Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Legal? Showing DVDs for free?

This is topic Legal? Showing DVDs for free? in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001105

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 04-06-2004, 04:04 PM:

I know of a theater [name withheld] that is planning on showing "The Office" (critically acclaimed BBC sitcom) for free. Is this legal. I don't want to be a whistle-blower, I just want to figure out the legalities behind this. I've heard of theaters renting out their space for children's parties, where a special DVD might be played on the video projector. Wouldn't that be the same thing?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-06-2004, 04:56 PM:

I'm not a lawyer, but....

If it's a public performance, then it's not legal, regardless of whether or not admission is charged.

I don't know about the birthday party thing. I suspect that it's a grey area, but probably safest to license the DVD (unless it's a PD title).

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 04-07-2004, 12:37 AM:

AFAIK, if the space (the auditorium) is rented for a PRIVATE PARTY (emphasis on the word PRIVATE), then legally it shouldn't be any different than playing a DVD on the big-screen TV at home during a b-day party.

The line gets crossed if the private party screening gets 'advertised' as to imply that anyone (read: the public) can 'attend' the 'party' solely for the purpose of viewing the video, whether an admission is paid or not.

-Aaron

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 04-07-2004, 09:16 AM:

Interesting. Thanks for your opinions guys! [beer]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-07-2004, 10:11 AM:

I suspect that even renting an auditorium for a private party where copyrighted material was screened would be questionable. If caught, the theatre might be subject to sanctions such as removal from service by a distributor, especially since the theatre was trying to profit from showing unlicensed material. Even if the private screenings were "free", any profit from concession sales would make it a commercial venture.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-07-2004, 10:57 AM:

Plus also, BBC Worldwide, the international licensing arm of the BBC which manages programme sales, are notoriously anal about protecting revenue. If the DVD this place is showing was purchased retail and they did not obtain a separate licence to screen it in their theatre, I would imagine that such a screening would probably not be legal. The licence agreements (which are often shown as the 'first play' screen on a retail DVD) are usually quite specific in stating that they only allow it to be shown in a private residence. Other group showings - even if free - are specifically excluded.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 04-07-2004, 11:22 AM:

This is what a few DVD's state on the back of their packages.

WARNING: For Private home use only. Unauthorized public performance, broadcast or copying is a violation of applicable laws.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 04-07-2004, 12:03 PM:

One exception to copyright rules is that a classroom teacher can show a video in class if part of a one-one-one teaching experience. However, the video cannot be shown in the school cafeteria as part of any kind of reward, entertainment, etc, regardless if admission is charged or not.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-07-2004, 01:52 PM:

For what it's worth, the disclaimers (FBI warning, etc) that come on videotapes/DVDs/etc. have no actual legal validity whatsoever, apparently. They're intended to scare off potential "casual pirates," but have no value beyond that.

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 04-07-2004, 02:09 PM:

I plan on speaking with the owner of the previously unnamed theater soon, so I'll be sure to ask him how he managed to get rights to show the DVD. I'll post what I learn.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-07-2004, 02:11 PM:

The disclaimers are just a warning that there ARE copyright laws that can be enforced. For a theatre showing unlicensed material, there are also civil penalties and business sanctions that can be invoked by a distributor.

Posted by Charles Dale Carter (Member # 2315) on 04-07-2004, 02:59 PM:

Very interesting topic that hits close to home. Would it make any difference if theater is run by a non-profit org.? And if concession sales went to benefit the operating non-profit? I, too, know of a theater that shows TV events (through a satellite TV feed) such as sporting events, races, etc. for free and charges for concessions. The showings are not advertised anywhere other than on marquee. Is this different? Is there really any legal beagle among the ranks here who can validate any of the banter here?

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-07-2004, 03:59 PM:

You can show broadcast programming to a crowd as long as the following is done..

You do not block out or silence commercials or station idendification...

You do not charge admission (except in the case of a private club where a cover charge may be mandatory by local law)...

You do not advertise that you will be showing any specific programming... it must be vague and not name the event or show itself... Such as a local bar here advertises that you can watch the college basketball playoffs on any of thier 52 screens, but never actually said the NCAA playoffs.

Ciao

Dave

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 04-07-2004, 06:01 PM:

One of the last big pay per-view fights that ran last year. A friend that owns a bar here in the city was going to have the fight. He called the cable company that services the area on the cost of the event. The price was $99.00 for private home use. They then asked how many people it seated and how many TV's were going tobe used for the event. So they quoted him a price of $49.00 per person for the public licensed to show the fight.
They based the per person on how many seats in the grill area and to how many TV's.

