5 ms·

There's always the analog loophole. If you can watch it on your screen, you can record it.

by schrodinger 10y ago

infinite8s 10y ago
If you discount the cost of your time to zero. Otherwise it's not even worth a minimum wage job.
- flukus 10y ago
  It only needs to be done by one person, not every viewer. And yes, the value of much of my time is effectively zero. The same is true for most people.
  - MBCook 10y ago
    That's why we have laws to apply negative externalities like very large jail sentences if you're caught distributing a file that you created by taping a movie off-screen.
    - flukus 10y ago
      Local solutions to global problems that don't even work locally. Those large jail sentences also place a lot of externalities on the rest of society.
      - MBCook 10y ago
        I agree. My comment was not meant as an endorsement, simply a statement I think that's how they've 'solved' that issue.
Silhouette 10y ago
Of course, but typically quality suffers significantly, so what you get isn't as good as the original and that in itself is a deterrent for a lot of people. Also, some modern watermarking techniques can survive conversions like this, so if anyone is making a habit of recording content from a service using watermarking and redistributing it on a scale that justifies taking serious action, it'll be pretty easy to prove who it was when the lawsuit comes up.
- flukus 10y ago
  > Also, some modern watermarking techniques can survive conversions like this, so if anyone is making a habit of recording content from a service using watermarking and redistributing it on a scale that justifies taking serious action, it'll be pretty easy to prove who it was when the lawsuit comes up. How many compromised netflix accounts do you think are floating around? At some point the bits have to actually go to a display device as well, which can always be tapped.
  - Silhouette 10y ago
    If a compromised account was used, presumably the server logs will show an unusual access pattern on that account, in particular involving the content that has leaked being accessed from an unusual location. And then presumably the person whose account was used will have to make a convincing case that they shouldn't be held responsible for access using their credentials anyway.
    - flukus 10y ago
      Ok, what if a machine is compromised (there are millions of zombie boxes out there)? Someone can gain access, do their stuff and then upload the result. Are they going to start suing grandmas with weak wifi passwords? That worked so well for the RIAA last time.
      - Silhouette 10y ago
        Then it'll be up to the person whose account was accessed to provide some evidence that something like this happened and that it wasn't their fault. That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it, just because there's some vaguely possible alternative that might have once happened somewhere maybe.

There's always the analog loophole. If you can watch it on your screen, you can record it.

infinite8s 10y ago

If you discount the cost of your time to zero. Otherwise it's not even worth a minimum wage job.

flukus 10y ago
It only needs to be done by one person, not every viewer. And yes, the value of much of my time is effectively zero. The same is true for most people.
- MBCook 10y ago
  That's why we have laws to apply negative externalities like very large jail sentences if you're caught distributing a file that you created by taping a movie off-screen.
  - flukus 10y ago
    Local solutions to global problems that don't even work locally. Those large jail sentences also place a lot of externalities on the rest of society.
    - MBCook 10y ago
      I agree. My comment was not meant as an endorsement, simply a statement I think that's how they've 'solved' that issue.

Silhouette 10y ago

Of course, but typically quality suffers significantly, so what you get isn't as good as the original and that in itself is a deterrent for a lot of people. Also, some modern watermarking techniques can survive conversions like this, so if anyone is making a habit of recording content from a service using watermarking and redistributing it on a scale that justifies taking serious action, it'll be pretty easy to prove who it was when the lawsuit comes up.

flukus 10y ago
> Also, some modern watermarking techniques can survive conversions like this, so if anyone is making a habit of recording content from a service using watermarking and redistributing it on a scale that justifies taking serious action, it'll be pretty easy to prove who it was when the lawsuit comes up. How many compromised netflix accounts do you think are floating around? At some point the bits have to actually go to a display device as well, which can always be tapped.
- Silhouette 10y ago
  If a compromised account was used, presumably the server logs will show an unusual access pattern on that account, in particular involving the content that has leaked being accessed from an unusual location. And then presumably the person whose account was used will have to make a convincing case that they shouldn't be held responsible for access using their credentials anyway.
  - flukus 10y ago
    Ok, what if a machine is compromised (there are millions of zombie boxes out there)? Someone can gain access, do their stuff and then upload the result. Are they going to start suing grandmas with weak wifi passwords? That worked so well for the RIAA last time.
    - Silhouette 10y ago
      Then it'll be up to the person whose account was accessed to provide some evidence that something like this happened and that it wasn't their fault. That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it, just because there's some vaguely possible alternative that might have once happened somewhere maybe.