AA, lawyers who work for them, corporations that rape their customers, and the politicians who pass these fubar laws. ALL DEAD.

Re:Refresher course in cryto theory (4, Insightful)

uberdave (526529) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739868)

Don't you think they know this already? The various media concerns are trying to get the TV/DVD player/whatever to be Bob, while casting the consumer in the role of Carol. That's what all the fuss is about.

way to go Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739747)

now instead of renting movies, and copying them for later PERSONAL use. You are going to force people to just download the movie and cut out the middle men. Since most net based rental companies pay a portion of their income to the movie studios guess who will be hit...

Software developers should relocate to Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739753)

Over there, the Russian government actually believe that software developers, hackers, et al are just harmless folks who wouldn't hurt a fly.

"DMCA" is a dirty word in the Kremlin.

I think code should be protected like free speech (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739763)

I have not RFA since the site is Slashdotted right now. However, I think there is legal precedent for code being a protected form of free speech. See DJB [] 's page on the subject where he was able to, to some extent, override the ITAR export regulation arguing that code is speech.

I am opposed to people pirating media and making it available on the internet. However, I am more opposed to court decisions allowing people to make fair use of their copyrighted material. The software industry has survived piracy for decades; the media industry will survive also as long as people realize that pirating music and movies is wrong (which is why I flame idiots on Slashdot who think they have a God-given right to free movies and music).

Check For Updates Feature Used to Identify Users? (4, Insightful)

Evil W1zard (832703) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739767)

I am guessing that the Auto Check for New Updates feature is done via an HTTP Get from the home user's box so my question is that since the site is going to be under control of company X now can and will they use that feature to identify home users? Also a possibility is putting a bogus update on the web site so home users download a broken "new" version that won't work anymore... Not to be all conspiracy theory, but I think those situations are plausible. I for one will be turning off that check for updates feature promptly just in case...

Re:Check For Updates Feature Used to Identify User (2, Informative)

Zed2K (313037) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739894)

Except that it is not illegal to have this software installed. Even if the author is forced to remove the software it is still innocent until proven guilty. They can't force people to uninstall software from their own computers.

So what does this mean for other such tools? (3, Informative)

rindeee (530084) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739777)

Personally, I use HandBrake (the best ripper/transcoder in my opinion -- works on OS X and *nix, can rip high-def, transcodes to H.264 among others, Open Source). Why did they target just this one utility? It seems that they do this every so often; take out a single app among dozens. Thoughts?

Sounds fishy - what exactly has happened here? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739781)

Both the summary and TFA are quite mysterious about exactly what is going on. Was he served with a cease and desist letter? Or a DMCA takedown order? Or a court order of some kind? Or something else? Those are basic, very important questions, and they're completely unanswered. He only says that he was attacked as if by a pack of wolves.

If it was a cease-and-desist: then it has no actual legal force (it's an unsupported demand from the writer, and the only immediate consequence of telling them to screw themselves is that they may then attempt to do something real instead), and if he didn't consult a lawyer before complying, I have no sympathy. And if he did consult a lawyer, I'd still like to know a lot more about what threat they made that made compliance appear advisable.

If it was a DMCA takedown notice: that makes no sense because such a notice would only require him to take down his site - not "hand over" the domain registration or source code. I'm not sure what "handing over" the source code is even supposed to mean; did they demand a copy of it? Or that he stop distributing it? Or what?

If it was a court order: then it is or ought to be in the public record. I want a case number, and the name of the court and the judge that issued the order.

If it was something else: WHAT?

Oh well... (1)

ChrisF79 (829953) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739784)

For every one of these programs that gets shut down, 100 more are in the works for every OS out there. Good luck, feds.

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739786)

Ohhh That DVD Decrypter author got served!

Just release the source in a non-DMCA country? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739826)

Why not just do that? :-/

Linux impact (1)

edfardos (863920) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739831)

DVD Decrypter is the only backup solution for Linux (runs under Wine quite nicely w/ ide-scsi support) for Sony DVD's.

Sony writes bad sectors and addresses sectors beyond the edge of the media in their form of "ARCCOS" copy protection. DVD Decrypter simply inserts dummy sectors when appropriate.

libdvdread cannot backup these discs, I've been in contact w/ the authors, but there is still no solution.

I'm done giving Sony money until I can backup the media I own.

my responsabillity as a consumer (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12739834)

im just so sick of these greedy and already way too powerful corporations always get their way over the consumer.. im SO sick of it I will from now on see it as my responsabillity to pirate as much damned music and video as I can and help others do the same in order to try and level the playingfield a bit.

I get that people want to protect their property, I have no problem with that.. its the way its being done that I have a problem with. I will no longer accept being forced to allow them to openly commit fraud against me and having to support them doing it as well unless I want to be labelled as a criminal!

Takedown insurance? (1)

Phantasmo (586700) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739889)

Too bad the source isn't available - we could have continued development!
What we need is a web server running as a Tor hidden service that allows hackers to submit the source code of controversial proprietary software. Then if the project is taken down, the server immediately starts offering up the source.

Last Pocket of Resistance (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12739901)

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security office of Cybersecurity is busily taking down all the actual attackers who also figure out how to crack the scheme in 72 hours, right? Once DVD Decrypter is taken care of, we'll finally be free of the scourge of owners accessing their own DVD data.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account