Fusion FVRT200 Digital Video Recorder 80GB

gromituk

MSE_Martin wrote: »

However, if you think you'd want to store them for longer, it may be worth investing in a cheap dvd recorder; this way you can burn your favourites to DVD and keep them indefinitely.

I think you ought to mention the illegality of this. Time-shifting is OK; storing copyright material for ever is not.

vernall

gromituk wrote: »

I think you ought to mention the illegality of this. Time-shifting is OK; storing copyright material for ever is not.

i was always under the impression that it is not illegal as long as its for personal use

gromituk

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48)

"70. The making for private and domestic use of a recording of a broadcast or cable programme solely for the purpose of enabling it to be viewed or listened to at a more convenient time does not infringe any copyright in the broadcast or cable programme or in any work included in it."

Note the careful wording. This does not include keeping it for ever, nor even viewing it more than once.

Sid_Harper

gromituk wrote: »

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48)

"70. The making for private and domestic use of a recording of a broadcast or cable programme solely for the purpose of enabling it to be viewed or listened to at a more convenient time does not infringe any copyright in the broadcast or cable programme or in any work included in it."

Note the careful wording. This does not include keeping it for ever, nor even viewing it more than once.

Yes but video tapes can be viewed more than once and kept 'forever' as well. So, IMHO (as no lawyer) I think that if someone were to take this to a court of law, the video tape argument would act somewhat as a precedent. i.e. people have been doing this with VCRs for decades.

Selling or lending such recordings is, of course, illegal.

gromituk

Sid_Harper wrote: »

Yes but video tapes can be viewed more than once and kept 'forever' as well.

But just because it can be done, it doesn't make it legal.

So, IMHO (as no lawyer) I think that if someone were to take this to a court of law, the video tape argument would act somewhat as a precedent. i.e. people have been doing this with VCRs for decades.

People have been breaking speed limits for decades, but I don't think a court would take that as a valid argument to quash the law.

Example, from the Panasonic DMREZ25EB manual: "Your attention is drawn to the fact that recording of pre-recorded tapes or discs or other published or broadcast materials may infringe copyright laws."

Yes, it's vague. But it's there. You are copying a broadcast, and the exception I quoted above is to allow you to view it as if it were broadcast, the only difference being that it is at a more convenient time. That is quite different from keeping it forever to be viewed whenever you like in perpetuity. For that you buy the pre-recorded DVD, and the copyright holder thereby gets an extra royalty from you for granting you the extra rights.

Sid_Harper

The fact that people having been in all probability been doing this type of thing for years with VCRs is probably what makes it prudent for manufacturers to explicitly not condone the behaviour, and I suppose you're saying Martin should do the same.

I'm not disputing what is or not illegal. I'm just saying that the possibility of even trying to prosecute someone who has recorded broadcast programmes onto DVD for personal use just because they are able to watch them more than once is almost inconceivable due to the precedent set by and prevalence of personal recording devices that can do this.

The copyright owners also know all of this, which is why they encourage DVD sales through box sets, 'special editions', 'never before seen footage', etc. Of course, the quality of a DVD is not matched by over-the-air broadcasts either, and is precisely why high definition standards have copy protection systems.

gromituk

Sid_Harper wrote: »

The fact that people having been in all probability been doing this type of thing for years with VCRs is probably what makes it prudent for manufacturers to explicitly not condone the behaviour, and I suppose you're saying Martin should do the same.

Exactly.

mah_jong

Another Micro direct ....dont bother if you are in the highlands or Islands, IOM etc ...... Scrolld own the postage rates page .
19.99 p and p

no idea what courier they would use for this ....

BUT

it was Royal Mail signed for for the wee mp3 player that was on here last week and i was asked for 17 quid postage!!

Surely an area for Martin to investigate!

devild_2

lol, I love barrackroom lawyers. A little (very) knowledge is a dangerous thing, but in this case it is hilarious

Zaphod_Beblebrocks

http://www.netto.co.uk/internet/nettog/menu/main.nsf
Can't make out the model number from picture though.