The Firmware Page

After reading this post in the Combo forum (and seeing it get locked) I just have to raise this issue.

Large parts of this forum are devoted to hardware cracking of the RPC-2 protection scheme for PC based DVD drives. Now the movie industry (and the hardware manufacturers they bullied) implemented this scheme for a reason. That reason is to control and exploit the global consumers of DVD software for the benefit of their revenue streams, i.e. to make more money by ripping us off!

Now most people here (including myself) agree that this is a bad thing and we are naturally very grateful to people like the firmware patchers who can circumvent this scheme for us and give us back the freedom of choice that the movie industry tried to take from us.

I have no moral problem with cracking of RPC2 whilst it remains a free service. And here lies the problem. The DVD Region-Free software is NOT free! In fact it is extortionately priced at $40. How is charging to remove the RPC2 restrictions any more morally right than implementing it in the first place? We don't see Elaborate Bytes charging for DVD Region Killer, or inmatrix charging for DVD Genie. Of course, this is the software author's choice, which he is well within his rights to make, after all we don't have to buy his software! I'm at risk here of turning this post into a rant against that developer which it's not, so....

More to the point of this post, why should this forum condemn, prevent or discourage people asking for a crack for this software, when in fact they are actively involved in (firmware) cracking themselves? Both cracks will cost someone money. OK so a hardware crack costs a multi-billion dollar international corporation a few dollars for each DVD title whereas the software crack would cost a lone independent software developer his registration fee, but morally is there any difference? Both are seeking to profit from the RPC2 scheme.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not condoning software theft at all. I just found a touch of hypocrisy in this particular (and probably contentious!) case and wanted to raise the issue to find out what other people think about this?

Merry Xmas & Happy New Year to everyone who reads this. I look forward to reading your views.

G1zm0

Hello,

A software costs time and/or money to its author. It is the author's choice to sell it and choose the price he wants, or to give it to the user's community.

If the user finds the software's price is to expensive, nobody forces him to buy the software.

So, there is no justification to encourage people to illegally copy software, books, newspapers, or any other personal or intellectual property.

The RPC2 patch case is far different.

When you buy a DVD, you you buy the right to see the content. If you cannot read the content as your DVD drive is RPC2 enabled, your right to see the content you have legally buyed is violated by the combination of the DVD vendor and the drive vendor.

So, hacking the firmare is a way to exercize a right you have legally acquired. You don't cause any damage to the DVD vendor as you have paid the fees he wanted for viewing the content and you don't cause any damage to the drive manufacturer.

In fact, a DVD drive manufacturer will probably sell more products if potential buyers know they can be RPC1 patched !

BB

This is usually the case.

The firmware patchers do everything that they can to patch drives, but some drives either aren't patched yet, or are very difficult to patch. If a person has the need to view their DVD's (as many people do) and they are from different regions and there is no RPC-1 firmware available, then they have little choice but to use software like DVD Region Free. If there are enough people that want this software, then price increases with demand. By advertising for fengtao software, this site is not suggesting that someone shouldn't flash their firmware, but it is the only choice for some people. I hope that no one is angered by this advertisement, but as >NIL: said,

View the official statement here

I have no real moral issue with this. I've expressed my opinion about digital information (i.e. software or any kind of digital creation like CD's or DVD's) many times before

The reason why we won't allow people to give these kind of links openly is because:

1/ Cracks for software are very easy to find if you look hard enough. So I don't think it is our role to provide any kind of help there. There's enough to do with firmwares themselves.

2/ Sites that openly advertise for cracks or warezz get busted sooner or later. Now, if we get busted we lose the whole forum. Is this really what you want?

For that reason we have to enforce a zero tolerance policy for crackz or warezz.

We would not want to give another reason to narrowminded MPAA to shut us down (they are probably already p*ssed enough with us as it is):
"See, Mr. Judge, those guys are advocating for software cracking... Therefore you have to realize that firmware hacking and software piracy are actually the same thing. Both should be banned and we should be given complete control, mwahahahaha!!! ")

3/ We are currently advertising for fengtao and, whatever opinion we might have on his product, we have a moral obligation to keep it for ourselves as long as the contract is valid.
While we are not bound to exercice any kind of opinion censorship against the product being advertised (you can flame or glorify the product if you want), it would make little sense for us to advertise this product on one side, and tell people to go crack it on the other...

Besides, it should be pretty obvious to people browsing this forum to know whether they want to buy it or not.

Hi ,

Some of the issues raised here are ones I`ve thought about before. An encouraging piece of news which may already have been posted here I came across today ..this is from 04/01/2003

The courts have ruled that a DVD Copy Protection crack written by programmer Andrew Bunner is protected under the First Amendment. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) took Bunner to court arguing copy protection is their "Trade Secret" and that his DeCSS program violated it. It's about time somebody got a one-up over the MPAA.


A three-judge appellate court in California has ruled that a published DVD code crack is constitutionally protected free speech. In doing so, the court rejected the movie industry's claim that copy protection is a trade secret, striking a blow against the digital encryption of DVD content.

The 6th District California Appeals Court opinion unanimously held that a lower court judge's injunction violated the First Amendment rights of defendant Andrew Bunner. The programmer was sued by an organization consisting of Hollywood studios and a DVD encryption group for publishing DeCSS, a DVD decryption code, on the Internet.

Free speech advocates who argued in Bunner's defense, such as First Amendment Project executive David Greene and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), hailed the decision as a "tremendous victory for freedom of speech on the Internet," but the DVD Copy Control Association (DVDCAA), a DVD licensing organization of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), said it is appealing the decision

Regards ,

Gerry

Hello there!

I would like to post a little reply...
Just my point of view:

I will only RPC1 patch my drive if I really have to. I am a bit scared about losing it if something would go wrong.

On the other side, you don' t look at your drive and everybody would recocnize: "Hey, it is region free" until I use a very big felt-tip and write "hacked/cracked/patched/RPC1" on it.

I would not patch just to fool the market and import movies.

RPC1 is my last way out to watch a movie I can't get with the right region code...

All the best!
Bye!

If you crack the software only person who get's hurt is the person who is helping us be free and play any DVD. They have put a lot of work doing this software they deserve to be compensated.

Hacking firmware only person get's hurt is the the DVD industry NOT the manufacturer of the drive. The Industry is forcing the manufacturer to make firmware with the restrictions they don't have a choice.