logo Sign In

"Banning of OCPMovie" — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Esn
If I understand this correctly, he's not selling other people's work out of this website but out of his own website... this is immoral, but... is it against the rules? And are other people who do this (while not directly advertising the fact on this board) ALSO identified and banned?


You have to keep in mind that a lot of the fan edits and whatnot he's accumulated have more than likely come from folks on this site.
Author
Time
Post link
Another lame "I'm Leaving" post, but this time it's the "I was banned and screw eveybody" post... LAME

losers always try to get the last word in....how sad.

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
Post link
Alright, I am sorry OCP got banned. I haven't bothered reading everything so I have no opinion about what happened. But he did bring up something from the past, and that was how he was posting how badly the X0 project got owned and how pathetic it was they wasted so much time and money. He really was being a jerk, there was no point to it at all. He was practically spamming the boards writing the same thing over and over. I have usually had a lot of repect for OCP, but his actions that day made me loose a lot of respect for him. I simply posting something along the line of "why are you acting like such as ass" and I believe I went on to say that he doesn't have to care about the x0 if he does not want to, but there are those of us who still do. Since then he has on multiple occasions MISQUOTED that particular post I mentioned above, in true yellow journalist manner. It is pretty annoying. As you see he has used it once again. Having spent a great deal of time on the boards at that time, I can also say that several of the other posts that he quotes are also edited to change there meaning as well. I like ocp, but I have to say he really was behaving like a drunken idiot on the occasion that he mentioned.

Okay, I read the whole thread, sorry he was banned, but what a dork. What the hell was he thinking. Yes, people did bootleg his work at conventions, that sucks. But I think it has happened to just about every preservation and fan edit/project from the beginning. Even the Phantom Edit was often sold for unbelievable prices on ebay and on the bootleg market. This has been an issue since day one. It always will be. The movie industry has been trying to put a stop to their own movies being pirated for a long time and they have a lot more money and resources to take care of it than any of us. They have not been sucessful so far, so why would ocp's efforts to put an end to this have been sucessful? I don't think his effort to put a stop to his own stuff being pirated is any ground AT ALL to even partly justify his pirating others work. Even selling his own preservation efforts is completely against everything this site and the whole fanedit/preservation community has ever stood for. A lot of people here are stuggling with money, many of which have families to care for as well as themelves, but it gives nobody the right to sell other peoples work. Really doesn't give them the right to sell their own preservation efforts either. Even though Delected Magic was ocp's own project, the source material was not his.

vbangle, this is a totally different situation from those drama queens in the off topic section. OCP is making his own kind of drama with this thing, but at least he has been a valuable member of the community and made some very good contributions. Our old friends from the off topic thread have made no contributions to anything (neither have I, but then again I do not consider my self one of the "most important" members).

Also I wish people would look at both sides of the story before posting stupid comments about how wrong the form moderaters were. I don't know why OCP makes such a big deal about the X0, many people seem to think it is a retarded effort, I for one am looking forward to it. If you don't care about it, it really isn't hurting you. Personally, I think OCP's classic editions look like crap. I spent hours downloading it and was really looking forward to it, when I finally finished downloading it and put it in to watch it, I was amazed at how awful it look and how badly the laserdisc material stood out in contrast to the SE DVDs. Awful! But I didn't feel it necessary to go to his thread and spam the words "YOU GOT OWNED!!" in every other post.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
Oops, sorry. Didn't mean to double post.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
exactly how i feel, c3px. well written.

Author
Time
Post link
I think rule number three should be edited regarding the preservation efforts of theatrical releases where the retail release has been changed. Cough*the reason we came here in the first place*endCough
Author
Time
Post link
Role number three refers to trading of bootlegs and screeners of current or recent theatrical releases. I would take this to mean that while Episode III was in theaters there was no trading of screeners which would be very illeagal. However now that it is out, I don't think it would there would be a problem trading the timecoded screener, as long as you own the original. The cough* reason we are here *cough was for the original theatrical releases, which was not at all availible on DVD, but that we all owned (or should have own) in some form in order to legitimately get the laserdisc versions. In other words, it is about not trading movies that have not yet been (but are going to be) officially released on DVD, as well as not trading copies of retail DVDs. I do not believe there is any restriction against trading theatrical versions of films whose official DVD release was significantly altered.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
And as usual, I come unbidden to this game and late at that.

I've personally known OCP for going on a decade now, having met him in high school back in... 1997, I believe. Aside from a few more screws loose than the average person and maybe lacking in some social graces, he's the kinda guy you'd have as the whacky sidekick best-friend in a WWII movie. Where you're digging out a foxhole with your helmet and the guy helping you won't shut the hell up, going on and on about nothing. And he'd have to have a stupid name like Toothpaste or Ox or something else utterly absurd.

