Copyright infringement issues...

[aklendathu]

As you're all aware, the MPAA and RIAA are taking rather harsh measures to curb what they describe as 'piracy' which if taken to the extreme would even not allow you to make backup copies of the DVDs you bought.

Now, I recently bought the special edition DVD of Star Trek VI and while watching the extras I came across this little gem - it turns out these people don't seem too worried with taking their principles to the letter about making unauthorized copies...

This is the story: To make some of the props, they used parts from commercial plastic model kits. Now, to avoid having to buy a large number of these kits, they just bought one kit of each and copied the original parts to make as many as they needed... I would guess that this would be illegal, wouldn't you (unauthorized reproduction, etc, etc.) ? Isn't that hilarious ?

I could be mistaken and they might actually have asked permission to do it from the kit manufacturer, but then I would have expected this to have been mentioned in the documentary, if nothing else for educational puposes only.

[Mug Funky]

hmm... grey area.

the model kits were reverse-engineered, rather than "copied" as such, which is more legit than barefaced copying. the difference is the use of the available product rather than any original schematics. fledgling shoe manufacturers do this all the time - buy expensive shoes and cut them up to see how they work, so they can use these features in their own designs.

also, the models made for screen weren't distributed (any model kits that collectors would have are made based on the design, but not from the same parts).

about the "piracy" issue though: DVD authoring houses worldwide rely on DVD rips as their bread and butter. want to release a region 1 of a region 3 disc? simple. rip the r3 disc and add your own menus. this is done with permission of course, however the technology used (DVDdecrypter usually) uses deCSS, and is thus still illegal under the DMCA.

it's a matter of turning a blind eye if there's money coming in for the MPAA or whomever is calling the shots.

[aklendathu]

Originally posted by Mug Funky
hmm... grey area.

...

also, the models made for screen weren't distributed (any model kits that collectors would have are made based on the design, but not from the same parts).

...


Grey area indeed...

Still, I find it rather ironical that for such a simple thing the studio would resort to copying parts (Need 50 kits, buy one and make 50 copies of it or parts thereof) - true, you don't distribute them but use this process in your business, supposedly because it's cheaper to do so (and OK, maybe they just need 1 or 2 parts from the kit).

If the copyright notice that's on every DVD disc is taken to the letter, I'm not even allowed to LEND the thing!...

Well I just thought this story was a (sad) laugh and I decided to share it with the Doom9 community.

[adam]

Originally posted by aklendathu
If the copyright notice that's on every DVD disc is taken to the letter, I'm not even allowed to LEND the thing!...



Not really. Copyrights prohibit unauthorized rental, lease, or lending. If you look in copyright law this basically means that you can't make money off of the transaction unless you obtain permission from the copyright holder (commercial license.) Lending a DVD to your friend or neighbor is an authorized form of lending. Look in the Limitations section of just about any country's copyright laws and you will find out what kind of actions are automatically authorized, ie: lending, giving away, destroying, public viewing of YOUR material in YOUR house, etc..

[aklendathu]

Adam,

Thanks for the clarification. ;)

[Pyscrow]

This would be an infringment of Patent law, not copyright law. So it would depend upon the extent of patents held by the original company.

[Mug Funky]

if it came to litigation, i'm sure the model companies would have a very hard time proving damages... if anything they would gladly give permission if their kit gets used in a movie. wow factor counts for a lot... think of some poor model-kit guy using "my model kits are in the movies" to pick up in a smoky nightclub...

[vio]

A little OT, but I had a thought the other day.

Say someone makes a filesharing program, which instead of sharing the copyrighted files just transfers it once then deletes the file on the senders pc.

This would just be like giving some a gift, like a cd for a birthday. The ownership/licence/etc would just be transfered. Now if the sender was malicious and decided to recover the deleted file then they would be infringing, but it would be extremely difficult to monitor who has the ownership.

For instance if someone monitored my transfers and saw the same file go out twice they could say "hey maybe he didnt delete it", But I have several compilation cds with multiple identical tracks on them, theoretically I could have ripped them all and then destroyed/lost/damaged the cds. And even if I didnt have more than one ownership, whos to say I didnt receive another 'gift' from another user? For a RIAA style organisation to be 100% sure they would have to monitor every packet on every computer I use, Home, work, cafe, etc. Thats impossible. And innocent until proven guilty.

Someone correct me but as I see the law, giving someone a gift is not illegal. Sure most people would abuse a system like this, but you couldnt say its illegal.