The cable company had people around the city checking on bars.

Here is a warning from MGM from the back of a DVD.

Warning: The copyright owner has licensed the film (including the soundtrack) comprised in this DVD for home use only. All other rights are reserved. The definition of home use excludes the use of this DVD at locations such as clubs, buses, hospitals, hotels, oil rigs, prisons and schools. Any unauthorised coping, editing, exhibition, public performance diffusion and/or broadcast of this DVD or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and any such action estabishes libility for such civil action and may give rise to criminal prosecution.

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 04-07-2004, 07:25 PM:

Spoke to the theater owner, and according to him/her [implication withheld], the booking of the DVD was done through their private booker. The event is being advertised, but no admission is being charged. The owner recognized the fact that showing the DVD was illegal, but assumed that his/her booker had ironed out the legal issues. After the booker okayed it, the owner put it in the calendar.

Do you think public performance rights for DVD will become more attainable now that every TV show in the history of man is being archived on DVD?

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 04-07-2004, 08:04 PM:

There is an exception to the public exhibition of DVD rule...video stores are specifically allowed to screen DVD material in store as a promotional tool.

Of course, different distributors/territories may have contractual differences.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-08-2004, 01:35 AM:

quote:
The owner recognized the fact that showing the DVD was illegal, but assumed that his/her booker had ironed out the legal issues. After the booker okayed it, the owner put it in the calendar.

The booker is (or at least, should be) acting as the copyright owner's agent, so presumably the venue has paid a non-theatrical hire fee, or (s)he contacted BBC Worldwide who gave permission as a goodwill gesture (unusual, but not unheard of).

In reply to Charles Dale Carter's point, different countries have different copyright legislation, and I'm no expert on the US. In Europe, there are basically two models: ours, which largely follows the North American principle of defining copyright as the economic ownership of intellectual property (in other words, the person who meets the financial costs of a work's production is its de facto copyright owner); and the French 'droit d'auteur' (right of the author) system, which takes as its starting point the idea that intellectual property cannot have any financial value (i.e. a production company cannot produce a 'good' film, however much money it spends, unless it has talented film-makers to work for it). The key differences between the two models and the different reasons for countries adopting one or the other are covered in Pascal Kamina's book Film Copyright in the European Union.

As for British law, it is the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended by statutory instruments (acts of Parliament which make minor changes to laws without needing to tear them up and rewrite them) in 1995, 1996 and 2003. The key things it defines are what constitutes a 'film' for the purpose of copyright, who owns the copyright and how it can change hands, how long a film remains in copyright, what acts are restricted by copyright and what acts are permitted in respect of a copyright work.

Without going through the chapter and verse (which is contained in section 19 of the act), the bottom line is that any public performance which takes place without the copyright owner's explicit permission constitutes an offence. Given that the licence blurb on the back of most retail DVDs specifically restricts permission to showing them inside private residences, I'd guess that you would be on a sticky wicket if you tried to do so anywhere else. OK, you could potentially argue the toss over the definition of 'public', but when you have to hire lawyers to argue the toss for you, it would probably be a lot cheaper just to pay the non-theatrical rental fee!

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-08-2004, 07:04 AM:

<Looks at a couple of BBC DVDs>

Wallace and Gromit and The Best of Monty Python's Flying Circus VOL.1.

The discs themselves have a copyright symbol, and the words:

'BBC Worldwide LTD 1999 Subject to applicable laws' and
'BBC Worldwide LTD 2000 Subject to applicable laws'

so that doesn't tell us much. The cases carry the following text:

'Warning: this Digital Video Disc, including the sound track is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying, hiring, lending, public performance, radio or TV broadcasting of this video is prohibited. Your attention is drawn to the copyright warning at the beginning of the programme.

That warning says:

'THE RECORDING, COPYING, LOAN, ANAUTHORISED HIRE, PUBLIC SHOWING OR BROADCASTING OF THIS BBC WORLDWIDE DVD-VIDEO IS PROHIBITED'

Still not clear exactly what is permitted, but I very much doubt that hiring a theatre and showing it to several tens or hndreds of people would be included, whatever the circumstances. I would certainly want to have something in writing in my hand before using a recording in this way.

The words 'Private home use only', which are used on many commercial DVDs do not appear on these BBC ones.

