logo Sign In

ADigitalMan

User Group
Members
Join date
26-Sep-2004
Last activity
9-Jan-2026
Posts
2,953
Web Site
https://www.youtube.com/@DigitalMan-jc3xy

Post History

Post
#77072
Topic
Qui Gon's death.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/77072/action/topic#77072
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Well Lucas says the movie Novels are canon, so I think it is allready part of the continuity....


*sigh* Except for that part in ROTJ where Ben tells Luke that Owen was his brother. Lucas has since abandoned that bit of cannon for the "Step-brother" relationship (which I actually think works better anyway).
Post
#77069
Topic
ROTJ is worse than I remember.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/77069/action/topic#77069
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Starboy


As for bootlegging, it appears we have some legal counsel on the forum. Digitalman, am I right in stating that you are allowed to own backup copies of media which you have paid for? i.e. I can rip mp3's of songs when I own the album? So if I own the VHS version of the "faces" release, isn't it legal for me to obtain that same material in a different format? I have paid for the rights for personal use of the movie. Honest question, not a challenge.


Yes and no. First, I should be clear that I am not a lawyer, but I have done much, much, much legal research into First Amendment rights and into copyright law. None of what I'm about to tell you will get you to pass the bar, but it is based on fact and precedent. Please don't make me cite the references. I don't stake my freedom on any of this, but all of the research I have done points to these conclusions.

Yes, you ARE allowed to own backup copies of media which you paid for. Unfortunately, if a DVD is digitally encrypted, it is currently illegal for you to break the encryption scheme under a different law. This was the entertainment industry's way of getting around the "backup" issue. They made it illegal to engage in the technical process that allows you to back up a disc, even if you have the right to make a backup. Kinda like in Monty Python's Life of Brian ... Stan had the right to have babies, even if he couldn't actually have them. ;-) Personal note: I think it was beautiful that this incredible digital encryption scheme that was designed to protect DVDs was promptly hacked by a (then) 13-year-old kid. Even greater is that he released the code into the public domain, where it spread like wildfire, making it damn near impossible to police. If you cannot effectively police a policy, then it becomes unenforcable and new precedent is created for the owner of the copyright selectively enforcing his rights, and thus making his case much weaker. Did you know that the code for breaking the DVD encryption has actually been on t-shirts and worn into the courtroom by citizens when the issue was tried?

Anyway, what is NOT legal would be for you to own backups on a format that you haven't purchased. If you owned the original Faces VHS release, you could back that up to DVD for your own purposes. Or, if a friend gave you a copy of his backup of the same edition, and you still owned your official releases, that would be legal too. But if you did not buy the Laserdisc version, then technically you wouldn't have the right to own a backup of that format. Laserdiscs were mastered using a different process, and often contained different content such as widescreen format, commentaries and AC3 sound.

An analogy in the music world is this: You CAN take an album, cassette, or original CD of which you own a legal copy and re-encode it into MP3. If a friend owned this original CD too, and he ripped an MP3 version and gave it to you, that too wouldn't be a crime. However, if he gave you a rip of a "remastered" version of the CD and you only had the original edition, that would actually be a crime. (For example, the original Pink Floyd's "The Wall" vs the Remastered version). The reason is that the Sound Recording (as defined by the Library of Congress) would be an altered form. See, there are two kinds of copyrights, one for the conceptual work, called "Performing Arts" (PA for short) and one for the actual recorded form, called "Sound Recording" (SR for short). If the copyright holder remasters a CD or a movie, the physical form has changed, if not the conceptual work. (Greedo shooting first does not apply here ... that was a change in concept and would have required an update to the PA copyright too.) When I record a demo of my own material, I copyright the music and lyrics using the PA form AND the sound recording on a SR form. Then, when I have it remixed in the studio for proper release, I have to amend the SR form to include the updated work. If I change any lyrics or music, I have to update the PA form as well.

