PDA

View Full Version : Problems copying a CDrom


G_STRING
5th Apr 2005, 13:13
Normally, don't have any problem copying CDs, (using Nero), but have hit a snag.

I normally copy all 'valuable' (to me), CDs, in case something happens to the original, but I've been trying in vain to copy my latest aquisition.

The CD is needed in the drive to initiate the software start, (even though it is copied to the hard drive). I've tried - so far - 5 copies, but even though, on the surface, it looks like the files have been successfully burnt, when I try to use the copy to initiate the program, it asks for the correct CD.

I'm assuming that the original contains some sort of hidden code or something, that won't copy across to another disk

If anybody knows how to get around this, that would be brilliant.

PS I'm only making these copies for my own use, to safeguard the original, as I do with all of my 'can't live without' media

thanks G_STRING

Jhieminga
5th Apr 2005, 13:49
It looks as though you have been snagged by a copy protection issue. There are ways around this, but this is controversial as not every country is clear on what constitutes illegal copying. In your case I would say that you can create a copy for safekeeping but that would be just my personal opinion.

So after reviewing the legal and moral issues, ensuring that you are not breaking any laws, and double checking that PPRUNE doesn't mind me posting this..... you might look at copying software such as CloneCD or Alcohol 120%.

(If there are any objections to this post, let me know and I'll edit!)

Evo
5th Apr 2005, 15:21
In your case I would say that you can create a copy for safekeeping but that would be just my personal opinion.

Sadly this is not correct; the UK has a very restrictive view of 'fair dealing' rights. The relevant bit of UK law is s.50A(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988


50A.-(1) It is not an infringement of copyright for a lawful user of a copy of a computer program to make any back up copy of it which it is necessary for him to have for the purposes of his lawful use.


There are two issues here. Firstly, the wording "any back up copy of it which it is necessary for him to have". In the days of floppy disks and tapes backups were certainly necessary; in the days of CD and DVD-ROM this is viewed by the courts (viz. Sony v Owens 2002) as unnecessary, therefore 50A(1) doesn't apply. Secondly, in the case of games, it is argued that 50A is not relevant as a game consists of a number of copyrights, e.g. soundtrack and film, that may not be backed up under 50A.

Of course, you are free to weigh up the prospect of prosecution for copyright violations for doing something that most would regard as fair use. However, mechanisms for doing this aren't something we can discuss on PPRuNe, although I expect search engines would lead you to an answer.

CosmosSchwartz
6th Apr 2005, 23:34
Re - 50A(1) - Depends on the end user licence agreement for the software in question. Even Microsoft will allow one copy of the software on many of their apps and games.

If it's copy protected then chances are the license doesn't allow a copy to be made, hence the protection!

Evo
7th Apr 2005, 07:20
Obviously if backup rights are granted in the EULA then there isn't an issue, but you can't actually restrict s.50A(1) rights in an agreement, viz.


S296A.-(1) Where a person has the use of a computer program under an agreement, any term or condition in the agreement shall be void in so far as it purports to prohibit or restrict-

(a) the making of any back up copy of the program which it is necessary for him to have for the purposes of the agreed use;


However, the key point is again "which it is necessary for him to have". In the view of Mr Justice Jacob in Sony v Owen,


The fact is that if you spoil your CD, which has a recording of music on it, you have to go and buy another. The same is true of a CD carrying a game. Backups are not necessary at all.


You might quite reasonably think that this is a bit of a daft comment from the judge, and the academic view is that the judgement in Sony v Owen is flawed, but until a higher court disagrees he's stating the law.