This week's stupid myth is brought to us by the folks at Audio Intervisual Design, Inc., a company that specializes in ..... something. (I'll get to that confusing tidbit later on, after the myth.)
from
http://www.aidinc.com/features/dvdfaq.asp
Quote:
What are muxing and demuxing?
They are short for multiplexing and demultiplexing, respectively. Multiplexing is the process of building a project in your authoring program so that it can be burned to DVD and read by a standard DVD player. This is normally the last step in making a DVD, though you will often multiplex to test the DVD as you author. Conversely, demultiplexing is the process of taking a burned DVD and extracting the original audio, video, etc. As you might expect, demuxing is controversial and can be illegal depending on which DVD you are demuxing. So please tread carefully.
|
What the ... ?
No! Wrong. And not just "wrong" but
ridiculously wrong. As such, we've left the world of "media myth" and headed into that area that can only be referred to as a "
stupid myth".
Yes, I'm being harsh, but let's be honest with ourselves --
anybody that wants to pass themselves off as a professional should not be making these kinds of boneheaded mistakes! This is honestly no different than a doctor telling you that a vitamin or Advil is illegal. It a dumb mistake at best, outright incompetence at worst. And that's part of why we started this "media myth" section of the site -- to make others aware of the BS, in order to educate consumers.
So let's go over this carefully:
- What is multiplexing?
- What is demultiplexing?
- Could it ever be illegal? If not, what is potentially illegal?
Multiplexing (or "muxing") is the process of combining something. In the case of digital video, you're combining audio, video, and possibly other data (navigation info, subtitles, etc). Multiplexing is only one part of the authoring process, when it comes to DVDs. Authoring includes the creation of navigation, menus (optional), and organization and presentation of your DVD.
De-multiplexing (or "demuxing") is the process of separating something that was previously multiplexed. In the case of digital video, that means recreating the program and/or elementary streams. Or at least you hope so -- but that's another conversation. Demuxing isn't always perfect.
Demuxing is NOT a process that only describes extracting a DVD. Indeed, de-multiplexing is only one part of the DVD decompile process, as it contains quite a bit of non-AV data that generally needs to be dumped. The DVD is also in a specialize disc structure format, and requires re-assembly (re-merge PGCs) before you can ever get to the demuxing phase of the DVD decompile. I build and un-build dozens of DVDs daily -- I would know this.
Demuxing cannot be illegal any more than eating a brownie is illegal. (And there is an analogy here -- but we'll get to that in a second!)
The term "illegal" itself is a misnomer.
What's likely being referred to here is the unauthorized breaking of CSS encryption (and/or other encryption algorithms, if present). Yes, this means that there is indeed "authorized" breaking of encryption, if done at the request of the content owners. And technically, the encryption is "broken" by way of keys -- that's how the DVD player can play your discs!
But DeCSS and/or other decryption happens before demux can happen. The entire structure of CSS make a disc unreadable by standard byte-for-byte data-reading by a computer drive. So you can't demux what you can't read. Some underground (and at one point, even mainstream) software, which performed DeCSS, would DeCSS then demux in a single step. But that doesn't mean it's the same process -- or even related.
Let's go back to that brownie. If you stuff it full of marijuana, yeah, you'll be in big trouble if you're caught. But it's not the brownie that's illegal -- it's the pot. They're not related, or even closely related.
DeCSS itself also isn't necessarily illegal. It's civilly actionable -- but it's not necessarily criminal. To suggest otherwise is to drink movie industry koolaid and go completely head-up-ass at the continually changing nature of how the courts are deciding copyright law can and cannot be interpreted and enforced. For example, DVD Jon was acquitted.
But before I go...
from
http://www.aidinc.com/about/default.asp
Quote:
Professionals come to Audio Intervisual Design for superior technical knowledge, vast experience of both traditional work techniques and emerging formats, and the understanding that you need to service your client’s projects.
|
from
http://www.aidinc.com/home.asp
Quote:
Audio Intervisual Design has served as a consultant, design team, integrator, reseller, and service & support group for over 25 years to Motion Picture, Television, and Music industry Production and Post-Production professionals. Bookmark this page (Ctrl+D) or subscribe to our Newsletter to stay on top of the latest innovations and technologies vital to your work.
|
After both of those quotes, I can truly say that I have no idea what it is that these people do. I'm reminded of politicians -- people who can write and talk endlessly, yet manage to say absolutely nothing about what they've done and what they'll do in the future.
It may as well say
"Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ."
Demux illegal? No, I think not.
Posts like this may not make us new friends -- but then again, I don't want stupid friends.
PNG screencap of offending page attached inside the RAR.