The thread on UPF has a different outcome that what you are saying. i am reproducing the relevant information which seems to contradict what you are saying.
I am very much interested in the source of the following statement, since i did not find anything that definitive in my searches:
" Under the consumer protection amendndment to the Copyright laws, a private person may make a copy of a copyrighted work onto a different media formant for personal use. This amendment was added during the 70's when cassettes became the rage"
--------
Kent, we found a copywrite site that mentioned something about some recent legislation or something about reasonable exceptions under "fair use" where you could make copies for yourself.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.1066:IH
we couldn't determine if it was just opinions, a bill in committee or an actual amendment to the existing law that had been passed.
Do you have a better/more conclusive reference than mine?
-----
I will research whether it was passed, but the bill only applies to digital formats. This would allow you to make a VHS copy of your DVD, but not a digital, or other, copy (DVD, MP3, CD) of your VHS tape. Go figure.
(later)
bill is still in committee
-----------
<<Personal use reproduction is legal though a gray area. Keep your copies to one (you wouldn't need more than one if it is for personal use).>>
For practical purposes, I think you're right.
However, I think the original poster was asking for an opinion to determine the outcome of a bet. What you can do for practical purposes is definitely different from what is "legal" according to the statute.
Bottom line is that your purchase of any work which may be copyrighted (even purchasing the original, unless such purchase specifically includes the right to make copies) does not automatically entitle you to make copies.
If you make a copy of something you have purchased to protect the original and not to sell or trade the copy (in person or via KaZaa, Napster, etc.), then the copyright owner probably would never find out about it or do anything about it if you it was discovered.
However, that doesn't necessarily mean you have the "right" to do it.
It is also becoming more and more clear after the Napster case, and others like it, and cable piracy cases I have litigated, that it only matters what the statute says, not what we think is fair, right or "american." Trading copies of works you own for copies of works you don't own, downloading them from a ftp or web site, or getting them via e-mail is piracy, is not legal, and never has been. Doing something because others do it is like justifying the commission of a crime because there are criminals.
The archive limitation on a copyright appears to be reserved for libraries open to the public. The current fair use exception is meant to allow reviewers and researchers to quote portions of a copyrighted work in work of their own, not to make entire copies on a different form of media.
The digital age has changed a lot of the copyright law and digital copies and transmissions seem to have different exceptions due to the fact that digital copies are intangible, ephemeral and more likely to be accidentally damaged. By digital copy I mean a copy stored entirely on your media device (PC or iPod), not a floppy, CD, DVD or other removable media. The legislative and legal professions are having a hard time keeping up with technology.
KMM, JD
---------
OK.....so here is what I got for you Larry. As of today, whomever bet that it is illegal to make the copy from VHS to DVD would win. If it was going the other way (DVD->VHS) it would be legal, but the current condition of the DCMA it does not allow for VHS to be copied to a digital format, despite the fact that the use might be considered nonifringing on a copyrighted work.
This is what happened when policy is written by industry instead of unbiased lawmakers. Fortunately, as it has been mentioned in this thread, Bill HR 1066 IH is on the board for a vote that will allow conversions like the one in question to occur legally.
In Article C of Section 5 of HR 1066, it covers your issue as shown below:
`(c) CIRCUMVENTION FOR NONINFRINGING USES- (1) Notwithstanding any other provision in this title, a person who lawfully obtains a copy or phonorecord of a work, or who lawfully receives a transmission of a work, may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to the work or protects a right of the copyright holder under this title if--
`(A) such act is necessary to make a noninfringing use of the work under this title; and