Between 1974 and 1999 I worked as an AV technician in a school. We showed many feature films, sometimes several in a week both to after-hours film clubs, and for educational purposes, e.g. films of set books for English lierature exams, and a wide variety of films to film/media studies classes. All of this material was on 16mm, there were many distributors, Columbia-Warner, Rank, Ron Harris and Guild were the main ones we dealt with. We typically paid about £30-£40, and all the distributors seemed to use the same terms and conditions for 16mm non-commercial exibition, an A4 sheet of rather small print, which specified exactly what we could and couldn't do for the licence fee we paid, simple.

Staff always seemed to be moaning about how much they had to pay for films, It sounds pretty cheap to me, I hired something from the BFI at Christmas and it's only £50 plus tax now. Anyway, the dawn of the video age was upon us, and the staff were delighted; they could go down to the local video shop, hire a tape for a couple of pounds, and show it to their chasses. They seemed to have great difficulty understanding when we explained to them that they couldn't.

I also got 'borrowed' by various organisations to run films on a similar basis, My mother had a friend who was the leader of the local pack of Brownies, and they often showed films. Strange organisation the Brownies, always struck me as being a sort of juvenile, female version of the Freemasons!

Anyway, in those days any organisation wanting to show a film could book one quite easily. These days things are different, I have't got a clue how you would go about showing a DVD legitimatly. Can you rent a DVD in the same way you could a film print? Can you go and by a normal 'home' DVD and then buy a separate licence to show it? If so, who from, and how? I suspect that the vast majority of screenings to such groups today are using normal 'home' DVDs or VHS tapes, with no licence for such use.

Towards the end of my time some of the distributors started listing a few films on Super-8, at first with magnetic tracks, and then with optical. I suspect they had problems with magnetic tracks getting erased, and few 8mm machines could play optical. By that time video was starting to take over anyway, so 8mm never got very far. In this country few places except cinemas had 35mm. Some long-stay mental hospitals had it, mainly dis-used long ago, but most other places used 16mm. Even the large college where I now work, which had a full outdoor projection box with fire shutters and everything only ever had 16mm installed. I acquired the carbon arc machines when the hall was converted into a library, and the projection box into a store. The nitrate regulations here were even tighter here than in many other countries, which meant that installing 35mm was neither simple nor cheap. By the time nitrate went out of use and the regulations started to be relaxed, 16mm was well established for non-theatrical use. When I worked at the school we did run 35mm once or twice, when we needed something not available on 16mm, we had to hire a portable machine, and put up with breaks between reels. In the '70s large fixed 16mm machines with up to 2000W xenons and 6k spools were quite common in places which, from what I have read here would probably have had 35mm if they had been in the U.S. Also, from about the time of the introduction of colour in the '60s, 16mm became the norm for television production.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-08-2004, 08:01 AM:

In the US, the major nontheatrical distributors (Swank, Criterion, New Yorker Films, etc.) will rent VHS videotapes in the same way they would rent 16mm for nontheatrical screenings. I believe that the prices are the same as 16mm, and the tapes can legally be shown to the public (with or without an admission charge).

I would assume that they probably have DVDs available of the more popular titles now. When I last booked anything through Swank (1999), it was 35mm, 16mm, or VHS only.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-08-2004, 08:50 AM:

Stephen writes:

quote:
Anyway, the dawn of the video age was upon us, and the staff were delighted; they could go down to the local video shop, hire a tape for a couple of pounds, and show it to their chasses.

Not to mention 'running off' their own copies... [Roll Eyes]

Broadcasters and the video industry eventually had to admit defeat on that score and start the Educational Recording Agency scheme instead.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-08-2004, 10:47 AM:

We were allowed to record BBC schools programmes, and there was a similar arrangement for ITV, but there were three conditions attached to the use of the recordings:

They could only be used for educational purposes.

They could only be used within the establishment by which they were made.

They had to be erased within twelve months of being made.

Later there was an arrangement whereby certain general service programmes could also be recorded.

We also bought a licence to record Open University programmes, I think this was done through Guild.

Things have probably changed somewhat in the last fifteen years.

Recording programmes off-air for personal use at home is now generally accepted, but making a copy of a commercial video recording is not. This complicates things somewhat where feature films are concerned. I cannot borrow a tape or DVD from someone and run off a copy for myself, but what if the same film is broadcast; can I record it off-air? What is the difference between making a copy of a friends tape, and effectivly making a copy of the television company master tape? What about television programmes which have been commercially released on video? I cannot copy the Monty Python DVD which I have, but I could record the material off-air when broadcast.