I can understand that the mods here had to bite the bullet and ban him for a reason. If I agree or disagree to it, that is a seperate and actually discussable topic - but as this is their forum, one must wipe their feet when entering and obey the lay of the land. OCP broke rules and that is the be all and end all of the situation.

This isn't exactly in his defense but I find it a touch absurd myself that the mods are able to willingly ban someone not only for profiting (again, against the rules) on DVD/R sales but have the absurd notion that something someone does off the boards is their business. Pardon my frankness, but it strikes me as odd that a site based around the good intention of "fan preservation" (which is a stone's throw from the old "for educational purposes only" warning that followed every cookbook, phone phreak guide and issue of 2600) is so willing and able to push the mighty thumb of administration down on the guy for profiting off his work.

I do have something of an affection for the man, obviously - so perhaps I'm a touch blinded by that. But the guy has been struggling since he left college. It's half his fault and half the BS that details everyone's life. Bad luck, stupid people, and all that steam. Being who he is and how he is in real life, OCP needs to make money doing whatever he can. He's in fairly dire straits on and off again. As to his selling DVD/Rs or what-have-you, I don't really have much to say in that because I can understand why he was banned. But then, you're also banning him from making money and by that I don't mean pocket money. I mean the money he uses to pay his rent and put food in his mouth.

What you're doing amounts to chopping off his hands because he was caught stealing bread to feed himself.

It's silly because I bet you there are other people here doing it and people here haven't caught them yet. So, perhaps OCP's crime is that he wasn't subtle. Knowing him as I do - I can agree to that. He's about as subtle as, say, Ginger Lynn at a NOW meeting. So, what it boils down to is how subtle he's selling, perhaps.

Not to mention, you're damning him for something he's doing outside the forum. While - yes - this is covered by the rules, this is like adding a rule saying "Next time you drop a duce, you will be banned". It's silly and a touch too "internet serious" that you're banning someone for successfully bootlegging on a site that is a spit-and-polish, piss-n-shine excuse for that exact "b" word. Banning people for what they do off the board is asinine, and you might as well just close shop.

But these are your rules, and I will wipe my feet at the door and do as the Romans do and all that nonsense. Theres a lot of good people here and it's sad to see one of them go out like he did.

Yes, OCP broke the rules. But if rules like that are going to keep people like him out - do we have the right priorities in mind?

Thank you all, and have a great holiday.
Author
Time
Post link
so are you saying all the Star Wars movies are HIS to be sold,damn I didnt know he owned them,bootlegging is bootlegging,and he was selling ALOT of other peoples hard work too,I wont mention any names,and as far as others on this board selling,you are damn right there are,I know of at least 2 more right now that do it too,and to my knowledge they are still here,they shouldnt be,but OH well,one of them gets away with it by calling it "donations"which I think is a crock of shit,those are some pretty steep donations,blank dvd'rs are pretty damn cheap now.
and I dont buy this "hard times" crap,everyone has hard times at one time or another,that does not mean it is a free pass to break rules and sell shit that isnt yours,I have shared a ton of stuff and sent out a shitload of dvd'rs,and NEVER charged anything,not even postage, NOTHING,and yes you do come off as biased,so you go ahead and be biased and say this should be looked at differently because he has "hard times" I personally am GLAD the mods and Jay did what they did,but they need to catch the others too.

OCPmovie and TR47 were also banned at the "other" site as well.

just my thoughts

DJ
Author
Time
Post link
Well said d_j. Exactly what I was thinking.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: dark_jediand I dont buy this "hard times" crap,everyone has hard times at one time or another,that does not mean it is a free pass to break rules and sell shit that isnt yours


Which would be a perfectly legitimate peice of reasoning, if you weren't on a site that breaks several copyright laws and intellectual properties standards by editing that which no one here owns.

Yes, you're not suppose to make a profit because thats bad - but editing copyrighted material without written permission by the owner is just as illegal, if harder to prosecute since it doesn't involve "obvious" crime like bootlegging.

In the end though, your reasoning is pretty darn flawed. Complaining about someone breaking the law while you're in a den of the same is awfully silly.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Will Tasker
Originally posted by: dark_jediand I dont buy this "hard times" crap,everyone has hard times at one time or another,that does not mean it is a free pass to break rules and sell shit that isnt yours


Which would be a perfectly legitimate peice of reasoning, if you weren't on a site that breaks several copyright laws and intellectual properties standards by editing that which no one here owns.

