will this lawsuit effect topbucks at all - GoFuckYourself.com

Global Dialers · 05-30-2004, 11:49 PM

before the topbucks lovers start bashing me this isnt a hating thread i love the bling i make with topbucks especially their software programs (thats why im asking)

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/business/8725824.htm

Quote:

New injunction issued against maker of DVD-copying software

JIM SUHR

Associated Press

ST. LOUIS - A California company specializing in encryption technology has obtained the latest court order barring a Missouri company's sale of popular DVD-copying software.

Macrovision Corp. received the preliminary injunction in its patent-infringement lawsuit against 321 Studios Inc., already forbidden by federal judges in recent months from selling its DVD-cloning software.

Less than two weeks ago, 321 founder Robert Moore told a congressional panel the court rulings have put his company "on the brink of annihilation."

The injunction was issued May 11 by U.S. District Judge Richard Owen in New York but was not made public until Thursday by Macrovision, based in Santa Clara, Calif.

Macrovision, maker of various copyright-protection software products, alleges that 321's software violates its patents on anti-copying software.

Julia Bishop-Cross, a 321 spokeswoman, said that Chesterfield-based company would appeal.

"We're disappointed in the fact that the judge did not address any of the legal arguments we made," she said, calling the latest ruling "just more legal fighting we have to do."

Most Hollywood DVDs are protected by software flags that trigger the patented anti-copy methods within DVD players, Macrovision attorney Robert Becker said. When those flags are copied by questioned software, the patented methods are illegally triggered and performed, he said.

"Because copy protection is our core business, the conduct of those like 321 Studios that facilitate widespread copying is unacceptable," said Bill Krepick, Macrovision's chief executive.

Federal judges in New York and California earlier this year ordered 321 to stop marketing the DVD copying software - a victory for Hollywood studios, which contended that DVD-copying products violate the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. That law bars circumvention of anti-piracy measures used to protect DVDs and other technology.

Since those rulings, 321 has shipped retooled versions of its DVD-copying products, removing the software component required to descramble movies.

Among other things, Moore's company has accused Macrovision and Hollywood of joining forces in trying to stop the sale of 321's products, arguing that parts of Macrovision's lawsuit "are plainly cut and pasted" from a similar lawsuit filed in the New York federal court months earlier.

Moore, 321's chief executive, testified May 12 before a House panel in support of a measure that would amend the DCMA to let film buffs make personal copies of DVD movies and other digital content for limited purposes.

Sponsors described the proposal as a consumers' rights bill for digital media that would allow consumers to bypass encryption locks built into DVD movies by Hollywood to prevent copying. Such encryption schemes are increasingly common in music and movies.

Hollywood studios and the music industry said that would lead to more piracy and lost sales.

Moore told the Energy and Commerce subcommittee on consumer protection that 321 had expected to generate $100 million in sales until federal judges banned its software. He said his company is now "on the brink of annihilation."

Macrovision's technology has been used on more than 2.7 billion video DVDs, 250 million personal computer game compact discs and DVDs, and 275 million music CDs.

Paul Markham · 05-31-2004, 12:06 AM

So my take on this is they are complaining that they cannot sell there copyright busting program.

Maybe we should all run over to their site and download all the content and put it up for free. It's obvious they think everything should be for free, including their site.

Or is that not for free, only other peoples intelectual property?

Thing is films, music, pictures, books, etc. belong to someone and if you are selling something that allows someone to steal the property is a crime. You buy the rights to look at a movie, listen to music, publish a picture.

Not the rights to give it to a friend.

05-31-2004, 12:06 AM	#2
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	So my take on this is they are complaining that they cannot sell there copyright busting program. Maybe we should all run over to their site and download all the content and put it up for free. It's obvious they think everything should be for free, including their site. Or is that not for free, only other peoples intelectual property? Thing is films, music, pictures, books, etc. belong to someone and if you are selling something that allows someone to steal the property is a crime. You buy the rights to look at a movie, listen to music, publish a picture. Not the rights to give it to a friend. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70