I believe that once everything in television/video is digital we will see restrictions put on what can be recorded; some sort of copy-prohibit flag transmitted in each frame, flag set, recorded will not record it. Indeed, I suspect that the ability to control use of programme material is one of the reasons why digital is being promoted so hard.

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 04-08-2004, 07:00 PM:

quote:
Anyway, in those days any organisation wanting to show a film could book one quite easily. These days things are different, I have't got a clue how you would go about showing a DVD legitimatly. Can you rent a DVD in the same way you could a film print? Can you go and by a normal 'home' DVD and then buy a separate licence to show it? If so, who from, and how? I suspect that the vast majority of screenings to such groups today are using normal 'home' DVDs or VHS tapes, with no licence for such use.

In the UK Filmbank will hire out some DVDs (and VHS/ 16mm) for non theatrical showing. At present they have more titles on 16mm and VHS than DVD.
The DVDs are standard home use DVDs sent out with a sheet of paper 'correcting' the on disk copyright info.
They charge more for carrage of the DVD than it would cost to buy a new one for. [if only they could give paper licences]

Posted by Roger Katz (Member # 1625) on 04-08-2004, 10:06 PM:

I see that Swank rents the films for nom-theatrical venues. What if one wanted to rent a 16 mm print of an older movie to show at a theatre which is primarily used for live purposes? What company would rent films like that?

Posted by Nicholas Suchyta (Member # 2050) on 04-09-2004, 01:28 AM:

I know that Criterion will allow you to purchase a "license" that will allow you to play a DVD and do it legally. The disadvantages are that it's outrageously expensive, and that the DVD's have to be titles that they have booking rights to.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-09-2004, 09:44 AM:

What do you mean by 'outrageously expensive'? What do you consider would would be a reasonable fee to show a film to a group of people of the size that you are likely to get in schools, colleges, youth clubs and similar places?

Posted by Charles Dale Carter (Member # 2315) on 04-09-2004, 02:18 PM:

Thanks, Dave Williams, for answering specifically some of my questions. In the case of the theater I'm speaking of, the non-profit goes through a film distributor to get its DVDs. The fees are $150 for a weekend showing then the first $150 of admissions ($300 when all is said and done). Admission at theater for all movies is $5, so only 60 people need to come over the two, or three showings. It's working very well and their getting some of the latest movies (not first runs, though) and have access to some of the classics that are now out.

The theater has foregone its 35mm past and is now exclusively digital. I will definitely pass along to them your answers, Dave, about showing the sporting events.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 04-09-2004, 02:42 PM:

Dan wrote:

quote:
Spoke to the theater owner, and according to him/her [implication withheld], the booking of the DVD was done through their private booker.

This may well be the truth but my instinct is to doubt this.

I suppose my reaction might depend upon the company in question and my feelings toward them. Given that the company will remain nameless (for obvious good reason) I am inclined to be skeptical.

There is a fair chance that you were being "handled" so that your "investigation" would go no further; the assumption being that you would never contact the booker for verification.

Posted by Nicholas Suchyta (Member # 2050) on 04-10-2004, 02:02 AM:

When we checked into buying a site license, the cost was upwards of $20,000. For a single screen, it's not affordable for us at this time. From what was passed on to me, they based it on the fact that you could conceivably "show several films per week." While it may be cheaper in the long run, it's still more then we wanted to shell out right away.

Posted by Steve Anderson (Member # 364) on 04-11-2004, 09:46 AM:

We do the "birthday party" they either pay for a film rental or bring their own DVD to be played. Most of the time they also bring in cake and ice cream so we don't make concession money..just theater space.

Posted by Ray Kaufman (Member # 2351) on 04-11-2004, 10:32 AM:

Having run a hardtop for over fifteen years and now getting into the outdoor movies stage of my life, I’ve investigated or researched this subject extensively and know I’ve only scratched the surface. There are a lot of issues going on here, including licensing DVD, non-theatrical vs. theatrical and the definition of “public” performance, all of which can be very confusing if not a legal quagmire. From the little that I know or have been told by those that do –

Many distributors, but not all of them, will license the 'theatrical' screening of DVD’s, usually under the same terms as for film. (meaning you still have to have an MLA,) for public performance. Non-theatrical distribs including Swank, Criterion, (for Fox and others,) and New Yorker only tell people a little regarding the promotion of non-theatricals, but in essence, non-theatrical screenings are meant for closed groups of people; schools, institutions, airlines, cruise ships, etc. and the screening is not to be advertised, by title, to the public at large. Nothing wrong with promoting the event that the title is a part of. Likewise, the title can be a part of a calendar listing in a paper, but a separate ad, including the title is a no-no.

