[amelius]

> asserting copyright of ripped images

I don't think there would be a legal basis here. If I sell a pen, I can't claim ownership of the things people write with it, no matter what EULA I make people sign. The same holds for a Xerox machine. And similarly it holds for a tool to copy bits or flux transitions.

[paulgerhardt]

Not quite. As I understand it, the hardware rips disks and encodes them in proprietary SPS flux image formats (.IPF, .STREAM, and .DRAFT) subject to a very weird license agreement.[1] SPS does not assert ownership of the encoded content but does assert that content encoded with their software can not be used for commercial purposes. I suspect this “bit coloring” is at the root of why the Internet Archive made the decision to no longer accept Kryoflux based images and why it is not a good candidate for archival purposes.

[1] https://www.kryoflux.com/download/LICENCE.txt

[snvzz]

It's a shame they're doing this.

But at least, there is hope that fully OSS+OSHW solutions will effectively replace it.

What they're doing is certainly not magic. Warpers existed in the 90s already.

[Brian_K_White]

It doesn't matter if it's legally enforceable.

All that matters is that they tried.