skevinp

Members
  • Content count

    2,622
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

skevinp last won the day on November 18

skevinp had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,092 Excellent

About skevinp

  • Rank
    DCP Fanatic

Recent Profile Visitors

1,172 profile views
  1. Video edits 2017

    Ah, sorry, lost the trail. They should not do anything that would likely only be used to synchronize the video with the audio, like providing instructions on how to do it, or embedding time cues if they would have no other use. I just meant to address the mere act of providing video without sound. As there are reasonable substantial non-infringing uses of such a video are possible, the fact alone that they could be synchronized with audio may not be sufficient to render them guilty of contributory copyright infringement. In any case, I can still see where they would not want to take that risk. Litigation can be very expensive, even if you win.
  2. Video edits 2017

    If they merely provided the video without doing anything specifically aimed at it being synchronized, though, I don't think that would be the case, because there are arguably substantial non-infringing uses to a video with no sound. As somebody else mentioned, they might obtain such a video just to watch the drill.
  3. Video edits 2017

    Correct. That was indeed the premise of my question. Per a little research, there are indeed (judicially created) doctrines of contributory infringement and inducement that are somewhat comparable to patent law, including recognized defenses.
  4. Video edits 2017

    Is there statutory or case law on this? Perhaps comparable to inducement or contributory infringement in patent law? What are synch rights meant to cover: (1) The final product of synchronizing the 2 things? (2) The right to take the 2 things and synchronize them? (3) the right to own the results of one's own efforts required to synchronize them? Or (4) something else?
  5. Video edits 2017

    And show the video in high speed.
  6. The end (Georgia Dome)

    Same thing that happened to the Falcons in the Super Bowl.
  7. Video edits 2017

    So you stole his point from him? Is nothing safe from your thieving ways? :D
  8. Video edits 2017

    Because rich people getting everything they want whenever they want it for free is a justification comparable to feeding a starving child.
  9. Cadets 2018

    And they will finally have hands.
  10. Cadets 2018

    What am I supposed to watch and why can't the snakes do it themselves?
  11. How about we kick it even harder and solve the problem permanently.
  12. Video edits 2017

    So start months earlier?
  13. Finals Format

    No one would believe it if that happened today.
  14. Finals Format

    On DCP, angrily calling people dinos seems to be the last, though almost immediately invoked, refuge of advocates of bad ideas.
  15. Video edits 2017

    I'm not talking about rights to past shows DCI thought they had based on an interpretation of existing licenses. I'm talking about corps securing rights (including video, not just performance) before putting a show on the field to begin with. Why can they not do that?