If the theatre owner rents his theatre for a private party and as part of the party, the group brings in a DVD to screen as part of the celebration, the question becomes, is this not a “private” event and not subject to the terms of public performance. The theatre merely becomes a substitute for a backyard. The theatre is just a place to hold a private function. It could well be a banquet hall. And this is but one example of the answers not yet clearly addressed.

I do know one thing. No matter what, stay clear of mouse house’s product in any form. The truths and myths run rampant on their ferocity to go after the little guy when copyright and exhibition rights are concerned.

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 04-11-2004, 01:22 PM:

Copyright Law of the United States of America
and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

Circular 92
Chapter 1
Subject Matter and Scope of Copyright

quote:
To perform or display a work “publicly” means —

(1) to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or

(2) to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work to a place specified by clause (1) or to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times.

Public Performance of Video Recordings

quote:
Public Performance of Video Recordings
A quick explanation on how to avoid breaking the law:

Students often want to show movies or videos in our classrooms and auditoriums for their clubs, organizations, or just for fun. Unless you acquire the tapes with public performance rights you will be breaking the copyright law. You cannot just go to the video store, rent a video or DVD and show it in a public space because these copies are not licensed for public performance. Even if you do not charge an admission for the movie you are still breaking the law.

In order to be legal you have to get the tape or DVD from a vendor that rents you the movie with public performance rights. This can be expensive and may cost hundreds of dollars per tape.

The only exception to this rule is if an instructor shows the video in a classroom and the activity is a teaching activity and not recreation or entertainment. This situation would not be considered a violation of copyright law.

A few places to rent tapes or DVDs with public performance rights. (We usually use Swank):

Swank Motion Pictures, Inc., 1-800-876-5577
Kino International, 1-800-562-3330
New Yorker Films, 1-877-247-6200
Criterion Pictures USA, 1-800-890-9494
Modern Sound Pictures, 1-402-341-8476

Read on for more detailed information:
What is a copyrighted video recording?

Copyright is a property right that gives the copyright owner of an original work a bundle of exclusive rights, which include the right to authorize or prohibit reproduction, derivative works, distribution, and public performance or display of that work. You can bet that every videotape you own or rent is copyrighted.

What is a "Public Performance"?

Section 101 of the copyright law says that a performance is public if it is in a public place or if it is in any place if "a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its acquaintances" is gathered there.

Thus, the factors to consider in determining whether a performance is public include whether the place is public and the size and composition of the audience. For example, if the place where the performance takes place is a public place (open to the public), how many and what kind of people attend is not important.

By definition it is a public performance. Virtually every auditorium, classroom, meeting room, and dorm lounge on the campus is to be considered a public place, so screening a video there is considered a public performance. Where the place of performance is not open to the public (Like your dorm room, where the public can be excluded), and every one there was your friend, the performance would most likely not be considered as public and you would be legal.

The teaching exception:

Even if a proposed performance might be considered a public performance, there may not be an infringement because the copyright law places further limits upon the performance right of copyright owners in Sections 110(1), (2) and (4).4 Section 110(1) says that performances that take place in the face-to-face teaching activities of a nonprofit educational institution are not an infringement of the copyright owner's right.

Following are the elements of each exemption that must be satisfied in order for an otherwise public performance to be exempt:

1. Section 110(1) (Teaching Activities of a Nonprofit Educational Institution):
* The performance must be performed by the instructor or pupil(s) (not by a performance artist);
* The instructor and pupil(s) must be in the same place (transmissions by television, etc., do not qualify here although they may qualify under 110(2) below);
* The activity must be a teaching activity and not recreation or entertainment;
* The activity must be put on by a nonprofit educational institution;
* The activity must take place in a classroom or other area used as a classroom for systematic instructional activity; and
* In the case of performance of a videotape or movie, the copy of the work performed must have been lawfully made. For example, one cannot show an archival copy of a videotape since it would not have been made in accordance with the provisions of the copyright law.

