Would this be legal?

[puddy]

I'm in the USA and have a "legal" question. I see a market for selling rare commercial VHS video tapes in NTSC land, but many of the tapes are in PAL format, incompatible with NTSC VHS players and TVs.

If I convert a copy of the PAL VHS to NTSC and burn it to a DVD, would I be allowed to sell the original PAL VHS tape along with the converted DVD?

They would buy the VHS tape for a price, the DVD would be thrown in for free. So, the purchaser would be the new owner of the original VHS tape and would have a "right to backup" copy on the DVD that will allow them to view the video in NTSC land.

Any thoughts on this?

[blutach]

The copyright owner would still have its rights, IMO. Making a backup for yourself after buying a product is very different to selling it for commercial gain.

You should seek legal opinion anyway from a senior IP lawyer.

Regards

[Sharktooth]

i think it's legal since you give him the original VHS + a backup of the SAME material on another media.

[puddy]

The copyright owner would still have its rights, IMO. Making a backup for yourself after buying a product is very different to selling it for commercial gain.

You should seek legal opinion anyway from a senior IP lawyer.
Regards

Keep in mind, I am not retaining the original VHS video or selling the PAL-to-NTSC converted DVD copy of the video by itself. It is a package deal and I will clearly state the person is purchasing the original VHS video and the DVD copy is free for backup purposes.

Sure, I understand it is on the edge, but if you think about it, the end result is the same. The owner will have the original video and a single copy of that video, which as I understand it, is legal.

Also, the hurdle is far too great for the average NTSC-land consumer to actually make their own backup copy of a PAL VHS tape. 99.9% of the time they are going to have all NTSC payback equipment.

I'm just thinking here, I'm not actually doing this yet, nor have I even taken the 1st step in doing this. The idea just came to me so I thought I'd throw it out there and get some feedback.

[Dark Shikari]

As long as you're charging money for the service of converting the tape, it should be fine. It would be much like selling someone a DVD-Audio disc and charging them a small extra fee to give them an ordinary CD version of it. It seems to be to be an issue of charging for a service (converting the tape) rather than selling the actual rights in any way.

[puddy]

As long as you're charging money for the service of converting the tape, it should be fine. It would be much like selling someone a DVD-Audio disc and charging them a small extra fee to give them an ordinary CD version of it. It seems to be to be an issue of charging for a service (converting the tape) rather than selling the actual rights in any way.

That is an interesting angle to it. But that seems to imply that the person already owned the tape and hired me to convert it for them.

I guess in a way, it is the same time, but I'm not sure.

[ojdidit]

C'mon guys. No judge would buy that argument. Its clearly a case of trying to circumvent the "spirit" of the law while observing the "letter'. GUILTY.

[Guest]

The copyright owner retains all rights and you need to consult him. You cannot just start distributing extra copies of his copyrighted work at your whim.

[bond]

First question: Do you have the license to sell the original VHS commercially?

[Dark Shikari]

The copyright owner retains all rights and you need to consult him. You cannot just start distributing extra copies of his copyrighted work at your whim.You're not distributing extra copies--you're simply format-shifting, which is the entire basis on which Doom9 exists. By your logic, we might as well just close up this forum right now.

There is nothing illegal about paying someone to convert your records to CDs, therefore there is nothing illegal about paying someone extra to convert that VHS tape you just bought to a more convenient format. Simple as that.

[Guest]

It's not the same thing at all, Dark. Consult an intellectual property attorney if you doubt me.

[Dark Shikari]

It's not the same thing at all, Dark. Consult an intellectual property attorney if you doubt me.How is selling someone a VHS, and then offering to convert it to them to a more convenient format for a fee any different from the same person paying you money to convert their LPs to CDs?

1. You sell someone a VHS tape.
2. They tell you it won't work on their TV.
3. You offer to convert it to a more convenient format for a fee.
4. They take the deal, and pay you a few dollars. Everyone's happy.
(You claim this isn't legal)

1. You sell someone an LP.
2. They tell you it won't work on their CD player.
3. You offer to convert it to a more convenient format for a fee.
4. They take the deal, and pay you a few dollars. Everyone's happy.
(It is a well known fact that this is legal)

Just because they're different formats doesn't change the reality of the law. Since there is no copy protection, the DMCA's policy on breaking content protection doesn't apply either.

