Is that a fact or an opinion?
1 Like
I think it has⌠buy your movie (bluray, for example), put it on your plex server (free, I think, for now), hook your plex app up to your plex server (roku, desktop, mobile). Watch what you want, when you want it.
How you get your content is up to you, plenty of online suppliers, its totally legal to rip a bluray disc you own, there are less legal means⌠but everything after putting your content into plex satisfies the requirements.
Iâve watched my movies and tv shows on airplanes (offline cache copy), in foreign countries (over free wifi), on a mobile network driving cross country⌠the technology is available.
1 Like
I am not sure that is true, as it employs one or more types of DRM which may need to be bypassed to rip:
The handbrake tutorial on it suggests that external decryption software is needed, lending credence to the theory:
(None of which precludes it being easy and largely consequence free if you own the disc, and are ripping for personal use)
How about I pay for the Bluray and then I use someone elseâs ripped copy of the same movie? It saves me work and Iâve given the creator money for the same product.
Oh? Still illegal?
Yeah, fuck them.
3 Likes
Good rule. Iâve taken to sticking my fingers in my ears and saying, âLa, la, la, la, laâ until the idiot I mean disruptive innovator moves along.
2 Likes
I run a Plex install too (love Plex.) I find it frustrating that I need to use Plex for one thing, then fire up Netflix for something else, then switch over to the DVR, and so on. And there are still things that I canât legitimately watch without restriction. I can watch this on the train but not that. This, I can only watch at home. That, I can watch streaming, but not offline on the plane. Last nightâs hockey game? Have to be home to watch that.
I make do, but it could be so much better!
PlayOn looked to unify media streaming services via dlna. It sorta worked, including bringing Netflix to devices without a Netflix app.
A bit wonky at times, though. Maybe worth evaling.
Ignore the law and it is. I have Plex as well and a giant disk array.
Copying is theft because youâre stealing the time of the person who created what youâre copying. You spend a year at your job and get paid for a year. Someone spends a year creating a piece of intellectual property and you feel ripped off if they get paid. Suppose you go to work on Monday morning and all day long people come up to you and tell you a 2-minute long joke, filling every minute of your day. Same happens the next 4 days and you leave work on Friday without getting even 1 minute of work done for the entire week. The next week same thing starts. You get mad and every one of them is offended: âHow did I hurt you? I just took two minutes of your time. How can losing two minutes hurt you?â Everyone seems to look at unauthorized downloading as their harmless 2 minutes. But according to your hero Larry Lessig, there are 43 million people in this country uploading and downloading on a commercial scale. Legally (which is what heâs referring to) 1 person making 1,000 uploads/downloads in a year isnât even in the ballpark of âcommercial scaleâ, but it works out to 43 billion per year. Thatâs a lot of "2 minutes"es. BTW. Fun Fact: When you complain about IP protection on the Internet, youâre using a house that IP built. It wouldnât exist if there were no IP protection. Private investors have put over a trillion dollars into the Internet. If you think theyâd have still done it without IP protection, spend about â2 minutesâ with an MBA. In fact, youâd all be handwriting your comments with a fountain pen by the light of a gas lamp without IP protection. The light bulb required an enormous investment and spawned a huge patent battle to protect the investments. You probably donât have a single thing in your house thatâs descended from something first invented or created after 1900 that doesnât have DNA from at least one patented or copyright-protected ancestor.
From a long-time copyright lawyer: almost certainly LEGAL. Besides, how will anyone catch you, or more important, why would anyone want to? The cost would be 10,000-50,000 x the possible damages and not even the biggest of the bullies are stupid enough for that. I know from first-hand experience that if you called the legal dept. of Microsoft, or Apple or whoever and offered a signed confession, theyâd take a message and youâd never get called back.
TCP/IP? Apache? ARPANET?
2 Likes
Did you really join this site just to post this?
3 Likes
Are you still using ARPANET? Do you still have a dial-up modem that doesnât depend on technology developed after 1990? If aliens came and destroyed all physical components of the Internet (hardware, signal-carrying cabling, etc.) developed and deployed at private expense and IP-protected, but left all physical components that werenât, same Internet as to day or different? Would it still be the same information superhighway if there were no website development tools, no e-commerce tools, no audio, video or graphics? Something else. What would you be connecting with? Not a computer. No electronic computer has ever been, or could ever be, built without using privately-developed and IP-protected technology. Further, even though much of the underlying technology was developed by universities with public funding, much of it wasnât. Besides that, none of the technology could possibly have been commercialized except by private entities with private funding. So back to ARPANET. No IP DNA. True, but only if you take away the computers, telephones and other hardware, transmission lines and software. Apache? Wrong. See Apache License paragraph 2, âGrant of Copyright Licenseâ and paragraph 3, âGrant of Patent Licenseâ. In fact, any software, Open or otherwise, that comes with a license, even Creative Commons, is based on a claim that it is IP-protected because thatâs the only legal basis in existence that allows the license issuer to exercise any control over the licensee whatsoever. Otherwise, itâs me saying you canât swim in the ocean without a license from me. House that IP built.
Everything is fine. Have a donut. 
1 Like
No. Iâve been following anti-copyright for 18 years. Iâve read tons of posts on tons of sites over those years, in the tens of thousands. Occasionally I post things like what I did here trying to challenge vague assertions with specific data points. Mainly itâs to see if anybody cares whether their reasons for opposing copyright are on the same planet as the actual verifiable facts relating to their reasons. So far, no, they donât. I also have this naive, insane fantasy that maybe someday someone will read what I wrote and consider it seriously. Occasionally, I get flamed, but otherwise Iâm ignored. I think youâre the first person whoâs sent a substantive response. Thank you.
Woops, sorry!
I meant a Krispy-Kreme.
Good luck, Quixote. 
I think most people just do what theyâre going to do and make up reasons after the fact.
That said, the pain of most âlegalâ scenarios is what drives people to just take the easy out. It is much easier to pirate than to do the legal thing, even when people want to do so.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
