• AnyStream is having some DRM issues currently, Netflix is not available in HD for the time being.
    Situations like this will always happen with AnyStream: streaming providers are continuously improving their countermeasures while we try to catch up, it's an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. Please be patient and don't flood our support or forum with requests, we are working on it 24/7 to get it resolved. Thank you.

Antigua-based software developer charged for breaching country’s copyright laws

Ummm..........
The suit has nothing at all to do with US law - read the article next time.
RClark was just speaking from the typical "US-Centric Worldview" that most Americans seem to have. :p
This is actually about the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty.

Also the allegations about "millions of dollars of lost revenue" are BS. It's been determined that most people that make a pirate copy of a rental would never have bought the title to begin with. They are like pack-rats building a "huge movie collection" - that they never would have considered building at all were they to have to buy the real DVDs.

I share the overall optimism that the case can be disposed of.

-W
 
Last edited:
Yes, my question was that since SlySoft is NOT a US based company then what laws would apply to this case other than WIPO? They are being sued by what I believe is a US based company hence my question on the laws. If the article is correct in what they claim to be the maximum fine/penalty then I would tend to agree Clams statement of "I share the overall optimism that the case can be disposed of".
 
Yes, my question was that since SlySoft is NOT a US based company then what laws would apply to this case other than WIPO? They are being sued by what I believe is a US based company hence my question on the laws.

From my read, I don't take this to be a civil lawsuit by any company.
I read it as C.B. being charged with violating Antigua law because he is accused of being in violation of WIPO.

That said... all the studios (not just US) could perhaps be "Third Parties" to the case - with a list of grievences or something.

I'm sure we'll here an outcome when it happens.

-W
 
Lifetime Licences

Perhaps all this angst would have been prevented if Slysoft had re-emailed all members of the decision to retain lifetime licences with the associated rationale? I agree with gsingh13 that the decision & its reversal appears misleading and i applaud his stance & Slysoft's final decision to refund. I just wouldnt have linked this issue with the legal proceedings as this was pure speculation. I'm glad lifetime licences of this great product are still available for the benefit of future members but i dont agree that keeping quiet on the decision to retain them was the best way to handle it seeing they had originally emailed each of us of the decision to terminate the option of new lifetime licences. Perhaps it was the reaction to what some considered ambiguous wording of the original email that made Slysoft determine that keeping quiet the second time around was the best option?

Peter
 
I agree. The response that Recycle gave was not civil. The original post was questioning why Slysoft has not ended the lifetime purchasing option and why they are not giving a reason for it. gsingh13 was just speculating about the reasons why Slysoft is keeping silent about it as I did in another thread.


Prolly cuz of the shift in the battle plan was made through complaints from both sides.
You know./ customers not wanting to loose the option to buy a lifetime licence.
Also the PR that would be ultimately accomplished by doing bad by those customers who wished to keep the option open.
 
It's unfortunate the court case issue; and the lifetime license issue got intermingled.
Yes, C.B. was supposed to be G.B. (sigh)

Yes, I agree that the lifetime issue was handled poorly. (silence is never golden in the marketing business)

No, I don't think the court case is related. (as the thread jumps back and forth) And even if the outcome is poor - they can always move the "front office" to Nigeria or Somalia. :D

-W
 
And even if the outcome is poor - they can always move the "front office" to Nigeria or Somalia. :D-W

And the NEW Slysoft under a different name, could devote all of their time to develope a Cinavia removal tool. That should NOT fall under the control of the "World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty" and which could be potentially a huge money making business.
:agree:

Also, under the control of the WIPO, and if the court ruling is not in Slysoft favor, the only products that should effect Slysoft is the ripping products.

Companies of the past, (such as DVD Decrypter) where the MPAA has taken legal action, and they have more than one product and is NOT a ripping software program, these products should not be effected by the WIPO and are still in business.

But in the end, final outputs are almost unlimited, depending on the agreements with the petitioners and the respondents and the court.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And the NEW Slysoft under a different name, could devote all of their time to develope a Cinavia removal tool.

Again, what the heck are you talking about? SlySoft gets shut down then comes back but no longer decrypts DVD's or Blu-Ray, but instead ONLY removes Cinavia? I don't get it.
 
Hmm. Yes the court case started on the 9th. I'm wondering has a lawsuit been filed against Slysoft before from the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty. To be honest I'm curious as to why it has taken this long for such an organisation to file a lawsuit. May be they have been preparing all that time and making their case rock solid.
Either way I think for the first time Slysoft might be in trouble and all those lifetime licenses that have been bought could mean nothing very soon. My suspicion started when they decided to extended the lifetime license but it really inflated when they kept tight lipped about its extention.
It was all speculation and it still is. I'm guessing Slysoft has had many court cases in the past and not been affected by it so may be this one isn't any different but I don't know. It would be good if there were details on the court case and how it's progressing. Perhaps nothing will come of the court case but one thing I do know is it will be a shame if slysoft had to close.
 
I'm guessing Slysoft has had many court cases in the past and not been affected by it so may be this one isn't any different but I don't know.
No need to guess. It was stated earlier in this thread.
Since SlySoft started in 2003 we have had several issues like that. Our strategy was always to get it solved without any noise. We'll keep it that way. Thank you for your understanding.
 
It's unfortunate the court case issue; and the lifetime license issue got intermingled.
Yes, I agree that the lifetime issue was handled poorly.
No, I don't think the court case is related. (as the thread jumps back and forth)

-W

Linked or not, the issue is still the court case which still remains and it could be a very big problem. However, I am very glad the moderators on the forum think this whole court case thing is a farce and nothing will come of it. Like someone else said it could take years to resolve.
 
@ pelvis popcan

If the court rules against Slysoft, the court has the potential of completely stoping the current Slysoft as a business or just force them to stop the ripping software programs only, or whatever both parties can agree on or what the court rules.

In the worse case Slysoft could start a new business in a different name and most likely a different president (Slysoft 1) and get into the Cinavia business of developing a Cinavia removal tool, WIPO control should not be a concern with only the Cinavia removal tool business.
:agree:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just FYI - If and when Cinavia on commercially released DVD's becomes a widespread problem - I'm sure they will address it if needed - REGARDLESS of any other external issues.

-W
 
Back
Top