It would probably be illegal if you didn't sell them the original first, yes.

[puddy]

First question: Do you have the license to sell the original VHS commercially?

No, but neither do the people who sell tapes they own on e-bay, right? I'm going obtain these "rare" tapes (FYI, totally legit stuff, not porn!!) though places like e-bay. I will then own them.

I will then sell them back on e-bay but with a twist that along with the original VHS tape they get a DVD of the same material. And in a lot of cases the only way somebody could actually view what they are buying is by having the converted DVD.

How about this: Sell the tape as-is (which was always the plan) but add a free bonus voucher good for one Tape-to-DVD conversion?

I'm not trying to rip anybody off. If the original VHS was available in NTSC then there would be no need for me to do this at all. I had to do this for myself and thought I couldn't be the only one out there who needed this. Seemed like a reasonable niche market to explore.

And this is different than just advertising that you do Tape-to-DVD transfers. Many people don't realize they can own videos that are not in their native county format. Many are not even aware that there are lots of videos released only in PAL-land.

Again, it is niche, and maybe slightly on the edge, but certainly not in the realm of counterfeiting or something to that degree.

[puddy]

Just because they're different formats doesn't change the reality of the law. Since there is no copy protection, the DMCA's policy on breaking content protection doesn't apply either.

Well, they are commercial VHS tapes, so I would assume many of them would have Macrovision protection. Then the resulting converted DVD would not be protected and could easily be copied. So, this may actually be the best argument against doing this so far, IMO.

[Guest]

(You claim this isn't legal) No I didn't say that! And that is not the scenario offered by the OP, anyway.

[Dark Shikari]

No I didn't say that! And that is not the scenario offered by the OP, anyway.However it sounds as if he can turn his scenario into that scenario with no substantive change in his business model.

[bond]

No, but neither do the people who sell tapes they own on e-bay, right? I'm going obtain these "rare" tapes (FYI, totally legit stuff, not porn!!) though places like e-bay. I will then own them.

I will then sell them back on e-bay but with a twist that along with the original VHS tape they get a DVD of the same material. And in a lot of cases the only way somebody could actually view what they are buying is by having the converted DVD. from my point of view this is illegal as done commercially, no matter if its in VHS, DVD or both

[foxyshadis]

You need a business license to buy and sell videotapes and dvds commercially, for tax purposes mainly, but you don't need any kind of license from the copyright holder. Same deal for running a tape-to-DVD shop; although I know this hasn't been tested in court, copyright holders also haven't gone after these companies en masse, they're all over the phone books. You'd probably have to come up with some contract to combine the two; as said, consult an IP lawyer.

[Guest]

to buy and sell videotapes and dvds commercially...you don't need any kind of license from the copyright holder For existing copies that you own, yes. If you make new copies, however, you certainly do need a license.

[Toti]

Wow, that sounds very interesting position. However, knowing the copyrights they would say it is ilegal. I wouldn't do it when there are other jobs.

When it comes to Copyrights, they don't want you to do anything just put it in the player and hit play. Sometimes I am even amazed they let you fast forward the video.

[puddy]

Wow, that sounds very interesting position. However, knowing the copyrights they would say it is ilegal. I wouldn't do it when there are other jobs.

When it comes to Copyrights, they don't want you to do anything just put it in the player and hit play. Sometimes I am even amazed they let you fast forward the video.

That's true. The copyright holder is going to say "No Way!" even if what I'm proposing is legal, they'd say it wasn't anyway.

Ok, here's the thing. Am I allowed to offer Tape-to-DVD transfers to people who own an original commercial video? Lets say my neighbor gets "Die Hard" on VHS from the $1 bin a Wal-Mart. He knows I run a video transfer service. He hires me to transfer the movie from VHS to DVD for $25 (I know, not practical, just an example). Is that legal? If so, then what I want to do should be legal as well.