The ultimate question becomes "Who really cares?" If you owned the THX VHS set, and you obtained a backup of the Faces Laserdisc set on DVD, it is highly unlikely that you *would* be prosecuted, even if you *could* be prosecuted. Your intent was to preserve a movie which you bought legally on a format that won't deteriorate. If the master wasn't from the same strike, but the PA content didn't change, who really cares? Only uptight money grubbing lawyers and very anal-retentive coypright holders. Further, if you actually bought the official DVD (in addition to all your historic purchases) LFL and Fox would be much less likely to go after you for backing up of one of your previous editions, even if the source of the format were different. Reason being, you wouldn't be accepting this backup in lieu of their legitimate product. In short, if you aren't affecting their bottom line, they frankly don't give a rat's ass. But if you're selling backups, or accepting backups without any legal license in your posession, you're a target.

Mike Verta's site explains it so eloquently. His "restoration" is coming solely from compiling the various formats he owns, and he has no intent of selling the finished product. More power to him.

I'm more interested in the legal arguments around "backing up" movies that you have rented. There is a serious grey area there that hasn't been totally resolved. There is a concept called "time shifting" that legally allows you to record a program off of TV and watch it later. If you rent a movie but don't have time to watch it during the rental period, can you legally "time shift" by recording the movie and then watching it at your leisure? This is a serious debate going on in copyright law, and it will only take one judge with the balls to say "Yes" to that question to turn Hollywood's home video industry on its ear. Blockbuster's stock will plummet on that day, but will then skyrocket after sales go up -- when everybody starts renting movies and backing them up, rather than purchasing them outright.
Post
#76946
Topic
ROTJ is worse than I remember.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76946/action/topic#76946
Time
The biggest reason why I "cave" to the official DVDs, is that it gives me greater license to complain about what is wrong with them. When you are a paying customer, you have much more ground to stand on to get the defects changed (hence my post about my dealings with LFL, Fox, and the BBB). That is the very foundation of tort law. If you haven't paid for anything, then the company hasn't wronged you. You may be voting with your wallet, true, but in this real world, that vote doesn't add up to much, given the 100 million+ copies that have already flown off the shelves.

The second biggest reason, why I "cave" is to indulge in some of the great fan-provided material. Namely the OT rips and prequel reedits that are being created here. If you trade bootlegs of your favorite band, you're less likely to be hunted down by their legal eagles because you're more likely to have bought all of their official releases anyway. i.e. You're not affecting the bottom line. (Note: Pirating is something different than bootlegging and this is rightly a concern in Hollywood). However, if you engage in bootlegging without supporting the official releases, you're opening yourself to more legal action, frankly because bootlegging is illegal. If you have the legal argument "but I bought the legitimate, official copy anyway" they are likely to leave you alone and drop any charges. Nobody wants to sue or prosecute a customer in good standing (for fear of what the bad press could do). It's the customer who is stealing who will get the legal smackdown.

Post
#76906
Topic
StarWarsLegacy.com - The Official Thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76906/action/topic#76906
Time
Originally posted by: mverta


I've considered it, but there's a line there... I'm not sure I'm comfortable crossing it. Lucasfilm is watching the site and has given me a pass with the screencaps so far, and I really don't want a C&D. Not that a C&D would prevent me from doing the restoration, but it would prevent me from sharing it, and I think it's important for the effort to have a public face for so many reasons... Anyway, we'll see.


Thanks for the explanation. It's interesting that Lucas has paid attention to your site. Makes me wonder if he's at all remorseful for the half-assed job they did at the release. I'm sure he'll use your site as a guide to fix everything that was broken and, instead of releasing corrected discs to those of us who have already paid, he's just going to make us buy them again. And then after we've paid again, he'll release the HD-DVD version and make us pay yet again.
Post
#76904
Topic
Director's Cuts?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76904/action/topic#76904
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: jeffreyschmid
This Rick McCallum guy who Lucas has producing the new movies is a no talent ass clown. Why doesn't he have someone like Spielberg or Zemekis in the seat?!?


He needs to have Spielberg directing. Spielberg even wanted to direct, but Lucas wanted to retain the "glory" for himself. Had Spielberg directed Episode I, I bet (a) we'd have gotten Haley Joel Osment as Anakin, (b) Qui-Gon's character would have been cut and melded into Obi-Wan's character, as he should have been, and (c) Jar Jar and the Gungans would have been something entirely different. I'm not sure what, but it would have been different, and most likely, would have been better.