Yes, you're not suppose to make a profit because thats bad - but editing copyrighted material without written permission by the owner is just as illegal, if harder to prosecute since it doesn't involve "obvious" crime like bootlegging.

In the end though, your reasoning is pretty darn flawed. Complaining about someone breaking the law while you're in a den of the same is awfully silly.

First off, editing and sharing, isn't "just as illegal" as selling. The former is generally civil. The latter is criminal.

As a practical matter, an editing/preservation site will be ignored or tolerated. A site that promotes, or even one that *knowingly* permits selling, will get shut down. You betcha. Try it sometime.


As for issues of morally-right, or legally-right, we can debate every point forever. The law is full of gray areas and contradictions, as well as some things that can't reallly be reconciled with the constitution. And, frankly, a lot of issues are given to the civil arena because the authorities and corporations don't want legal challenges.

So it comes down to practicality.

Fan-editing is tolerated, because it simply generates more sales (a larger percentage of people actually *voluntarilly* want to stay on the good side of the law and the follow the you-have-to-own-a-retail-version rule. They'll buy Batman and Robin (ewwww), or Boogeyman, in order to see a watchable version of a failed, or under-performing property). Or, for "cult" properties, because it mostly appeals to hard-core fans who already own 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 (or...) different retail versions (and might recruit a few more fans).

Preservation is tolerated, because it generates interest in re-releases and special-editions (no coincidence that some stuff has *finally* been released - weeks or months after a preservation or restoration).

Fan films are tolerated, for the sheer publicity, and fueling of fandom. (The laws that give companies trademarks on character names, or could technically forbid the photographing of miniatures and sets of a certain design are absolutely in contradiction of the stated purpose of copyright, in the constitution... so they call it trademark).

If the situation changes, we'll run for the woods.

But, for now, the companies love us - as long as we keep our noses clean.


Edit: Meant to say "editing and sharing" instead of "trading or filesharing", the latter isn't on-topic, and its redundant. Brain fart. The original is quoted a couple of posts down.

One day I found... 10 years had got behind me. Next day was worse.

 

Download  shows from Cable DVR (Updated! Yes, it needs a rewrite, but it's worth slogging through, anyway).

Author
Time
Post link
As for OCPMovie, himself, I'm hurtin' for the guy. And he's done a hell of a lot for the community, fans, and, as above, even the companies. (They have to weigh having their feelings hurt, and having their lawyers itching for something to do, against the almighty dollar).

But I saw a reprint of a recent "order form", and it was pretty bad. There were seperate charges for covers and for printed discs, and for you-name-it, and they were pretty steep.

I can understand that desperation can drive a person to a lot of things. And when you look around and see people on [site omitted], [site omitted], and [site omitted], staying in buisness for years, selling bootlegs, or fan-edits. You see Ebayers popping up 20 times faster than they get kicked off... You want your own piece of the pie. In a real sense, you earned it. If you took a fucking dead, abandoned property, and put in, literally, thousands of dollars of work - giving it the "value added" thing. You, of all people, deserve a piece of that big, juicy pie that the others are munching off of.

Now (I don't want to make a template to encourage others), if his form letter had said stuff like... "Here's a list of people and places you can get this, for free, for B&P, or for bandwidth." "I cant really spare the time...". "I don't understand the hardware side of things, and my dual-layers often fail..." "But, I am in a bad place, right now. If you would like to donate something in the range of xxx, so I can keep up the good work, blahblahblah."

But, I'm sorry, he was too blatent. It's a bad idea to even hint at taking a profit. You might not get banned from a site if you're honestly begging for donations. But you could get your broke ass sued right off of you. (And they'll find a way to get that blood out of a stone). Or you could end up in the county jail (or worse). An order form is just begging for it.

Don't ask me how some places can stay in buisness. But the world is full of that. Probably fall-guy owners, lawyers and loopholes and, ahem, greased palms. But ya' notice, whatever the crime or lawsuit its always the small fry that get busted...

Edit: as another note, the more people begging, the more (I suspect) the companies will be looking at us funny.

One day I found... 10 years had got behind me. Next day was worse.

 

Download  shows from Cable DVR (Updated! Yes, it needs a rewrite, but it's worth slogging through, anyway).

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Zion
So what you're saying is we should allow people - especially people who have fallen on hard times - to use our site as a springboard for selling their work along with everyone else's work? Yeah, there definitely aren't any flaws in that logic...

The question is - would you rather be hiring a defense attorney because you were caught bootlegging - or because you were using a copyrighted property without consent of the owner?

