Talk:libdvdcss

Not copy protection?

This article says that css is not copy protection, but the copy protection article says it is. Is this a contradiction?

As I understand it, CSS does not prevent a bit-for-bit copy of a DVD from being played, so it does not act as a copy protection system. All it enforces is the need for a player to have access to the necessary keys to unscramble the content on the DVD. Other systems, such as SCMS or Blu-ray actively attempt to prevent copies being made of the data. Note that this subject is a legal minefield, with laws differing from country to country, so please don't assume that anything said here gives you licence to do anything in your jurisdiction. WLD 16:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Danieleran 22:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC) It is silly to say that CSS isn't copy protection because you "can still copy the encrypted bits." You quite obviously can't copy them in a useful way unless you decrypt it first. It's only ever the content that's being encrypted, not the ability to read bits on the disc; that's why its the Content Scrambling System. Suggesting that CSS is only a 'region enforcement' is disingenious and misleading, and only makes the arguement for fair use sound ignorant. It most certainly offers no legal protection, and suggesting that laws are lacking in some areas doesn't help or inform either.

QUOTE: (last Paragraph of Article) In many countries it is forbidden to sell or document programs that provide ways around copy prevention systems. Many Linux distributions do not contain libdvdcss (for example Debian, SUSE Linux, and ubuntu) due to fears of running afoul of DMCA-style laws. In most of these cases, the library can be easily downloaded from the Internet. In other cases some distributions refrain from preloading libdvdcss onto their install discs but it is available in their software repositories.

I do not see how any of this is relevant - I think it should be removed from the article. The Distribution and Laws are not part or concept of libcss. Please counter-argue. 194.97.121.220 02:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Since you can still copy the DVD even if it uses CSS it is clear not a copy protection mechanism. Please explain how CSS is a copy protection mechanism.

if you copy the contents of a css protected dvd-video it won't be usable, since the key is mising.

Not very sure about technology, but just asking: how come if you copy the CD bit-by-bit the key would be missing? -- AdrianTM 13:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The key is not part of the filesystem or the files. it is stored in a special place on the DVD (whose name escapes me). Most DVD+-R do not include this space. i am not quite sure, but i think DVD-R does.

Anyway, you can not copy a dvd-video bit by bit without circumventing the copy prevention (css) if you have questions read wiki's entries on dvd and css and ask further questions here217.194.224.34 14:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

and by the way: how is css helping to segment the market ?

this sounds dubious to me too. -- AdrianTM 13:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

an so i think it should be removed 217.194.224.34 14:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Distributions and Laws are not "part of concept" of libcss but are highly relevant to the subject so that paragraph is here to stay. -- AdrianTM 13:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

why are they highly relevant ?

Legal or not

Is this legal or not? It says "circumvention for purposes of software interoperability" is allowed what does circumvention for purposes of software interoperability mean?

Don't get your legal advice from Wikipedia. Besides English Wikipedia is only for one country and different countries have different laws. Also, learn to sign you posts. -- AdrianTM 03:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it legal in North America? What does "circumvention for purposes of software interoperability" mean? What country is that legal in?

This might come as a shock to you but North America is not a country, also IANAL -- AdrianTM 03:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

As for "purpose of software interoperablility" I guess it means, viewing a DVD on a Linux system for example, which in itself is not an illegal activity if you own or rented the DVD. -- AdrianTM 03:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It depends on local administrative interpretation, but... in general, libdvdcss solved the equation used for encryption; whereas, other systems copy-pasted code or re-implemented existing systems. Copying another person's work (esp. artistic works) can commonly be seen as immoral, solving math equations is a more complicated task to deem 'illegal'. They did the work themselves, they decide how it's used. They used someone else's work, that someone else decides how it's used. IANAL but it's personal to a degree xerxesbeat (talk) 07:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Legality

I don't think this is right: "Unlike DeCSS, libdvdcss has never been fought over in a courtroom, in part because Section 1201(f) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act authorizes such circumvention for purposes of software interoperability." Can we get a citation? If not, I'm going to remove it.Binarybits (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

It is logically impossible to present documentation for something has not been tried in court, therfore, there is nothing to cite. However, a more accurate statement could be, "there are no known court cases involving libdvdcss, possibly because Section 1201(f) of the DMCA authorizes...", or something to that effect. --DavidWG 68.53.186.151 (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

maybe you should mention as stated in VideoALn (the software authors website) wiki that the libdvdcss probably is afoul to DMCA and might be consider illegal. There seems to be a strong bias in the article, especially when the software vendors warnings about the legality is no where mentioned in the article.

Also in another source from the vendors website http://www.videolan.org/support/faq.html it specifically states that membership countries of the WIPO may find the library "controversial"

http://wiki.videolan.org/WindowsFAQ-1.0.x#Is_VLC_legal_in_all_countries.3F —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.230.135.77 (talk) 23:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Libdvdcss2

What does the "2" in libdvdcss2 mean? Is this another version or a patched version? 174.111.239.203 (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

aacskeys

On deb-multimedia.org there is also the package aacskeys: http://deb-multimedia.org/dists/unstable/main/binary-amd64/package/aacskeys. I do not have a BluRay-Player so I can't test this. If this package is based on a library similar to libdvdcss, it would be nice to create an article for it. Echinacin35 (talk) 19:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)