We then would have had Leo as Anakin in Ep II. Notice that Spielberg has worked with both of these potential Anakins since they were turned down by Lucas, and he's gotten some of the most amazing performances out of them. And did anybody have trouble seeing Leo as a 17 year old in Catch Me If You Can? No. But this was Lucas' reason for not using him in Episode II.

When it comes to directing, George Lucas is a brilliant executive producer.
Post
#76902
Topic
ROTJ is worse than I remember.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76902/action/topic#76902
Time
Whereas I've grown to love ESB as my favorite movie of all time (it was my least favorite SW film as a kid), I've always enjoyed ROTJ too. The Ewoks never offended me as much as they seemed to offend so many. Yes, wookiees would have been better, and yes, GL punked out to serve the kiddie crowd, which I now understand. But the Ewoks still don't offend me. Gungans offend me, but not Ewoks. Hayden not withstanding, the official DVD was the most enjoyable viewing of ROTJ I've seen yet.

Anyway, I found that on the DVD, for the first time in the history of ROTJ, the Rancor scene didn't look like complete crap. They clearly worked to remaster that whole sequence and it doesn't look like a giant blue screen mess anymore. Even the scene where Luke jams the bone it its mouth looks like it should have. This sequence was always the gut-wrencher for me, because it looked so horribly fake before. Now it looks on par with the rest of the FX in the trilogy. It doesn't look like it's been screwed with either. It just seems that the layers were color corrected and recomposited.

That said, I still want an unmolested OT version on DVD. Sometimes you just want to sing Lapti Nek and Yub Yub. Well, maybe not Yub Yub.
Post
#76018
Topic
Info Wanted: What other LDs are you all transferring?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76018/action/topic#76018
Time
Actually, I'm not doing any LD transfers (as I don't own any myself). I'm just geeking out from the sidelines. What's amazing is how much of the tech talk about LD captures and transfers I'm following and more importantly, comprehending, since I've never actually done one myself.

A good friend of mine is a Laserphile and I try to scrounge up a good rare laserdisc for him every year around Christmas time. He's built a fairly impressive library of OOP (i.e. OOP on VHS and DVD) titles. I know he has Kong, a bunch of Rush LDs, a bunch of great Disney classics and, of course, the DE of the OT.
Post
#76021
Topic
The Next Superman
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76021/action/topic#76021
Time
Yep. Jon Peters is still attached. I do think he's been sidelined, and with Singer's previous attachments to Richard Donner (via X-men, and Donner's wife on X2) he's much more interested in preserving the films' mythos. (That said, I'd rather have seen Millar and Gough take Smallville to the big screen; I don't know WHY Tom Welling wasn't cast, because poll after poll showed the public wanting him to don the tights and cape). But I digress ... back to Jon Peters: The second paragraph of the official press release dated 10-22-2004 on Routh's casting announcment confirms:

Quote
The untitled Superman movie is expected to begin principal photography in Australia early next year for release in summer, 2006. It is produced by Jon Peters, Bryan Singer and Gilbert Adler from a screenplay by Michael Dougherty & Dan Harris. No other casting has been announced.


Bring on those frickin' polar bears and the gay Jimmy Olsen. As Homer Simpson suggested "All this movie needs is a robotic pie."
Post
#75855
Topic
***The MeBeJedi feedback thread ***
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75855/action/topic#75855
Time
FINALLY! I figured how to open in PowerDVD (I had to download the latest version and run the trial). Brightness issue not withstanding, it does look very good. Far crisper than the five-star 1997 SE discs, for certain. That said, I know you're doing some work to them, and I look forward to a side-by-side comparison of the straight capture vs the retouched version.

Until the official DVD came out, I never in all my hundreds of viewings noticed all of the green flashes during the saber duel. They come in well in your capture too, but not to the obnoxious level they are on the DVD.
Post
#75804
Topic
***The MeBeJedi feedback thread ***
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75804/action/topic#75804
Time
Yeah. Not so much to compress for downloading, but to change the file type. I've found that browsers rarely screw with the binary data being transmitted in a zip file. Unfortunately, IE loves to screw up multimedia files for no tangible reason. It's not a major problem, but when it is a problem, it's usually pretty chronic. I can probably count on my hands the number of times I've seen this problem on my end, but zipping the source has always worked well for fixing the problem.