Originally posted by: Jaiman TuckuhFirst off, trading or filesharing isn't "just as illegal" as selling. The former is generally civil. The latter is criminal.


I like how you used "generally" as a means to side step the obvious intention that one is definite while the other is not.

Originally posted by: Jaiman TuckuhAs a practical matter, an editing/preservation site will be ignored or tolerated. A site that promotes, or even one that *knowingly* permits selling, will get shut down. You betcha. Try it sometime.


So the fact what you are party to is simply LESS illegal than outright bootlegging makes you an honest human being? Yes, I can see a judge rolling his eyes at that line of logic.

Again, what it does boil down to is that OCP did break the rules for this forum. I cannot justify nor defend his actions, as he's the one that signed whatever it is when he registered to be a user. That is his own doing and theres nothing anyone can do to change his action.

What he did was stupid because he broke obvious forum rules. What he did was stupid because he got caught. What he did was stupid because he tried to make a defense for it.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Will Tasker
Originally posted by: Zion
So what you're saying is we should allow people - especially people who have fallen on hard times - to use our site as a springboard for selling their work along with everyone else's work? Yeah, there definitely aren't any flaws in that logic...


The question is - would you rather be hiring a defense attorney because you were caught bootlegging - or because you were using a copyrighted property without consent of the owner?


Fair use still exists in the US. You do not need the consent of the copyright owner in order to make a fan edit. While it might be necessary to get permission to give that edit to someone else that also owns the original movie, I think you'd find that a judge would simply demand that the "other party" simply show proof that they own the original work. Selling a fan edit for any profit beyond the cost of materials would most certainly get you in hot water since at that point you're making money off someone elses copyrighted work.

Stop spreading FUD about copyright. I do not have to get GL's permission if I wish to replace every blaster sound in Star Wars with the sound of a fart. You sound like an *AA agent everytime you spread this bs about "needing permission".

There is a line between fair use and bootlegging and judges have ruled on it in the past.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: dark_jedi

...as far as others on this board selling,you are damn right there are,I know of at least 2 more right now that do it too,and to my knowledge they are still here,they shouldnt be,but OH well,one of them gets away with it by calling it "donations"which I think is a crock of shit,those are some pretty steep donations,blank dvd'rs are pretty damn cheap now.
DJ, please PM or email me with details and we'll look into it.

The no selling rule is non-negotiable; there are no excuses and no exceptions.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjediFair use still exists in the US. You do not need the consent of the copyright owner in order to make a fan edit.


The Fair Use statute covers "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" - of which none of what happens here falls under. The fact that such items are not "obviously" covered by said statute (107) means it could certainly be taken to court and made an arguement of.

That said, the best case scenario is that you simply lose money by mounting a defense by hiring a lawyer.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Will Tasker
Originally posted by: lordjediFair use still exists in the US. You do not need the consent of the copyright owner in order to make a fan edit.


The Fair Use statute covers "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" - of which none of what happens here falls under. The fact that such items are not "obviously" covered by said statute (107) means it could certainly be taken to court and made an arguement of.

That said, the best case scenario is that you simply lose money by mounting a defense by hiring a lawyer.


It's so nice of you to include only a portion of the statute. Here it is in full:

§107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A [17 USC § §106 and 106A], the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--

(1)
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2)
the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3)
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4)
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

I think you'd find that a fan edit would fall under non commercial use and the fact that you have to have the original in order to even make a fan edit would actually increase the market value of the work. The statute also covers making a personal backup for your own use. It could be argued that a fan edit is nothing more than a personal backup (especially if you're only ever watching that copy, even though you own the original). You could probably also argue that by making a fan edit, you are in fact making a comment or criticism on the original work. It could also be argued that you did it for teaching purposes (to teach yourself how to edit a movie together). As others have already stated, the law is actually pretty gray about what those terms mean (they don't define comment, criticism, or teaching).

The point is, the only time anyone here is treading close to the line of "bootlegging" is when they distribute a copy of their fan edit, for free, to anyone that wants it (again, those people are suppose to own the original work). The act of creating a fan edit, for ones own personal use, is not in itself illegal.

