[Fsfe-ie] Copy prohibition on DvDs in France

[Barry Mahon]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:00:16 +0200, <fsfe-ie-request at fsfeurope.org> wrote:


> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:58:38 +0100
>> From: A.J.Delaney at brighton.ac.uk
> Subject: [Fsfe-ie] French Court bans CSS on DVDs
> To: fsfe-ie at fsfeurope.org
> Message-ID: <1114444718.9091.1.camel at mowa423-lxajd9.it.bton.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hey all,
> 	Just read this on /. (Slashdot.org for all you people with a life)
> http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/25/122230&from=rss
> I've not verified it, but maybe Ian with his elite French reading skills
> can read the original story
> http://www.01net.com/editorial/274752/droit/la-justice-interdit-de-proteger-les-dvd-contre-la-copie/

I cannot claim 'superior' French but...

[First class complete translation at - http://www.allpeers.com/blog/?page_id=113]

The article is a short report of the decision by the Paris Court of Appeal [it could go to a higher court later...?] against a decision made in response to a case brought by Films Alain Sarde and Studio Canal in April 2004. The French consumers organisation, who had supported the original case brought by a buyer of the DvD of Mulholland Drive, appealed the decision.

The Appeal Court held that the customer had the right, under French law, of private copying, in this case to make a video so they could see the film on his mother's vcr, she having no DVD player. The article notes that it was in the same family, and therefore the right exists.

According to the article Films Alain Sarde and Studio Canal have to unlock the DVDs within a month.

The video publishers assocation said it was 'upset' and that the decision was contrary to an EU Directive on authors rights which allows protection systems.

2 items from the comments on the 01 site:

"why do we pay a tax on blank discs if there is no right to copy....??"

"Overall, the rights directive and the proposed software patents directive will not just 'protect' certain algorithms under authors rights but also prohibit the creation of any means of 'legalising' copying...."
[not sure I understand that, the writing is a bit hurried in style so maybe they mean something different]

The French, for those of you who can manage it, is:-

"En gros, EUCD + Brevet logiciel c'est non seulement certains algorithmes protégés par le droit d'auteur, mais c'est également interdire et la possibilité se donner légalement les moyens techniques de rendre impossible la création d'un algorithme différent qui aboutit au même résultat"

...and a comment from the site with the translation -

(apropos what is actually covered by the decision) - "All I know is what is in the 01.net article, which I attempted to translate as faithfully as possible. I guess that any copy protection which doesn’t respect fair-use rights guaranteed under French law is relevant to this decision. This means that a system is now considered illegal if it doesn’t let you make copies for personal use. That said: a) IANAL (and definitely NAFL) and b) a lot of people seemed to think this decision won’t hold up in light of contradictory legislation at the European level"

On the original US site http://www.boingboing.net/2005/04/23/french_court_bans_dr.html there is an interesting comment...:-

" And is it just me, or is the idea of watching Mulholland Drive with your Mom just a tad uncomfortable?"

Bye, Barry