Updated: May 19, 2003

Posted by William Uhlhorn (Member # 1923) on 04-16-2004, 01:21 PM:

Figure this out. A local theatre that is our competition ran a special showing for 600 school students. They played Disney product. The film in question was out of release at the time. The picture on the screen looked like 35mm to me. I called our booker, she called Disney, Disney called the theatre. The owner said it was a video. Disney decided not to take it any further. End of story.

Posted by Floyd Justin Newton (Member # 1316) on 04-16-2004, 07:11 PM:

Concerning all these 'non-licensed' exhibitions'....be careful
who you are involved with. A person can land up in big trouble
connected with huge legal ramifications that only a New York
lawyer can untangle and resolve. Food For Thought.

fjn
Local 294 Ret. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Jamie Glossop (Member # 2180) on 04-17-2004, 07:07 PM:

I guess if the cinemas not making a profit from the showing it should be alright. But you should realy get written permission from the bbc as due to the copyrights of the dvd. [Smile]

Posted by Heidi Good (Member # 2376) on 04-26-2004, 01:28 AM:

Some countries are more policed then others...

In Thialand and Bali and alot of southeast Asia, there are hotels and restaurants that show movies all the time..Often bootlegs they got before the movie even gets released in America. I'm positive that they don't pay royalties...and

Yes when are the laws going to change on DVD viewing...esp. Years after the movie came out, or movies that never got released on dvd in other countries...I'm from California but am in Australia now and I looked through the Movie book to see what was released in Australia, and I'm hard pressed to find a movie I want to watch....things need to change...

Posted by Heidi Good (Member # 2376) on 04-26-2004, 04:27 AM:

How is it ok for my Bank ( wells fargo ) to show movies to the customers while they wait in line .
I asked...the workers just randomly bring movies in and play them....
when is it realy ok and what is the issue realy.
Good point about modern day dvd's..every old TV show is now on dvd, so what do you do if you want to show movies that were never printed on film or are too old and obscure. Do you search out the owner and call them ...

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 04-26-2004, 10:55 AM:

Well, I doubt the people waiting in line at the bank are watching the whole movie. Unless the studio is as bastardable as to go after them under the "in whole or in part" clause. [Roll Eyes]

I think it would be the same as them playing a CD in the bank. There's public performance rights surrounding music, too, but if someone's playing a CD over the store's speaker system, they're not going to hoop and holler.

IMHO, paying royalties to play something passively is stupid. If it's not a performance, you shouldn't have to pay. I doubt people drive in droves to the Piggly Wiggly supermarket to sit in the meat section and listen to the latest Celiene Dion CD. There should be an exclusion if you're using the material for "background noise" [Razz]

Copyright law has gotten so spastically anal lately, I'm surprised the MPAA didn't try to put a stop to the movie quote game.

=TMP=

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 04-26-2004, 10:58 AM:

They show movies in the doctors office where I take my kids, is that legal. We are paying for the doctor visit, after all.

Posted by Ray Kaufman (Member # 2351) on 04-26-2004, 12:46 PM:

Both ASCAP and BMI are forever on the prowl, looking for ANYONE, be it store, office, elevator, or whatever, playing music covered under their respective licensing agreements. Musak and Musak-like services hold the license, which makes it legal for those using their service, but slipping a CD into a store P.A. is a huge no-no and eventually, they'll get a letter saying pay up or turn it off.

Royalties are paid to the respective creators and owners of the music. ASCAP says by playing the music as background, one is enjoying the work of another and the other is entitled to payment for that creation. And know too, this is not a recent happening. They've been doing this for decades. If anything, it's MPAA and the studios, who've only recently jumped on this bandwagon.

I've a friend who owns a dinner cruise biz and he was slapped many years ago for playing CD's as patrons boarded the boat to head out for a publicly advertised sail and dinner. He told the ASCAP guy to bring him a list of all of the covered music. The guy went to the car, opened the trunk and produced a HUGE book of fine print listings. He was told to leave it and they'd check it to be sure they'd only play music in the public domain. By the way, if it was a charter, they could play whatever they wanted as that was a private function.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 04-26-2004, 07:10 PM:

so let's say an asscap agent is on the prowl and hears some piped in music in a shoe store. she would have to consult her book/database to check if it's a song that asscap "owns". what if it's an obscure instrumental song? does she use that new song-identification program that i think was mentioned here a while ago but i can't find at the moment?

carl

Posted by Kevin Baglow (Member # 721) on 04-27-2004, 04:36 AM:

I think it will damage my theatres credibility if I show a DVD or any thing electronic --when people come here- because they want to see film?