P.S. Of course no one here would go to court without a lawyer, but I doubt any judge would be willing to accept a case based on someone editing a movie for their own use. You bought the DVD. If you want to cut everything but the opening sequence, you're free to do it, as long as you don't attempt to resell that as the original work. Of course, if you were distributing copies in a market that had no existing copies of the original work, you might get in trouble (case in point, the original Phantom Edit), but that's also probably a case of the studio will be distributing copies for sale later, so you'd be infringing on that (and that's assuming that everyone that got a copy didn't later go out and buy it when it came out on DVD).
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
I believe the poster above is right on target about "the copyright issue" as it relates to "Fan Edits". I just could not imagine any studio spending hundreds of thousand of dollars in lawyer and court fees to prosecute "Fans" who may make a few dozen "Fan Edits" from parts of there property. That would be Looney. On the other hand, I can see them going after the big marked knock off manufactures, who sell thousands of units that are no more then low quality transfers of an actual complete film title, and being sold as official {including studio logos}. There is much more damage being done to the copyright holder in this latter chase, where the standards of the product quality may negatively represent the studios other DVD products to some unaware consumers. I don't know anyone here who tries to distribute DVDs {or artwork} that claim to be "Original" and "Official" DVD versions of titles. In fact, most editors around here go out of the way to boast the changes and alterations made in there fan edit work, and recommend you own an original version so that you can compare their edit work to the standard official versions....

FF

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
I cannot believe all this OCP defending. Get over it. He is banned and he did it to himself. It really doesn'
t matter that he did not do it on this site. He got the edits from here, and it makes the fanediting community look bad. OT.com had EVERY right to ban him. I like how Will likened banning OCP to cutting off his hands for stealing bread. Come on! Honestly. There are a lot of people struggling in the world. I myself am not exactly rich. We all have to work hard for what we have. I have no idea what OCP does, but if his job does not cover his rent, perhaps he should look for a cheaper apartment, find a higher paying job or take on a second job. You know, the kind of things the rest of us do to get by. With Will's logic, if I am struggling, I am perfectly right to go and steal a car and sell it, because I am struggling. If I get caught, well then it is a damn shame and I should have been more subtle about the whole matter. You said you met OCP in high school? What was that liek last week. I really hope you just got out of high school if you have that kind of thinking. Because if you have been in the real world for more than a few years and still think this way then... I have no idea what to say.

It is also funny you put fanediting and selling bootlegs for profit in the same boat. "Yes, I can see a judge rolling his eyes at that line of logic." Making copies of movies for the sake of profit, and editing movies as a hobby are to totally different things. Why should a copyright owner really care if you are editing their film for your own fun as long as you paid them for the original. Even if they wanted too, it is going to cost them. I cannot see it being worth their time and money to do this when it is of no gain to them. However, if you are selling their films, they will see this as a threat, and it is worth it to them to put a stop to it. They will be spending money to do so, but it is important to make an example of them to prevent further abuse.

Looking at the past, since the time the Phantom Menace came out and the first fanedit of it poped up and made big news, the copyright holders looked at the issues, thought the best way to proceed, and in the end did nothing. GL has so far been friendly about the matter, and other copyright holders would be smart to do likewise. If in the future there is a huge epidemic of people like OCP deciding that since they went through the pain and sweat of downloading the thing that they have the right to sell it (but only because they are having a hard time with life), then the copyright holders might reconsider their current stance.

So, lets review:

Bootlegging = very bad, punishable by law and has been punished by law on countless occasions.

Fan edits = a fairly gray area, technically breaking of copyright law but not doing any harm, to date has never been punished by law, even though its existence has been acknowledge by film makers.

We are not in the same boat as OCP, he was selling for profit, while we are editing for fun. If one day they decide to crack down on fan edits, then it will be interesting what the courts decide. If and when that time comes, then we will all either stop, or go underground. As it is, I really do not feel I am breaking any laws. Of all the fan edits I posses, I also own the original, bought and paid for retail DVD. The money going straight from my hands to the hands of the copyright owners. They have nothing to complain about with me. OCP on the other hand, his case in something entirely different. He had no right, by whatever argument you want to use to sell those discs. I don't give a crap if he was doing it to pay rent, and neither do the copyright owners.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
Way to ban one of the best members here. Maybe you could ban Jambe Davdar too. See if you can't speed up this forums nosedive into irrelevance.

You mods are stupid petty dicks. You may as well ban me too because OCPMovie is one of the only reasons I ever come here.

Fuck you all
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Cawdor
Way to ban one of the best members here. Maybe you could ban Jambe Davdar too. See if you can't speed up this forums nosedive into irrelevance.

You mods are stupid petty dicks. You may as well ban me too because OCPMovie is one of the only reasons I ever come here.

Fuck you all


......I'm not touchin that one with a 30 foot pole.....

I've got better things to do tonight than die! - Springer, Transformers the Movie

Author
Time
Post link

nice knowing ya!

Join the dark side… and get a free cookie!