Originally Posted by bhartman36
Reading the document, one of the things that struck me is that the people who didn't want the exception (the rights holders, I assume) argued that an exception wasn't needed because it was already covered under the previous exception. Do you think that argument has legs?
I would say no. Otherwise they would simply take someone to court. They are looking for less ambiguity. Remember that these rules only apply for three years. I'll have all my DVDs converted by 12/31 and won't buy more until they reinstate the exception for personal use. that's my statement.