davidb

cheers mate thanks for the debate

Edward G

Sounds like a good way forward, David B.

I'm as mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

Steve Crook

Again, the rights to a lot of older films aren't held by the studios by by individuals. Sometimes the director or their descendants.

It would be nice if studios were more altruistic. It would be nice, but it ain't gonna happen. They have to make some money to pay for the upkeep of the studio and to pay the salaries of all the people that work for them. And film-making is a very risky business financially at the best of times.They make a huge outlay to make 10 films and maybe one makes a profit.

And as Grey Wyler said, and as I said above, there are a lot of expenses and a lot of effort needed to do a decent DVD release. It's not a matter of just handing the rights to a smaller company. You have to find a smaller company that can afford to do it, and can bear the significant loss they'll incur.

I really do wish it was all as simple as you think it is. But it ain't and because it ain't, not many people will make the effort, and take the financial hit to do it.

And yes, that does mean that the bootleggers will continue to ply their trade. But the lack of legal releases is still no excuse for buying them, and especially is no reason for trying to justify buying them and claiming that you're doing nothing wrong. It's illegal to sell a bootleg item. It's also illegal to buy it when you know it's a bootleg.

Steve

davidb

well again its about taking chances .the copyright holders dont seem to want to take a chance putting a niche market film out in case they dont recoup their outlay .the ebay bootegger seems to be willing to risk the chance of prosecution .at the minute the ebay bootlegger wins .i didnt say that what theyre doing is right ,theyre just filling a void

Steve Crook

And what about what you're doing? By buying from them you're encouraging them, adding to their ill gotten gains which take the money that should go to the film-makers, and you're breaking the law because you know they're bootlegs

Steve

Harleybloke

I thought the cost... for the companies to release 'legit' dvds wasn't so great..............?

We have another thread here about films we think should be on dvd and aren't.

If the companies maybe reviewed the market and say, release 'Far From The Madding Crowd', 'Scandal', even in a limited run, they might make life harder for the bootleggers, more so than any amount of police/trading standard actions?

Look at any of the big internet companies, HMV, Play etc and look at their 'soon to be released'. Plenty of 'crash bang wallop' but not what I'd buy. I brought 'Atonement' recently but most of my purchases are for stuff 25-45 years old. They can be hard to get. No 'ligit' copy so what can you do...........??

There are always people who will pay the minimum and buy crappy copies. I never have, although some 1930s/1940s films I have copies given to me by people who have the original as you can't get them anywhere else now.

Whoever owns the rights, why sit on them? Weren't they made to be seen.............

.....You couldn't hear it, if they were shooting at me with howitzers!

DB7

I recall Marc putting it in the 10k bracket and doubting production companies would get a return on many titles.

davidb

if you or anyone else has ever used the search for a film forum on this website your as guilty as me of copying and distributing ,even if no money changed hands .im at least prepared to put my hand up and say ive done it

Fellwanderer

I think davidb makes a valid point. Personally, I'll always go for the legit release over a bootleg but if there is no other way I can quite understand.

I'm pretty sure I've only got one copy of a film that has not yet been shown on television in this country or released on dvd - but I've ordered it for it's release in September anyway.

I'm certainly not going to pretend that if someone came up with a perfect bootleg copy of The Snow Goose then I wouldn't buy it. I would!

All the best
FELL

A signature is no substitute for a life

Steve Crook

But you didn't just put your hand up and say "ive done it" - you have to make a song and dance about it as if you're proud of having done it and then accuse the rights holders of being lazy just because they haven't done what you wanted. That's why I didn't like your attitude in all of this.

Not everyone was put on this world to serve your whims

Steve

davidb

i take it youve used the search for a film forum then , my opinion is that the distributors are lazy when it comes to niche market films and im not proud to use bootleggers ,just honest about it

julian_craster

There does seem to be a difference between what is 'public domain' in the USA, and what is PD in the UK. Presumably those US '50 films on 12 x DVD' megapacks for $20 (mainly of American films from the 1930s and 1940s in rubbish prints) would be illegal if compiled in Europe.....and few UK films make it on to these DVD sets.....

batman

There is indeed. I do not know all the technicalities of the process but there are sites in the US where you buy 'public domain' films for selling purposes. This applies only to US made films covered by US copyright laws. Even these US films would probably be classed as still in copyright under UK law but selling them as 'imports' in the UK is apparently accepted and legal practice.

I wish I had claws.

DB7

I've just deleted a post on here requesting London Belongs to Me, The Forsyte Saga, Jewel in the Crown and Blott on the Landscape. The mind friggin boggles.

HIPPIEDAVE

There are several items owned by companies they will never release and so will always be a market for them if people really want the product.