If you can't do that at the source, no bother though. I think I'll fire up the trusty ol' Netscape 4.7, who treats file downloads nicely almost always, even if it makes pages look like ass.

Update:
I downloaded with Netscape but still had the same problem. It's gotta be my Windows Media player, but I am totally lost on fixing it. Quicktime refuses to open it too. Alas ... t'weren't meant to be.
Post
#75685
Topic
Letter to LFL about DVD Defects (No OT vs SE discussion)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75685/action/topic#75685
Time
I'm cross-posting this from the official site's forum because, frankly, I think I have a damn fine point here to raise and hope you all will take it to heart.

One person on the official site's forum received a replacement disc which fixed the skipping errors, and confirmed that none of the other defects I noted were corrected. He said something to the effect of "For now, we'll just have to live with it. We shouldn't have to, but we will."

I reply: Why should we have to live with it? You paid good, hard-earned money for a product that should be correct. If they were willing to fix the pressing errors, why not the mastering errors? If you bought a brand-new car and the rear speakers were wired in reverse, would you not take it back in to be fixed? Or if the fabric on one of your seats didn't quite match the rest of the interior? Or if the timing were just a little off at startup? All three of these are analogous to the defects in the Star Wars disc. Now, if every car rolled off the assembly line with these problems, there would be a massive recall announced to correct the problems. If consumers do not stand up for themselves, businesses will only take advantage of them. Why should you just accept a defective product?

I emplore you all to start a letter writing campaign to correct the defects we're pointing out in this thread. The BBB will pay attention and will definitely take strong action, even if just a few dozen letters come in on the same subject. Even Rome was built brick by brick. Take action against Lucasfilm and they will be forced to correct their errors.

Updated
On a positive note, I DID speak with somebody at Fox's disc exchange program this afternoon for almost half an hour. She is going to personally try to get better answers on the issue. I still think that Lucasfilm was in such a defensive posture over the OT/SE debate, that their knee-jerk response on the audio problem was to defend it as another creative change. But I digress ... Having a person take the time to actually hear out my issue thoroughly, be sure she understood the issue, clearly get the fact that these changes were different from the "bad production run" that they are fixing, and then take my name and number and promise to get back to me after really tracking down the issue, well, this is promising. Now more than ever, the volume of complaints will underscore the widespread nature of the problem.

Update 2
On a second postive note, I just got called BACK from Fox, apparently by the boss of the person with whom I spoke earlier. He spoke to me for another 10-15 minutes wanting to be sure that he understood all of the issues (and I'm confident he did). He seems to want to get to the bottom of this. While its ultimately a Lucasfilm issue (and he seemed to indicate that Lucasfilm is going to ultimately do whatever they are going to do) he did seem poised to discuss the issue with LFL intelligently. Having an insider talk with Lucasfilm has more potential than just having an angry fan bitching, but that said, I think a hundred angry fans bitching all at once in the right direction will also have an effect.
Post
#75670
Topic
Episode III Teaser Trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75670/action/topic#75670
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Simon
Looks like the Lucas goons are slowly closing down the leaks of the teaser trailer...link one's account has been suspended

-Darth Simon


Because, you know, we can't have a giant commercial for the movie just floating around the net for free, you know. They need to charge $40 per person for that commercial.
Post
#75644
Topic
Episode III Teaser Trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75644/action/topic#75644
Time
Glad I'm not a member. Exactly how many minutes did it take for the trailer to make it into the public domain?

The character on the left looks so different from the one on the right, I'm wondering if they are indeed the same person. I'm assuming this is Darth Sidious, played by Ian McD, but the make up looks soooo heavy compared to Palpatine. The cheeks are strangely built up. I almost had wondered if it was a scarred-up Anakin, but he'd need the suit. Lucas has suceeded at confusing me, if nothing else.

Anybody else find some of this movie looking extremely bright-and-in-the-daylight for such a "dark" movie?

Post
#75355
Topic
Anakin's ghost?!?!?!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/75355/action/topic#75355
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
Naa, not miss piggy. How bout Kermit?


Nah, Miss Piggy. Frank Oz.


How about the "father" of Kermit and Fozzie? Check out "The Great Muppet Caper" if you don't know what I'm talking about.

I'd do this myself but I'm too busy. (And yet, here I am on this site again. What gives?)