Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 49840	2004-10-02 11:51:00	DVD plug in for MP10 available here	Alan Cottrell (624)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
277595	2004-10-03 00:02:00	uh...How am i stargazing?,the codec with is a commercial product is required to play back DVD's,in the case of someone making a program to do it they have either supplied the codec without regard to the lisence,or reveresed enginerred the process in order to enable playback. Hell,every bit of legal jargon pasted in here says im right,Its a commercial product,Being distributed freely. And how could it not apply here?,what screaming leap of logis is this?, it costs money in America so it must be free in NZ?,does that apply to all software/code/patents/copyrights?....or just those you think to justify the destributation of?	metla (154)
277596	2004-10-03 01:03:00	Anyone who doubts whether this is legal or not should do this: 1) Download dvdpack.msi from the link posted 2) Open the file with Winrar 3) Extract the files claud.ax and clvsd.ax 4) Right click on either of the files, select properties and click on the version tab. 5) Report back here with the Company and Copyright info that is listed there please.	b1naryb0y (3)
277597	2004-10-03 01:42:00	As far as I'm concerned, I paid $240 for my Dual Layer DVD writer which came bundled with PowerDVD software. Somewhere in that $240 some royalties should have been paid to play whatever DVDs I want with whatever software I want. Paying more money to watch your bought DVD with your bought DVD drive is ridiculous. What a SCAM. If there were any royalties that needed to be paid they should be factored into the DVD cost, or the DVD Rom/Writer cost. Regardless of the software used it's the same process decoding the DVD and seeing I'm not using PowerDVD I should be able to transfer the licence to use VLC if I want to. At the end of the day I don't think anyone cares. How the heck are they going to find out you play all your DVDs with VLC instead of some other software which has a licence?	alphazulusixeightniner (185)
277598	2004-10-03 04:51:00	In that case just install the bundlled dvdplayer,which will enable dvd playback on any media player,removing the need to download and install some hacked code from some linux graveyard.	metla (154)
277599	2004-10-03 05:02:00	> As far as I'm concerned, I paid $240 for my Dual > Layer DVD writer which came bundled with PowerDVD > software. Somewhere in that $240 some royalties > should have been paid to play whatever DVDs I > want with whatever software I want. > > ECT > At the end of the day I don't think anyone cares. How > the heck are they going to find out you play all your > DVDs with VLC instead of some other software which > has a licence? I did ask the question, if you have brought and paid once do you have to pay again to use"VLC" but it was Ignored/berried in the hack pox box argument. I still fell it is an important question. Watch which computer shop you use for repair. I had one register every piece of software on my machine for me, including my legally activated unregisered xp and xp ofiice with publisher I do not want Microscam with my details they were only supposed to resolve a warranty issue. D. D.	drb1 (4492)
277600	2004-10-03 05:09:00	Hi Metla, Once again your incorrect, The every piece of legal jargon you are referring to is The Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998 this piece of legislation was signed into existence by bill Clinton the then President of the USA. Contrary to what many (including you by the sound of it) believe, the USA does not govern the world nor does their legislation necessarily apply to other countries laws. To put an end to this argument and to prove why the whole issue of this type of codec adding (not hacking or reengineering) is a grey area, please read the following copy taken out of none other than MPEG LA's own patent license. The MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License is designed to align with the real-world flow of MPEG-4 commerce. Reasonable royalties are apportioned throughout the MPEG-4 value chain. In addition to different licensing options, the License employs reasonable annual limitations to provide more cost predictability, threshold levels below which certain royalties will not be charged in order to encourage early-stage adopters and minimize the impact on lower volume users, and some licensing options with royalty choices that require no royalty reports. This can quite obviously be construed as, If you are a low volume user and non commercial there will be no charge as the royalty due is not worth the cost of collection. It can of course be construed to mean a lot of other things hence (grey area) and the videolan disclaimer (if your worried ask your lawyer) The final indication would surely be, MPEG LA are fully aware of the existence of Videolan and DVDpack they are also aware that millions of individual users world wide use these products. If they were worried about any breach of copyright or patent, they would have taken the route of the RIAA and made these breaches plain to the public at large. Regards AC	Alan Cottrell (624)
277601	2004-10-03 05:12:00	So someone or company owns something and charges for it,and someone else takes pieces of it and destributes it for free and you would call it legal? Its a lisencing system,like i said before,You can't just ignore what doesn't suit. But like i also said,i don't care in the slightest,its obvious its not legal,but no skin off my nose.	metla (154)
277602	2004-10-03 05:20:00	Hello drb, The Codec's royalty payment would have been covered by Power DVD's software distributor. You only need the required Codec once on your PC, so yes you could use Videolan and Power DVD with no problems. as they would both share the same Codec. AC	Alan Cottrell (624)
277603	2004-10-03 05:35:00	Metla, China. recognises you Intulectual Copywright, and your Patent. However they believe the Implementer is the Innovator and Creator. Haveing financial rights to the product produced and no need to pay you any licence fees, unless they sell in your National Market. They are only App 1/3 of the world population. The US Corporation's wanted trade with China on their terms. What they are getting is more trade on China's term's,Microscam are among the loosers in that one. The U.S. Patent Office is not the Global Patent Office, although they behave like it. When it suits U.S. companies they will change the rules to suit the U.S. as All ways. The practice of "Renewing" Patents and Patenting "existing" ideas or processes is flawed and must be stopped, before your children have to pay a licence fee to Microscam so they can tie their shoe laces, before going to school. Because Microscam have patented the shoelace bow, over night. D.	drb1 (4492)
277604	2004-10-03 05:58:00	Metla, You missed the point, MPEG LA have the authorisation from the various MPEG codec writers to apply the necessary patents and collect royalties as they deem fit. They are the ones who are saying that Royalties will not necessarily be collected if you are a low volume user of the MPEG involved, So how do you glean from that information taken from their website, that the use of the MPEG codec is obviously illegal. AC	Alan Cottrell (624)
1 2 3 4 5 6