Dave,

I don't know the specific names of software or equipment available to accomplish your example task, but that points up the problem of stifling innovation and development with the DCMA going too far in protecting copyright control over general Public good.

Making the license and means to accomplish fair use goals is left totally up to MPAA. Lets compare that to law enforcement and security protection, which demanded a backdoor on encryption technology to be included so that they could develop their means to accomplish their excepted rights under copyright laws.

The DCMA law goes much farther, Dave, than MPAA just controlling software to make copies. For example, anyone could project a movie, get a video recorder trained on the movie screen, and make a copy. Not under this DCMA law, because they included a technique to make 4 lines of scrambled blurr on such a copy. Then the DCMA went farther, and demanded that all future recording devices would have to have the electronics included to accomplish this protection, and no longer could manufacture old systems or develop new systems without it. This adds cost to every future recording system you buy, and makes your old recorders illegal to produce anymore which also affects parts repair business. MPAA does not have to produce the copy equipment, but has made electronics companies meet their hardware encryption guidelines. The electronics companies can accept the added costs, if the technology works and forces people to only buy their licensed equipment, i.e. joined forces with the MPAA.

Then they tried to go a step farther, and make it illegal to develop de-encryption software all together. That would have made a total lock and control for MPAA on whether or not any devices were ever made for like fair use. Of course, the law enforcement and security would have to have their backdoor and legal development of copy software (which includes de-encryption software for exact copying, best quality).

So, MPAA would grant a license to a big electronics company like Sony, and you would have to buy their equipment to copy "Pirates of the Carribbean". If they didn't want, for example, TIVO to be able to copy that movie they would put too high of a price on their license for them. Extreme case, if you built your own equipment and software (especially if you sold it), then you would have to buy a license from MPAA, include the copy protection electronics in your equipment, and not reverse engineer the software...cough, cough, tough task.

Thus you are already stuck with only being able to buy electronics that meets DCMA guidelines. Any company that produces that will also buy the software de-encryption license, if they want to cater to the market that has a right to make copies. They could do that for all the movie theaters, but make the costs so expensive that a home user could never afford to buy copy equipment. This creates a stronger market for cheap equipment for the home user, and the longer time without --- all the better for high costs when made available finally.

I don't watch mass media produced propaganda at all. No movies, no TV, a glance at headlines or a still image is enough. I would not be suprised that a method for fair use copying of movies has not been made available to the public yet, and will not be until the demand maximizes the market value. Publicity about lawsuits helps increase the demand, duh!

I believe in the Internet. For the first time in history, the people can reach out to the world. We have lived our whole lifetime with only the Rich Man's concepts coming into our homes. Hell with Rich Man's entertainment and dumbing down the masses to their perspective of keeping themselves rich. Let's computer geeks get going so fast that all Control Institutions can not keep up. Don't break the law, that is a control institution. Know the rules, but forget about how the Rich Man wants to protect himself. Put your picture of you and your Kyocera 7135 on the net, and I'm interested. Learn how to include micropayment and quality content, and I just may buy from you.