Quandary? Should DVD Piracy be reported,its damaging the rental business, having to replace them,but to who?
597890
Dear Witch (who'd EVER say such a thing), you are 100% correct on the issue of immorality of copying THE DVDs. \n\n(For the benefit of mavsman from Korea and all like-minded): \nTHE TRUTH IS IT'S ILLEGAL TO COPY ANY PROPRIETARY WORK, EVEN FOR YOURSELF, AND CERTAINLY FOR FRIENDS (and who cares that you provide them free -- they're not yours to copy, let alone charge for.)\nI'm not impressed that you are a movie critic and film buff -- IF YOU WANT A FILM, DON'T STEAL IT, PAY FOR IT!!\n NOR IS IT YOUR CONCERN WHETHER THEY MAKE TONS OF MONEY ON A SMALL INVESTMENT -- IT'S THEIR PROPERTY, PERIOD,
1093145
Nothing wrong with your DVD burner.  None of them are able to copy professional DVDs with copy protection on them.  That what copy protection means - you can't copy it.  While there are some programs that get around copy protection, be warned that they are illegal and it is possible to be arrested just for owning the software, you don't even have to use it.  (I will let others debate whether thats fair or not - I'm just making sure you know what the current law is.)
659235
the makers of DVDxCopy are out of business because of the MPAA. \n\nThere are forums and sites for support but the company is gone so official support is nowhere to be found.
471131
This is most likely a copy protection issue.
1045252
I suppose it's five rentals.\nThey will ship you one disc at a time.
314934
I'm sad when it comes to movies. I buy off Amazon.com for dirty cheep. Or I'll get em at Blockbuster, rip em on my computer, then take em back. Actually, last month, my gf had to pay my cell phone bill because i bought Spike Lee's whole DVD collection on eBay.
987547
Contact them & tell them what happened. They should give you a new activation code.\n\nhttp://www.dvdxcopy.com/
317009
Clean Flicks purchases movies on tape, and then edits out all the sex, violence, and "bad" language before renting them out to customers. The rental chain is seeking a court declaration that its practices are perfectly legal - and not a violation of federal copyright law, as the directors reportedly believe.\n\nThe chain has emphasized its First Amendment rights. But the government is not a party to the case, as is generally required under the First Amendment; it is the directors, not the state, who the chain anticipates will try to stop its editing practices. Accordingly, the chain's best defense probably does not come directly from the First Amendment. Rather, it derives from the First-Amendment-inspired "fair use" exception to the copyright law, and similar exceptions to related laws under which the directors can sue.\n\nUnsurprisingly, The Directors' Guild of America believes that what Clean Flicks is doing is far from "fair use." Indeed, it has decried the suit as an effort "to legitimize the unauthorized editing and alteration of movies."\n\nWhich side is correct? Does Clean Flicks have the right to edit properly purchased movies as it sees fit, before renting them out? Or does a director have the right to ensure that a movie remains edited in the ways he or she has approved?\n\nPut another way, what Clean Flicks is doing may be anathema from an artistic point of view (I certainly believe that to be the case), but is it also illegal? I will argue that the legal question is much more difficult than it may seem at first, because Clean Flicks's practices resemble many long-accepted examples of "fair use" in important ways.\n\nThe Directors, Studios, and Actors Have Strong Legal Claims\n\nSince the DGA has not yet filed a countersuit, it is not clear exactly which claims it will bring against Clean Flicks. But it has already raised a number of possible bases for a suit, several of which appear to be strong.\n\nFirst, the DGA can argue that Clean Flicks' business amounts to an ongoing violation of copyright laws. By editing out content from certain movies before renting them out, Clean Flicks arguably exceeds its license to use the copyrighted movies it had purchased.\n\nSecond, the DGA can argue that Clean Flicks, in marketing its edited films, violates trademarks. Phrases such as the studio's name, or a certain tag line used to promote the movie on the video box, are trademarked, and Clean Flicks is arguably using them deceptively if it connects them with a movie edited to be substantially different from the one the studio made.
217745
Sorry, love to help, but need more info.\n\nWho is misusing the company computers?  Your staff?  Your coworkers?  Is the company misusing their own computers? \n\nWhat way are the computers being "misused" - harassing people, identify theft, software piracy, etc.??
93823
Hmmm, to support pirates or artists? Quite the quandary. Should one support the owners of Intellectual Property? Or the theives who have stolen it? To purchase through legal or illegal channels?\n\nI honestly have no idea what the implied second side might be.\n\nBuy originals and only originals. Purchasing pirated CDs, DVDs, bedlinen, whatever, is not only stealing from the legitimate owners of the IP, but is supporting the careers of the scum who steal it.
811794
If you're truly a "punk" then I wouldn't go selling out to the authorities about a local video store renting out their screeners. \n\nI buy CDs from a local music store that sells the pre-release sample CD's they get sent, and I don't have a problem with it. They all have the same or similar warning. \n\nDo you have a personal grudge against the store, or just feel like being an annoying customer?
568145
Contact the MPAA on this violation.  They will probably even have a reward for you work in reporting this.  American movie industry loses billions of dollars on illegal showing and piracy of films.
710210
They own a copy of the product, but not the product itself.\n\nAnd it's not illegal to download, but it is illegal to upload music, movies, etc.
199102
Well talking to the DVD producer was the right thing to do, and because it is their footage they can control the pricing.  If you use their footage, and you didn't have permission/pay fee's, then they could sue you for copywrite infringment, which with legal costs could outweigh the profit's you made off the film.\n\nI would try to find a local film director/producer that lives in the areas you are looking for, and pay them a fee for their films instead of using that directors footage.  There are a lot of amateurs out there that could provide footage for cheaper I'm sure.
907752
Federal Courts have determined and ruled that copying commercial DVDs is illegal. It violates copyright laws. Pretty soon you won't even be able to get the software to accomplish this! The original DVD will not be modified in any way and most today have anti-copy encryption included in it. The copy can be detected as a copy, since the program will remove the anti-copy encryption as it records from the original.
728691
I work at Walmart and it is true. A vendor comes in and stocks the merchandise, displays the programs through the store and changes what is needed. At this time, I cannot tell you the name of the vendor, but I know I could find out if need be. It just never came about in the past as to whom they are since I don't work that particular department.  If the store is informed that they cannot sell a movie or DVD prior to a certain day and time but the store does in fact sell it prior, that company has every right not to place the product in the store. Therefore, that would be more of a loss if they removed all movies, etc from the shelves
208697
Do you want another opinion?\nSay *no* to piracy!\nFirst because it is not correct to do so and second because it is easy to find you with new type software.\nWhy do you want to take the risk?\n\nKaterina