logo Sign In

Dealing with People Selling Fan Projects — Page 12

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I’m still trying to figure out why the *** church would open themselves up to copyright infringement charges. How could President Munson do such a thing?!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi *** entertainment!

I am not from *** I have been a member here since before *** was a thing. I’ll admit I don’t really know much about copyright laws, I was just offering my own take on the issue. Sorry if I said anything that offended you guys, you all know more about this than me hahaha

Theatre, Godzilla, and Star Wars; pretty much sums me up.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

HerekittykittyX said:

ZigZig said:

HerekittykittyX said:

pittrek said:

  1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
  2. In exchange they ask from you money
  3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Hi *** entertainment

The Force is strong with this one…

This isn’t my first encounter with them I have got in a comment war with ***

Here’s how I’ve always argued this with people. Let’s say Harmy is your room-mate, he has a car and you don’t. He let’s you borrow his car when he isn’t out with his friends, his girl, working or whatever and his only stipulation is that you refill the gas tank before you bring it back. If you don’t refill the tank, and he get’s pissed at you and doesn’t let you use his car, who is in the wrong? If he asks that you don’t buy or sell his fan-edit/restoration, and he gets pissed off enough, he may just keep his future efforts to himself and never release them to the public. And you only have yourself to blame. Moral of my inebriated ranting? Don’t piss people off who give you free s**t.

Luke astro-projects himself to Salt Lake Planet, gets shot at by gorilla walkers, has a non-lightsaber duel with Darth Millennial, then dies of a broken heart, inspiring broom boys throughout the galaxy to get creative with their sweeping. - DuracellEnergizer

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Han Shot First said:

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi *** entertainment!

I am not from *** I have been a member here since before *** was a thing. I’ll admit I don’t really know much about copyright laws, I was just offering my own take on the issue. Sorry if I said anything that offended you guys, you all know more about this than me hahaha

There was nothing offensive about your post. You were simply wrong.

The question was never wether fan-edits were legal. They are not. So any way of distributing fan-edits, no matter if paid or for free, is technically a copyright infringement.

The community came up with a way to at least morally justify what they are doing. Not charging people for fan-edits is part of that. Anyone selling fan-edits on ebay is therefore legally and morally in the wrong.

Ceci n’est pas une signature.

Author
Time

Frank your Majesty said:

Han Shot First said:

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding LDS entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, LDS has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi LDS entertainment!

I am not from LDS I have been a member here since before LDS was a thing. I’ll admit I don’t really know much about copyright laws, I was just offering my own take on the issue. Sorry if I said anything that offended you guys, you all know more about this than me hahaha

There was nothing offensive about your post. You were simply wrong.

The question was never wether fan-edits were legal. They are not. So any way of distributing fan-edits, no matter if paid or for free, is technically a copyright infringement.

The community came up with a way to at least morally justify what they are doing. Not charging people for fan-edits is part of that. Anyone selling fan-edits on ebay is therefore legally and morally in the wrong.

IMHO, that’s the best summary of this whole question.

Author
Time

J0E said:

HerekittykittyX said:

ZigZig said:

HerekittykittyX said:

pittrek said:

  1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
  2. In exchange they ask from you money
  3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Hi LDS entertainment

The Force is strong with this one…

This isn’t my first encounter with them I have got in a comment war with LDS

Here’s how I’ve always argued this with people. Let’s say Harmy is your room-mate, he has a car and you don’t. He let’s you borrow his car when he isn’t out with his friends, his girl, working or whatever and his only stipulation is that you refill the gas tank before you bring it back. If you don’t refill the tank, and he get’s pissed at you and doesn’t let you use his car, who is in the wrong? If he asks that you don’t buy or sell his fan-edit/restoration, and he gets pissed off enough, he may just keep his future efforts to himself and never release them to the public. And you only have yourself to blame. Moral of my inebriated ranting? Don’t piss people off who give you free s**t.

Truth

Author
Time

Frank your Majesty said:

Han Shot First said:

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding LDS entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, LDS has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi LDS entertainment!

I am not from LDS I have been a member here since before LDS was a thing. I’ll admit I don’t really know much about copyright laws, I was just offering my own take on the issue. Sorry if I said anything that offended you guys, you all know more about this than me hahaha

There was nothing offensive about your post. You were simply wrong.

The question was never wether fan-edits were legal. They are not. So any way of distributing fan-edits, no matter if paid or for free, is technically a copyright infringement.

The community came up with a way to at least morally justify what they are doing. Not charging people for fan-edits is part of that. Anyone selling fan-edits on ebay is therefore legally and morally in the wrong.

Okay that makes sense. Sorry for not being very educated on this topic, I’m a 17 year old high school junior and I don’t know a lot about copyright laws. Thank you guys for clearing that up.

Theatre, Godzilla, and Star Wars; pretty much sums me up.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Frank your Majesty said:

The question was never wether fan-edits were legal. They are not. So any way of distributing fan-edits, no matter if paid or for free, is technically a copyright infringement.

