 |
|
|
Scene.org is hosted and supported by:
|
|
|
Scene.org is sponsored by:
|
|
|
|
|
 |
forum - Offtopic |
|
 | | Topic: | New Demo DVD - Piracy? | |
| maybe the guys between mindcandy had authorizations from the authors ???
i'm wondering if your problem is similar with free software: when you do free software, it happens that your software become part of a linux distribution which is in turn sold as a cd
edit: the GPL allows reselling[Post edited by g. on Saturday 8 April 2006 - 13:02] | | |
| you're profiting from other ppls work.
without even asking permission.
yes it's piracy.
if you distribute it for free it's mostly considered acceptable to do it without previously asking for permissions since their act of having released something to public domain (like usually all demos are, unless stated otherwise on the infofile by the authors) has the embebbed right to allow the non profit redistribution wherever by whomever.
when you start asking money for it, you need to ask permission for it. it's not that hard of a rule to understand.[Post edited by psenough on Saturday 8 April 2006 - 19:57] | | |
| In most countries, and in all countries were demos have been created so far, public domain does *not* apply to any of them. (Public domain only comes in the picture 75 years after the author has died)
*No* demo is in the public domain.[Post edited by _-_-__ on Saturday 8 April 2006 - 21:12] | | |
| so what do you call stuff that have been freely released to the public without any sort of associated license nicolas? -_-
public domain copyright and public domain distribution are diferent things.
you are correct on claiming the copyright remains attached to the owner till 75 years after he dies, unless he declares it public domain. but the work itself is beeing distributed freely on the public domain. | | |
| Public domain means there is no more a copyright on the work. Licenses do not play any sort of role to know whether a work is in public domain or copyrighted.
Another example, in some countries, (France for example) an author cannot sign away his (moral) rights to a work. (And thus, declaring a work public domain is *not* possible in those countries.
It's the first time I hear about a "public domain copyright" and "public domain distribution". The latter can only be understood as the work being a normal copyrighted work, that somebody gave permission to redistribute.
But without knowledge, explicit permission from the author to distribute a work in a given form, one must assume this distribution is not authorized. Paid redistribution on a DVD does not fall into the implicit terms that prevailed in the scene when those works were created, so an explicit permission must be obtained.[Post edited by _-_-__ on Monday 10 April 2006 - 19:51] | | |
| Yes, we are still working on our MindCandy Volume 2 DVD. Been like a couple years now I sad to say, but we really hope to release it this year. We have gotten permission from all the groups. And are working on getting commentary and additional info. Let me tell you, this is NOT easy.
I'd be more concerned with the Amiga Inc. people as they own some trademarks/copyrights. Thus we are trying to stay away from those to avoid being shut down.
Contact me as I'm interested to see what you've done with your Amiga production.
-dan (www.mindcandydvd.com) | | |
| Fair enough, thanks for clearing that up.
I will hang on to the DVD's I made for another 65 years before releasing them. Hmmm, but DVD's will be a thing of the past by then.
Ah well....
Although its strange to hear that there are 2 types of public domain, it was news to me.
Additional: Just did a search on 'Public Domain Laws' and came across this legal statement:
"If something is in the public domain, it can even be used by others for commercial purposes."[Post edited by j_tramiel on Tuesday 11 April 2006 - 21:36] | | |
| | there arent two diferent definitions in the eye of the law, i just use those words (public domain) erroneously to represent something beeing out there released for free to anyone to redistribute non commercially. whilst the law definition of it is regarding the copyright. | | |
| that's just a very improper usage of "public domain". Many people actually place their works under terms similar to what the works that fall into public domain have. Creative Commons even have a license for that and the BSD license with the advertising clause removed is also basically a PD license.
Also, the situation with demos and copyright is kind of a mess since if there are no terms stated, you always have to assume the worst which is no redistribution of any kind at all, not even watching. That's why netlabels have embraced CC-licenses - they make it possible to give sensible rights to your listeners forbidden by default in copyright. Can't say I've seen many demos that come with a license.[Post edited by slux on Friday 14 April 2006 - 1:44] | | |
| The thing is for something to be in the public domain it must be put in public domain explicitely by the right holders. If you can track such declaration somewhere relinquishing their rights, then it is fine, if you can't then you cannot assume the works are in public domain.
Furthermore, it can be even more involved if you start talking about works that are derivative works of others. (For example, if the soundtrack is a cover of another track, or if some of the graphics is copied from another author) | | |
| remember, just because a demo doesnt explicitly say what rules you have to follow when distributing it, doesnt mean there aren't any.
you're pretty safe to assume that you can copy it freely as long as no money comes into the equation. but if you want to sell something with demos on it, it's _your_ responsibility to contact the author and get permission. (which mindcandy did, and e.g. party organisers usually have a rule that if you enter their compos you automatically give them the right to sell a cd with the work on.)
there's a grey area tho - what happens when you're selling a dvd for only the cost of the media? or what about the case of magazine coverdisks, which are given away "for free" with a magazine you pay for? (e.g. sceen :) ) | | |
| demo compilations have been known to circulate on non profit basis (demopacks ffs), its normal to distribute them, as long as no money is beeing charged its acceptable to most demosceners.
magazines usually ask for permission.
selling stuff on ebay is clearly meant for profit though.. its an auction ffs.. | | |
|
|
|
