From: Brian Frye (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Aug 21 2005 - 23:30:13 PDT
Dominic said:
>I believe that this law is speaking about copyright
>infringements and not necessarily contracts that are
>drawn and signed by contracts agreed upon by Canyon
>Cinema and certain parties in regards to restrictions
>to tapes/dvds and films sold as "Lease of Videos/DVDs,
>and film Prints)....
>
>I have never implied that showing vhs or dvds in
>classrooms are a violation of copyrights, however, I
>contest that sometimes this is a violation of certain
>agreements that restrict viewing of such materials...
Dominic's take is probably correct. At the very least, it's less
cut-and-dried than David suggests. According to the commentary to 17 USC
110:
"Motion Pictures and Other Audiovisual Works.--The final provision of
clause (1) deals with the special problem of performances from
unlawfully-made copies of motion pictures and other audiovisual works.
The exemption is lost where the copy being used for a classroom
performance was ``not lawfully made under this title'' and the person
responsible for the performance knew or had reason to suspect as much.
This special exception to the exemption would not apply to performances
from lawfully-made copies, even if the copies were acquired from someone
who had stolen or converted them, or if the performances were in
violation of an agreement. However, though the performance would be
exempt under section 110(1) in such cases, the copyright owner might
have a cause of action against the unauthorized distributor under
section 106(3), or against the person responsible for the performance,
for breach of contract."
Thus, making copies of films for future use (as some schools and
institutions do) is a pretty clear-cut copyright violation. And showing a
video sold specifically for "home use" may be a contract violation. Though
I wonder whether a "shrink-wrap license" of that sort would be enforceable.
Frankly, I doubt it.
Still, I think there's a better lesson to be taken from David's
observations. Namely, that the option wrt video releases is to either price
them at "institutional rates" intended to factor in lost revenue from
rentals (in other words, to conceive of video releases as effective
substitutes for print rentals), or to price them at consumer rates, and
assume that a print rental offers a value-added experience that
institutional customers will pay for. I really think option 2 is
preferable, primarily because a key weakness of the market for A-G film is
its obscurity, or rather, lack of market penetration. If the response to
recent DVD releases says anything to me, it's that the potential audience is
much larger than is generally realized. And frankly, I think anyone
concerned about the future of A-G film and celluloid in general ought to be
concerned with ensuring that the market for it is large enough to ensure
that it doesn't need charity to stay viable. Because ultimately, that's the
road to guaranteed extinction.
Brian
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.