Apparently tired of waiting to be sued by the motion picture industry over its new DVD-to-PC copying software, RealNetworks this morning announced that it will file a preemptive legal action of its own in an attempt to establish the product's legality.
(See updates below: Industry firing back.)
From a statement just issued by RealNetworks:
"In response to threats made by the major movie studios, RealNetworks this morning plans to file an action for a declaratory judgment against DVD Copy Control Association, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., Paramount Pictures Corp., Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., NBC Universal, Inc., Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., and Viacom, Inc., in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit asks the court to rule that RealNetworks Home Entertainment, Inc.'s RealDVD software, made available to consumers today at www.realdvd.com, fully complies with the DVD Copy Control Association's license agreement. ...
"RealNetworks took this legal action to protect consumers' ability to exercise their fair-use rights for their purchased DVDs. The DVD CCA, which represents numerous parties including all of the major studios, previously sued another company over the same issues. The trial court ruled against the DVD CCA and allowed the distribution of a product similar to RealDVD."
In addition, RealNetworks this morning has officially released the software, which debuted in beta Sept. 8 at Network World's DEMOfall 08 to a largely mute but stern reaction from the movie industry.
"We have nothing else to say at this time," a spokeswoman from the Motion Picture Association of America told me days prior to the opening of DEMO. Since then press reports have included intimations from film industry executives that the RealNetworks product was not likely to go unchallenged. I checked in with the MPAA again the other day to see if they had anything else to say about RealDVD and was told by a spokeswoman that the answer was no. As I replied to her, their silence speaks volumes.
I would expect we'll be hearing something from them soon.
(Update: Got that one right. Just received word that the MPAA will have something to say early this afternoon.)
(Update 2: Busy day for RealDVD news. My Network World colleague Keith Shaw reviews the product here. His verdict: "The software works, but with some hurdles." Those hurdles are apparently very much related to the legal issues, too.)
(Update, 3) Movie industry is out with its lawsuit/reply: "RealNetworks' RealDVD should be called StealDVD," says MPAA general counsel Greg Goeckner.)
Welcome regulars and passersby. Here are a few more recent Buzzblog items. And, if you'd like to receive Buzzblog via e-mail newsletter, here's where to sign up.
Palin's private e-mail hacked, posted to the 'Net.
Run-amok Verizon robo-caller torments 1,400 customers.
RealNetworks touts 'legal' DVD-to-PC copying; movie industry says not so fastMythbuster busts his own tale of show's cowardly cave-in to RFID heavyweights
Doing the Laptop Drive of Shame.
Bank of America to support Firefox, finally.
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries.
Top 10 Buzzblog posts for '07: Verizon's there, of course, along with Gates, Wikipedia and the guy who lost a girlfriend to Blackberry's blackout.
Advertisement: |
The Leader in Network Knowledge
MPAA
If totally left to the MPAA we would all have to pay every time we pressed the play button.
MPAA
The RIAA and MPAA do want us to pay every time we play or listen... problem is, things dont work that way - we pay for the ability to list at any time on anything we own (CD, MP3, etc...) we pay to see the music live ...
we should pay no more than is fair and legal. Unless of course the laws are illegal. Humans have rights too ... copy wrongs should stop already and these groups should stop pretending they have all the cards, because they do not. They do have a lot of lawyers and money, but that should change soon.
We do have the right to play and backup our media, our data and our music. Funny how capitolism and 'free markets' lead to this sort of thing.
Case
I would like to follow the case; how do I find out which court it is in?
Post new comment