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 05-02-2004, 05:55 AM:

Within the United States, despite all of the confusion and propaganda to the contrary being spread about by the MPAA and RIAA, it is still fully legal for any of us to make a copy of ANYTHING for personal private use, including both movies and songs. Usually movie copies will be made by individuals on VHS tape, since this is easiest even though the quality isn't as good as dvd, but recently there is all sorts of software that can copy dvds to blank dvds. This comes under the "fair use" doctrine of the "copyright equation," where there is a theoretical balance between the interests of copyright holders and those of the general public. In time everything is supposed to pass into the public domain. However.....

Recently the mouse house and MPAA, et al paid huge sums of money under the table to our crooked congress [oops! sorry! political contributions] to buy the mickey mouse copyright extension law which runs it all out for another 20 years. This was appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to over-rule, but remarked sort of that what congress did was bad law and not very good public policy... still congress had the right to make bad law if it wanted to. I guess the court didn't this this was all that important in the overall scheme of things so they let it stand.

What's going on now is that the MPAA is hoping to achieve with technology what they cannot do legally: that is, they cannot STOP people from making copies of movies for their own personal use because in court they will lose. Instead, they want to stop all recording by individuals in the digital domain with techniques such as the "broadcast flag," which when turned on will prevent recording. If they get this the flag will of course be turned on all the time for everything.

In other words, **technology** will be used to stop people from doing what cannot be stopped **legally.** It will take a while for the reality of this to settle in, but people are gonna be mad like hell when it starts to affect them.

Eventually a test case will reach the Supreme Court. Usually precedent is very important in law, and if precedent set by the Betamax case of 1984 holds, my guess is the broadcast flag and all similar gimmickry will be ruled illegal. But it's going to take years for us to get there.

Meanwhile, avoid all new microsoft software and the XP operating system unless there is something **very specific** you need to do where you must have it. "Don't Upgrade Anything!!!" You may be very, very sorry; countless folks who have "upgraded" to this have been. In years to come, CD's with the 98SE operating system are going to be like gold, once everything else is all wrapped up in DRM [digital rights management] with all sorts of unpopular restrictions.

Posted by Tim Lockridge (Member # 1346) on 05-02-2004, 12:50 PM:

quote: Joe Schmidt
Meanwhile, avoid all new microsoft software and the XP operating system unless there is something **very specific** you need to do where you must have it. "Don't Upgrade Anything!!!" You may be very, very sorry; countless folks who have "upgraded" to this have been. In years to come, CD's with the 98SE operating system are going to be like gold, once everything else is all wrapped up in DRM [digital rights management] with all sorts of unpopular restrictions.

I realize we're going offtrack here... but what? If you're worried about DRM or other OS restrictions, you'd be better off with Linux, not win9x. The only reason people should be sorry for upgrading to XP is for hardware incompatibility, not for DRM issues. The operating system has little to do with copyright protections... those safeguards are built into individual file types. For example, Apple's OS X is probably the best Operating System on the market as far as user security, depth, and power are concerned. Apple's new "Fair Play" DRM -- part of their much hyped iTunes store -- is encoded into individual files... not into the operating system.

Besides, the companies designing these rights management procedures are only trying to protect their perceived interests. You can't really fault them for that.

And again, if you have problems with Microsoft or Apple, there's always Linux/BSD/etc. In this age where a few copyright holders may be a bit overzealous in enforcing restrictions, we -- as consumers -- are blessed with quite a few options.

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 05-02-2004, 07:48 PM:

Tim, you're absolutely right about the Linux alternative. At some point I plan to migrate over to a Linux/Lindows/Linspire box for internet only and it won't cost very much. If I switch from dial-up to broadband at home this will become mandatory for security considerations. Everything I do on a daily basis runs fine on 98SE, there is no reason to change, in fact I still use DOS sw from '88-90 for certain things.

XP will happen only if I must have it for a particular task, which may never come along due to time constraints and other projects in progress. It will be locked up in its own box with no internet access; for my own peace of mind that's how it must be.

It is not too unusual in forums for a sub-discussion to get going within a topic that began with something else. Often I'm a little confused myself whether to start a new topic or to digress within an existing one. If we get too far out of line the moderators will beat us up.

[Cool]