Is this just a Mac OSX version of their Easy DVD copy?

http://www.roxio.com/en/products/dvdcopy/index.jhtml

It looks pretty cool. If only I had a dvd burner....

I've been thinking about this a lot recently as I recently purchased a mac with a DVD writer. Burning DVD's is a really tedious process as I've done some through imovie. After you take into account lower film quality, often lack of extra features, lack of cover art etc, together with the inordinate time it takes to encode then burn a DVD - I really can't be bothered. DVD's aren't that expensive via amazon for example. My time spent mucking about copying a commercial DVD is worth more than the cost of a DVD.

*Rant over*

seriously though, is it really worth the hassle & cost of software to do the job in the first place?

DrD

[Edited by Photodan because I know this person didn't mean all the other stuff he/she said.]

You sir are a beautiful person. I want to kiss you. iDVD is not made to make DVDs its made to produce glorious iMovie DVDs, things people think OOOOH look at that our wedding, how sweet.

If you want just a BUTTLOAD of movies then buying is the way to go. You get the nice packaging and all the spine tingling extras that make me want to tinkle.

If you think iMovie or iDVD makes a DVD, you get a gold star and a pat on the head. It makes for great holiday gifts also.

In order to protect my investment, I should be able to burn a DVD "safety copy" for when my kids scratch "finding Nemo" after its 50th trip back and forth from the car to our house (or to the neighbor's house). Since the studios own the movie on that DVD, and I'm only paying for the license to view it, why are they allowed to advertise "OWN IT TODAY!" when it's just not true?

If all I'm buying is a license, then there should be a replacement policy for the media that it's carried on. People WOULD pay a few bucks to get damaged DVDs replaced, since all they really "purchased" was the media itself (and the packaging). My license (already paid for) should be media-independant; I shouldn't need to purchase a new DVD (and essentially another new license) to watch their movie again.

Of course, this argument didn't work with records or CDs either. Shouldn't I have gotten a discount when I replaced (upgraded) all of my vinyl album collection with CDs, since I had already paid the license to listen to those songs? Both the RIAA and MPAA want it both ways: they'll happily take our money (more than once!), but quickly label us all criminals, when most of us just want to preserve/protect out investment in DVDs and CDs.

Somehow the rules covering "fair use" has gotten lost somewhere. With each new CD I buy, I burn a copy to play, and put the original right back in the jewel case where it's safe for the future. Yes, I am BUYING the actual commercial CD first, every time, because I am such a criminal mastermind and a danger to the music industry. I am also a musician, BTW, so I don't believe in stealing music.

Why should DVDs be treated any differently?

-Ken P

Quote

pyxl8 wrote:
In order to protect my investment, I should be able to burn a DVD "safety copy" for when my kids scratch "finding Nemo" after its 50th trip back and forth from the car to our house (or to the neighbor's house). Since the studios own the movie on that DVD, and I'm only paying for the license to view it, why are they allowed to advertise "OWN IT TODAY!" when it's just not true?

If all I'm buying is a license, then there should be a replacement policy for the media that it's carried on. People WOULD pay a few bucks to get damaged DVDs replaced, since all they really "purchased" was the media itself (and the packaging). My license (already paid for) should be media-independant; I shouldn't need to purchase a new DVD (and essentially another new license) to watch their movie again.

Of course, this argument didn't work with records or CDs either. Shouldn't I have gotten a discount when I replaced (upgraded) all of my vinyl album collection with CDs, since I had already paid the license to listen to those songs? Both the RIAA and MPAA want it both ways: they'll happily take our money (more than once!), but quickly label us all criminals, when most of us just want to preserve/protect out investment in DVDs and CDs.

Somehow the rules covering "fair use" has gotten lost somewhere. With each new CD I buy, I burn a copy to play, and put the original right back in the jewel case where it's safe for the future. Yes, I am BUYING the actual commercial CD first, every time, because I am such a criminal mastermind and a danger to the music industry. I am also a musician, BTW, so I don't believe in stealing music.

Why should DVDs be treated any differently?

-Ken P

this whole thing sucks. stupid arguement for bnoth sides. the movie industry should just never release DVD's they shouls just have all movies available on Pay per view.. that will make the whole debate moot... tisk tisk

Both pyx18 and guest's response have some good points. While it is true that what we are buying is a license but insisting that movie labels to replace your DVD after you have used it for a long time for a small sum is not reasonable. However, I am not with the guest's car analogy.

What you bought is licensed content for xx viewings. After xx viewings, the license expired which happen to coincide with the DVD being damaged. Pay per view as suggested by the next guest is fair use, the only problem is that service provider is charging too much for it.

Lastly, I wish Apple can successfully work with the movie industry for a good simple solution. One solution is for a DRM scheme that can limit the number of viewings. Price of a movie download varies for one view and multiple views. I do not like the scheme to work based on time (rental) ... I know is simpler to implement.

What irks me the most is the bad faith on the part of the various industries involved RIAA and MPAA). IF they priced their products decently, and IF (RIAA) they gave us a choice of how to buy (Singles vs. Albums), I might be more willing to accept restrictions … Why is it that a CD costs more than a vinyl, why is it that a DVD costs more than a videotape ????
In both cases, the production costs are much lower with the new technology, yet its price is higher …
I’m willing to spend the time and wait for my legal copy to be rendered and burned (I don’t have to sit at my desk and watch my iMac doing it …), just so I don’t get ripped off TWICE when an accident happens …
A hurricane sent the sea into my house for a prolonged visit a few years ago … and all my CDs were destroyed by being washed in salt water … I can hardly be made responsible for the mishap, methinks, and I didn’t have any backups … Now I have iTunes and I can rerip MY music, as long as my computer (or iPod) is still alive …
Fair use is the law. DRMs appeared long after it !
Another problem I haven’t addressed in this post is closely related: that of DVD regions. This is yet another ripoff, exclusive to the movie industry. I live in a bi-territorial Caribbean island where you can find DVDs from France (Region 2) and the US or Canada (Region 1). My DVD player can read only Region 1, and my computer locks after 5 region changes (doesn’t any more, thanks to Rgion X). Does that mean I have to buy only Region 1 DVDs, or buy both regions (2 copies each time), tor throw away the one my machine can’t read, or … What’s the solution ? Obviously, the studios don’t care that their “antipiracy” software is robbing me of my legitimate desire to view my chosen movie on my chosen platform. Either I buy another DVD player, or I buy 2 DVDs each time ? Has piracy disappeared thanks to this ridiculous monopolistic rule ? Not according to the studios … But I’m the one paying for it, both in money and inconvenience …

Cars to DVDs are not a valid analogy. When you buy a car, you own it, and can do what you like with it (though this may void warranty). When you buy a DVD, all you own is the media, which costs significantly less than 50c.

A more correct analogy is to a book, in that in each case you have an item of physical 'media' which contains someone else's intellectual property.

Of course, a book is also significantly more durable than a DVD, and the cost of making a 'backup copy' of the average novel is WAY more than the cost to buy a physical replacement.