Mylord666
Advanced Member | Редактировать | Профиль | Сообщение | Цитировать | Сообщить модератору
12.06.2007 на Doom9 появилась следующая информация:
It was Sony - the company that gave us such great things as audio CDs you cannot copy to your MiniDiscs, rootkits on our PCs, exploding notebook batteries and BD+, is also the culprit behind the takedown of RipIt4Me and FixVTS. While the proceedings appear to have been secret and the involved parties still cannot give any details, the Federal Court of Australia is keeping meticulous records. In looking through the documentation available online, we see that Sony filed a copyright lawsuit against Digital Digest on March 16th. 3 days after, the court granted the first search warrant. Looking through it reveals that they were after anything related to RipIt4Me - starting with its use, its users and ending with its development, and about circumventing Sony's ARccOS DVD corruption mechanism. Thereafter, we have orders that hint towards the secrecy of the proceedings (I'd be very interested if somebody living down there would go down to the registrar and asked to see all documentation related to the case - this cannot be done online and I live a tad bit too far away to try it myself), another search order against blutach. Then on the 30th of March, the court orders a fishing expedition on items seized at blutach's residence - looking for information on the development of RipIt4Me and any activities of anybody involved in RipIt4Me development. The order specifically mentions jeanl. Two days later, the RipIt4Me website is down an jeanl takes an extended time-out from visiting DVD backup related websites.
The final order from May 3rd also explains why there are no DVD backup forums at Digital Digest anymore - the admin has effectively been barred from providing support for any website that helps people copy DVDs.
So far so good, a few questions remain though: The case is listed in the copyright section - so how exactly can RipIt4Me infringe Sony's copyright (note that it's the arm of Sony that makes ARccOS that filed the suit, not the movie studio arm)? Towards that end, access to any filed documentation would be really useful.
Then there's the matter of any proceedings in the United States. Unlike the original case, a few minutes of searching didn't yield anything yet, but I'm not a 100% sure where to look either (admittedly, finding the proper court was a stroke of luck that Google made possible) - whether it would be in California District court, or in a district court of one of the two Sony DADC offices in the US, or Federal court (and in which circuit). If you're familiar with copyright lawsuits in the US, I'd be very interested in a chat. |
