Wasn't that a lengthy process to capitalize the first letter of each word?

Just as a side note, you CAN launch the film from within DVDp.  I do it with my trailers.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:

Well let's see $250,000 fines per title and/or 5 years in prison should you get caught and convicted, I would say is pretty good incentive.

How can you see he is subject to US jurisdiction (I am guessing it's from US law you get your numbers, but you really should include this information - the numbers are useless without)????

Maybe I am being thick here but was there a 'feature request' in here that I missed? 

Quoting Katatonia:

Quote:
Wasn't that a lengthy process to capitalize the first letter of each word?

When I send text messages or email from my wireless phone, it is very hard not to capitalize every word (which is the default and hard-to-overcome setting). Perhaps his Blackberry or other wireless device was used to browse this forum and submit his post.

Techincally, you are allowed to make one backup copy of your DVD's.  Forget the fact that the Studios try to prevent you from making backups and try to close down/sue any product that lets you make a backup copy.

I don't think creating a backup copy on your hard drive and using that to view in leu of the physical DVD is illegal.

I believe the key here is to use "backup" instead of "rip".  "Rip" rings too much of "Rip Off".

Disclaimer: I am not a Lawyer

Look The DMCA has not to this date has not won one single case in court avout copying DVD for Home Use.

The 321 Studios Case.
Another instance where this model could have been tapped is the fight over the "DVD X Copy" and "DVD Copy Plus" software products sold by 321 Studios, which allow consumers to make backup copies of DVDs. In fact, 321 Studios is currently involved in a heated lawsuit with the members of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) over the legality of 321's software, which MPAA believes violates Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Section 1201 bans technologies that would circumvent or defeat the technological measures used by copyright owners to protect access to their works. This anti-circumvention mandate is quickly proving to be one of the most controversial copyright reforms passed by Congress in years and now threatens to remove software from the market that is being used for entirely legitimate and lawful purposes.

MPAA president Jack Valenti -- the same man who once said, "the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone" -- has argued that consumers have no legitimate need for software products like those sold by 321. Last November he said, "If you buy a DVD you have a copy. If you want a backup copy you buy another one." But this worldview is not consistent with the rights consumers already enjoy with regard to time-shifting or saving content on audio cassettes or VHS video tapes. Consumers should have the reasonable expectation that they will be able to make at least some copies of the content they purchase, whether that content appears in books, music, or movies. For example, I have personally used similar DVD backup software called "DVD Shrink" that I freely downloaded from an overseas website to copy and burn my favorite individual movie scenes onto a single DVD. I use this single DVD to show friends and family all my favorite DVD scenes in rapid succession without having to put the original movie in the player each time. (This is similar to what millions of American already do with music when they burn their favorite songs onto one tape or CD.)

But, following the logic of the case against 321, presumably the MPAA would like to see the "freeware" I downloaded outlawed and then throw me in jail to boot. But why? It's hard to see how I've broken the copyright bargain in this case since I went out and purchased dozens of new movies to make this compilation of my favorite movie scenes. If, however, I had made additional copies of this compilation DVD and sold them on e-Bay, or even shared the disc with the entire world via a P2P network, I would agree that I had crossed a line and broken the copyright bargain and should be held liable for my actions. And 321 Studios acknowledges this, too. On their "Protect Fair Use" website, the company states, "Fair use isn't the same as free use. Consumers shouldn't have the right to make copies for commercial use without the permission of copyright holders. They should not be able to sell illegally acquired copies of digital works, either on disk or over the Internet." That's exactly right, and the proper course of action in cases where consumers betray this trust would be for the movie studios to file suit against them for undercutting the commercial viability of their products. But if millions of average movie lovers like me are considered criminals for merely copying a few of their favorite movies or individual scenes onto a different disc, then something has gone horribly wrong with copyright law in America.

Intellectual property plays a vital role in our modern Information Age economy, but we should not adopt a "by-any-means-necessary" approach to copyright enforcement. Targeted, court-based adjudication of clear-cut copyright infringement is the better way to balance the interests of consumers and creators.

Quoting Gillaspy:

Quote:
All i am saying is that it would be nice to have a play butten in my profiler so i can play the movies that i have in my database. What rong with that

You can, just create an HTML window with a link that points to your movie on the hard drive.