[Macworld.com]

I realize that there are lots of skeptics out there who don’t think that the iPod is suitable for watching videos, but they’re wrong. [more]

[lhudd]

What I want to know is does this program "join" audio tracks to fit into the 2-channel output of an iPod or a PSP? I have several movies that only came with 6-ch audio tracks, and when I used encoding programs in the past with my PSP, I lost information. Particularly, I only got the left and right front tracks while much of the dialog (from the center channel) was lost.
Does either handbrake product combine a 6-channel audio track into a 2 channel stream?

[sigmaration]

This is great! Once I figured out how to use Handbrake, it wasn't that hard.. but yes, it is definetly not intuitive.
I also enjoy watching movies while I travel. At least I know the in-flight movie is something decent!

[hayesk]

Why not contact the author and ask him about joining tracks? Oh yeah, and post back here when he replies. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[tomtom]

Good for you guys that the INCITE proposals went no where.
If they did it would most certainly be ball and chains for you!

[Jason Snell]

Yes, thank goodness we don't yet live in a country where giving people information about how to use entertainment products they bought with devices they own isn't cause to lock the information-givers in jail...
Yet, anyway.
Let's hear it for freedom of the press! Without it, the only message you'll ever get is from the MPAA (ripping DVDs to iPod is illegal) and RIAA (ripping MP3s from CDs is illegal)...

[adobephile]

Yeah, I think copying rented DVDs is unethical--even copying borrowed CDs from the library is wrong, as it deprives the copyright holders from benefitting from my purchases.
But we bought Lord of the Rings, and these are among the relative few movies I care to watch again. Not so for my wife, necessarily. But with my iPod I can watch them while she's sleeping and not keep her up.
I'm not even going to share the iPod copies with anyone. They're just for me. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I also don't have any difficulty watching movies on the small screen, and the sound through the headphones is clearer to me than the booming, often-marginal sound quality of a lot of TVs.
I just downloaded Instant Handbrake, and it's already churning away converting another of my DVDs.
Nice!

[exnihilo]

The theory of lost revenues by multi bullion dollar movie studios is lost on me. They only lose the revenue if I was going to buy the DVD, but instead went and ripped a rented DVD instead. If I'm not going to buy it at the sticker price, then they didn't lose the sale. What I do is buy the legit DVDs for movies that I think are great and are well worth the $15-$25 price tag. But for other movies that I think are just entertaining but not worth the cost, I rent them and rip them. I have to pay $3-$4 to rent I as well, which is what I'm willing to pay for those movies, but of course the studios aren't willing to sell them at that price.

[RichardBronosky]

In reply to:

---

I also don't have any difficulty watching movies on the small screen

---

The small screen argument is a tricky one. Here is an experiment you can do:
1. Sit in front of your normal TV at home in the seat where you watch TV.
2. Hold the video iPod in your left hand (assuming you are right handed) at the distance that you would normally use for viewing.
3. Keep that distance, while moving the iPod in front of your TV.
-- Can you see your TV poking out from behind? Most people can't, but if you can...
4. Use the index finger and thumb on your right hand to measure how much bigger your perceived size of the TV is. Pretty minuscule huh?

[RichardBronosky]

I agree the studios aren't losing money on you...
However, you are stealing their property.

[Peter Cohen]

This is the same twisted logic people use to steal video games as well. The bottom line is that you haven't any right to keep a copy of the disc if you've rented it -- you're stealing it, period. If that's what you're doing, then fine -- own up to it. But don't try to justify it by saying that they're not losing a sale because you never intended to buy it to begin with.

[whitedog]

I think what often confuses arguments over "fair use" is the distinction between what is legal and what is ethical. Unfortunately, laws and ethics don't always coincide. Something may be legal but unethical - borrowing a book from a friend and "forgetting" to return it. The reverse may also be true, something may be ethical but illegal - jaywalking late at night when there is no traffic in the vicinity, for instance.
In this context, copying a CD or DVD that you own in order to provide a backup copy for your own use would seem to be ethical but may, or may not, be legal - the laws on fair use are still in flux. But copying a CD or DVD you borrow or rent is both unethical and illegal.
That's not to say people can't come up with a rationalization for their behavior which justifies it in their own minds. We all do this many times every day, whether we are aware of it or not. But something may appear reasonable in a given circumstance and still be unethical and even illegal.
One can put oneself through all sorts of mental gymnastics trying to decide what is right or wrong in an apparently ambiguous situation, but there are few of these in my opinion that cannot be satisfactorily resolved by applying the Golden Rule. Quite simply, if you don't like someone taking your stuff without permission, then don't take someone else's stuff without their say so.

[exnihilo]

In reply to:

---

But don't try to justify it by saying that they're not losing a sale because you never intended to buy it to begin with.

---

Well, they don't. I never intended to buy it at the PRICE they want. Unfortunately, there no negotiating the price of a DVD. I also buy used DVDs because sometimes I can find them at the price I'm willing to pay. But buying a used DVD makes no difference to the studio because it's already been paid for. So has the DVD that I rent from the rental place.
So, did I steal in the "letter of the law" sense from the studio? I guess. But do I think it's unethical? No I don't. Why? Because the studio didn't lose revenue on me. That seems to be the ethical standard that the studio itself chose, the loss of revenue, so therefore, if they didn't lose revenue, they shouldn't have a problem. I'm always willing to negotiate, the studios aren't. I WANT to pay what I think it's worth, and I ALWAYS do, but sometimes my money doesn't go to the studio. Sorry, but I don't feel bad about that.
As far as the Golden Rule applies to this situation, I'm willing to bargain on anything I sell (on classified or eBay as an example) so I expect to be treated the same way.

[robopope]

Hypothetical . . .
A movie is run on cable and I record it to watch it at a later time in the evening or week or whatever.
Can I take that recorded movie and convert it to my iPod (320 x 240) to watch it at a later time in the evening or week or whatever? And if I take that broadcast version of the movie that has been sent over the dish and remove the commercials on my Mac and then convert it to my iPod to watch it at a later time in the evening or week or whatever, is that okay according to fair use? And if a movie is broadcast over HBO in its full digital form and I've paid for that service on an ongoing monthly basis and I record it to a DVD for my personal archive, is that content manifestly different from the identical content delivered on the DVD (minus the arguably unnecessarily bonus content) I may be renting or borrowing from the Blockbuster or the library? If Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is broadcast on Showtime, has it been established that I have the right to make a personal recording of it and watch it over and over again? And if so, does that personal right extend to other places (and times) I may choose to watch the movie I taped and paid for on Pay-Per-View (iPod, DVD player in car, a friend's house)? For example, I currently have dozens of episodes of Seinfeld in iPod format that I have recorded off the network television and removed the commercials and formatted for viewing. Is that wrong? If so, why? And if not, why should I buy the DVD set when the content is so readily available for free? What I'm obtusely getting to is that is it permissible to rent and rip a DVD that has been broadcast literally hundreds of times on TV, any one of which times I could have recorded and archived for personal use? I am not advocating the wholesale stealing of intellectual property. But there are, IMHO, circumstances under which having the intellectual property in your possession--even though you do not own the actual physical DVD--is not a criminal act.