A response to the MPAA's DVD FAQ

The MPAA's DVD Frequently Asked Questions

Note: This response is free for redistribution as long as it contains this statement and any changes made to it are noted by the person making the changes.

Question One: What is the MPAA and who are the members?
The answer to this question is, as far as I know, honest.

Question Two: What is the DVD-CCA?
Not-for-profit, sounds nice eh? However, the DVD CCA exist to help generate profit for the members of the MPAA, they aren't out to cure cancer or anything like that. The organization itself doesn't make a profit, but its members do. It is a big part of the entertainment trust (an illegal organization of entertainment plutocrats).

Question Three: What is the DVD Content Scramble System (CSS) and how does it work?

CSS is the copy protection system adopted by the motion picture industry and consumer electronics manufacturers to provide security to copyrighted content of DVDs and to prevent unauthorized copying of that content. CSS is akin to the lock on your house.

Um, no. The metaphor they use, "the lock on your house," is flawed. You see, the CSS system is much more like if you get a key to your place of work that says, "Do not duplicate" on it. You can make as many keys to open the door to your house as you want, the reason why you can't do so to your place of work is that you don't own the office where you work. As the MPAA admits in a later question, CSS does nothing to prevent copying, it only prevents access to content. So, basically it is only like a key to your house if the person who sells you the house keeps the keys, forbids you from making your own keys, and will let you through the front door to use your house only when he wants to and under his conditions. I wouldn't buy a house under those conditions, would you? If you bought a book, would you allow someone to prevent you from reading it when and where you wanted? Why should movies be different?

The only possible way it can be different is if the MPAA considers that it still owns the disk you've purchased. In other words, instead of retaining the right to prevent you from republishing their disks, copyright, they retain the right to prevent you from viewing the disk unless you pay for one of their licensed players. This is a big shift in intellectual property laws.

Question Four: What is DeCSS, and how does it work?

A computer that has the DeCSS utility can use it to break the CSS code on DVDs making it possible for motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied onto a computer's hard-drive for further distribution over the Internet or otherwise, in perfect, digital format. DeCSS is akin to a tool that breaks the lock on your house.

DVD files are too large to send over current Internet pipes, re-recordable DVD-ROMs are more expensive than prerecorded DVD movies. However, this isn't important (it merely points out that DeCSS is an inefficient tool for piracy). You don't need to break CSS in order to make a copy of a DVD that will run in a player that has a way to play back CSS encrypted content. Breaking CSS is only useful for viewing DVDs, not copying them.

Question Five: What is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and how does it apply to DVDs?

The Act strengthens the protection of copyrighted materials in digital formats, such as motion pictures on DVDs, by outlawing the manufacture, importation or distribution of devices, programs or services that circumvent technical protection measures that restrict access to or prevent infringement [copying] of copyrighted works. Thus, it prohibits anyone from distributing a software utility designed to circumvent the CSS technology used to protect DVD software.

The key part of this quote are the words "circumvent technical protection measures that restrict access to or prevent infringement [copying] of copyrighted works." I am not a lawyer, so I don't know if this is really true about the DMCA. However, I do know that they were very careful to include the phrase, "restrict access to" in their little explanation about the DMCA. Now, what does restricting access have to do with restricting copy? Putting aside the fact that you have the right to archive disks you've purchased (i.e. make copies as long as you don't republish, though they'd like you to think that wasn't true) why did they feel it necessary to include the words "restrict access" in here? I'll tell you why, it is because the CSS battle isn't about restricting copy but about restricting access. You don't own the disk, you own the right to use the disk under conditions dictated by the copyright holder. Again, this is a new way to view intellectual property. Copyright is not supposed to be a way to retain ownership of content after it has been purchased, it is supposed to prevent you from making copies of the thing you've purchased and then selling them or giving them away. The MPAA wants to change that.

Question Six: Why is the motion picture industry opposed to distribution of the DeCSS software?

The motion picture studios' position on copyright protection is not a new one. Copyright protection is a principle established in the United States Constitution and has long been recognized as essential to promote the creation of all forms of new books, magazines, newspapers, computer programs, motion pictures, television programs and other works from illegal use and copying.
In order to protect these rights in the least intrusive manner, motion picture studios have used copy protection methods on their videocassettes such as Macrovision. Similarly, for example, satellite television services use encrypted signals to prevent their signals from being received by non-subscribers. The motion picture industry similarly always has been opposed to, and has pursued those who distribute, devices that break copy protection including illegal "black boxes" to defeat Macrovision and illegal "smart cards" that allow illegal access to satellite television.

Once again, the MPAA tries to slide two things together that are separate: restriction of access and restriction of copy. The smart cards mentioned allow access to satellite broadcasts that are supposed to have restricted access. When you get cable or a blocked satellite channel, you aren't buying anything... you are renting. We expect the people who we are renting from to maintain access restrictions over the thing we are renting. Just as renting a hotel room does not give you the right, in perpetuity, to use that room, so renting cable or satellite programming does not give you the right to view that programming when your contract runs out.

However, when you buy a house it is your house, you have the right to use your property. When you buy a DVD the only right you do not possess is the right to republish it. That is what copyright is. It is possible that the draconian provisions of the DMCA may have really changed what copyright is, but if so it is important that people are aware of what the MPAA is trying to do. That great video collection you are building? You don't own it, when the MPAA comes out with DVD-2 and your old DVD player gives out, it will be illegal for you to view your old disks if the MPAA has its way. We aren't just talking planned obsolescence here, we are talking forced obsolescence.

Well, that's enough on this for today, I'll work on it some more as soon as I get time.