[Dr.Khron]

Not to split hairs, but I think there is a huge difference between:

1. Having someone pay you to transfer/re-encode material that they already legally own. (ie, the Die Hard VHS)

2. Purchasing DVDs or VCR tapes for the purpose of reselling them packaged together with your "service".


You might want to look into that Mormon company that sells DVD players that automatically edit out swears and boobs... "Clear Play" I think its called? The studios jumped all over them, but in the end a judge said that what they were doing was OK, because they were not re-selling actual DVDs.


Still, at the end of the day, don't listen to us, call a competent IP attorney.

[puddy]

Not to split hairs, but I think there is a huge difference between:

1. Having someone pay you to transfer/re-encode material that they already legally own. (ie, the Die Hard VHS)

2. Purchasing DVDs or VCR tapes for the purpose of reselling them packaged together with your "service".

I tend to think it is what you said first, splitting hairs. Doesn't really seem like a huge difference to me. The end result is exactly the same. But, a judge may agree with you?


[QUOTE=Dr.Khron;1075933]You might want to look into that Mormon company that sells DVD players that automatically edit out swears and boobs... "Clear Play" I think its called? The studios jumped all over them, but in the end a judge said that what they were doing was OK, because they were not re-selling actual DVDs.

Yes, I remember that whole thing. But as I recall they WERE selling the edited DVD's, not special players. Maybe they changed their business model or maybe I just misundstood originally?

[setarip_old]

@puddy

Hi!

You can "discuss this to death" with all of us TOTAL STRANGERS at this forum but, toward what end?

The ONLY route for you to take in pursuing the legal ramifications of your plan is the one that has already been suggested to you by four different posters - Seek the advice of an appropriately versed attorney...

[puddy]

@puddy

Hi!

You can "discuss this to death" with all of us TOTAL STRANGERS at this forum but, toward what end?

The ONLY route for you to take in pursuing the legal ramifications of your plan is the one that has already been suggested to you by four different posters - Seek the advice of an appropriately versed attorney...

So there is no benefit in talking about it? I should not talk about it here and just go pay a lawyer? Geeze. Yes, of course I could talk it to death. I get your point, but man...

[blutach]

puddy,

None of us here (AFAIK - I could be wrong, of course) is a senior intellectual property attorney. And even if we were, we wouldn't give advice on such a tender legal matter without knowing all the facts and couching that advice with lots of disclaimers etc. Have you ever received a letter of advice from a lawyer? It's 1 part advice and 3 parts arse protection for the legal firm!

By asking us here, you are not getting definitive legal advice. Doom9 will not accept responsibily or liability for your acts. We do not hold ourselves out to be senior (or even junior) IP attorneys - we are a technical forum.

Really, this should end here.

You have something which concerns a business proposition - go get some legal advice tailored to your business.

Regards

[puddy]

puddy,

None of us here (AFAIK - I could be wrong, of course) is a senior intellectual property attorney. And even if we were, we wouldn't give advice on such a tender legal matter without knowing all the facts and couching that advice with lots of disclaimers etc. Have you ever received a letter of advice from a lawyer? It's 1 part advice and 3 parts arse protection for the legal firm!

By asking us here, you are not getting definitive legal advice. Doom9 will not accept responsibily or liability for your acts. We do not hold ourselves out to be senior (or even junior) IP attorneys - we are a technical forum.

Really, this should end here.

You have something which concerns a business proposition - go get some legal advice tailored to your business.

Regards

OMG, you guys are unbelievable. Do you really think I came here to get a definitive legal answer? Hold Doom9 responsible for incorrect legal advice? Quite a pompous statement, mate.

I came here to talk about it among peers. Why do some of you assume so much? You can see I'm a major lurker, I've been around here since 2003!

I visit often and read, read, read. I post occasionally and most of the responses at least try to be helpful and the others nit-pick and try to find some technicality that is incorrect about my post or my topic, seemingly for some kind of ego boost - who knows?

FYI, I posted in "Announcements and Chat > General Discussion" section, not a tech section.

Here's some advice back... lighten up. But you may want to check with your lawyers first before you make any rash, life-altering personally changes. Because, as you know, Doom9 will not be responsible for any psychological issues that arise from stepping back and getting a grip. :sly:

And I'll take your advice as well - I'm done. You are right, there is no more to be gained in this discussion.

Disappointed,
puddy

[Guest]

Thread closed as it has deteriorated beyond redemption.