Technicality–making a fan edit is legal, distributing it without a license from the copyright holder is not. Thus, the stipulation at OT.com that you own the fan-edit’s primary source material also kinda-sorta means that if we were all Harmys, we would all be able to simply make our own Despecialized Editions, and they would all look alike because we’re all converging on the same reference point. So there’s no way to prove which is the original and which is the copy, or if they’re all originals and just coincidentally identical. The Spartacus defense 😉

The community came up with a way to at least morally justify what they are doing.

That’s very true. The above point is just helpfully muddies the waters around simply having the fan-edit versus the act of distributing it. But of course making a fan edit involves breaking DRM, so you have to have been at least during this time in a country where that was legal for this purpose, in order to be truly in the clear as a fan-edit creator.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

As I understand it, even making the edit is violating the copyright. You cannot create a derivative work without permission of the copyright holder. However, making a fan-edit only for yourself would be considered fair-use. But fair-use only means that a copyright violation isn’t prosecuted, not that the violation is nullified.

So, in essence, creating the edit isn’t entirely legal, but also not really illegal. I could have worded that better.

Ceci n’est pas une signature.

Author
Time

Frank your Majesty said:

As I understand it, even making the edit is violating the copyright. You cannot create a derivative work without permission of the copyright holder. However, making a fan-edit only for yourself would be considered fair-use. But fair-use only means that a copyright violation isn’t prosecuted, not that the violation is nullified.

So, in essence, creating the edit isn’t entirely legal, but also not really illegal. I could have worded that better.

I think fair use is best described as “a legal copyright violation”.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

I’ve always wondered about the possibility of distributing “project files” for video editors like Vegas or whatever and just distributing that, and making people plug in the source files themselves, supplying any that are pre rendered alterations.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Antcufaalb covered this nicely at some point. If you had, say, a diff file that, when applied to the legal retail product, produced the fanedit product, could you distribute the diff file instead of the fanedit?

The answer is no. His example was John Cage’s 4’33", which is 4 minutes and 33 seconds of dead silence. If you distribute a track that’s 2 minutes of dead silence, is that copyright infringement? Legally, it depends. If it was 2 minutes of your own silence, you’re good. If it was 2 minutes recorded from John Cage’s 4’33", then you’re not. Exact same files, bit-for-bit identical, but one is clear and one is not. The difference, legally, is that one was derived from copyrighted bits. Back to the original example, since the diff tool was created directly or indirectly from the copyrighted work, it too can be considered covered by the copyright.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Reported mate - a few of us are still reporting them (I hope 😃)

A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…

Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com; some info & answers + FAQs - includes info on how to search for projects and threads on the OT•com

A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)

… and take your time to look around this site before posting - to get a feel for this place. Don’t just lazily make yet another thread asking for projects.

Author
Time

I’ve not done a lot of research. But it seems like Lucas was pretty good to the fan base. i.e. not policing things like fan created stuff like he could have. And also I believe they released original sound recordings so people could use them for their fan projects like those custom lightsabers with sound effects?

Imagine if 20th Century Fox had been in control of Star Wars, i.e. Lucas didn’t have in his contract that he controlled the brand. Then I think a lot of these fan projects and things would have probably been policed and shut down. And we probably wouldn’t have gotten access to original sound recordings and things.

Right now, Nintendo is pretty bad at policing fan stuff. Do they not understand that a lot of this fan stuff actually helps promote their products and probably increases their sales?

Author
Time

Ryan said:

I’ve not done a lot of research. But it seems like Lucas was pretty good to the fan base. i.e. not policing things like fan created stuff like he could have. And also I believe they released original sound recordings so people could use them for their fan projects like those custom lightsabers with sound effects?

Imagine if 20th Century Fox had been in control of Star Wars, i.e. Lucas didn’t have in his contract that he controlled the brand. Then I think a lot of these fan projects and things would have probably been policed and shut down. And we probably wouldn’t have gotten access to original sound recordings and things.

Right now, Nintendo is pretty bad at policing fan stuff. Do they not understand that a lot of this fan stuff actually helps promote their products and probably increases their sales?

disney is okay

Author
Time

I feel like the people who sell this stuff are like Hydras, cut off one head two more grow back.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I like your analogy, and hope the hydra can nevertheless be defeated such as this one:
hxxp://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2014/06/04/hydra_game_an_example_of_a_counterintuitive_mathematical_result.html

Although it might take us longer than the age of the universe to do so.

Bluto

Author
Time
 (Edited)

LordZerome1080 said:

I feel like the people who sell this stuff are like Hydras, cut off one head two more grow back.

Exactly I given up I see it like this if people what to buy it it’s a lot easier then downloading it

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Took a look at Ebay to see how bad the Despecialized selling is at the moment, and was quite surprised. Only one item (an AVCHD with the nfo shamelessly copied from the forum. You’re famous, Catbus!) https://www.ebay.com/itm/star-wars-despecialized-edition-Trilogy/122871793458 (feel free to report)

I don’t see anything else, and no blu-rays. Are we doing a good job of reporting them, or is Disney stepping in now that they’ve bought Fox?