WoobieATL Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 You Tube and other video outlets are considered major marketing areas these days by the movie, music, television industries as well as others. DCI should embrace these areas and get this material out to as many people as they can. I would like to know what percentage of DCI's annual profits are driven by the CD/DVD/Internet Subscriptions...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
year1buick Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Of course you're right. DCI doesn't have any legal counsel and they just made all that mumbo jumbo up. They don't hold any actual copyrights and we can just do whatever we want with their property without fear of prosecution or fine. /sarcasm.You'd need to prove you have the right to charge $10 to sell whatever it is you claim to own. So does DCI. The difference is, they didn't just make it up and pull that stuff out of thin air. They (being a conglomerate of the members) OWN the images and audio recordings of their member corps. They can prove they have the right to that intellectual property -- not just because they say so but because it's contractually agreed to with not only the corps who participate but with YOU and ME if and when we use their site and want to access their property. "Terms of service." One service they provide is the shows their member corps perform. They own it. We want it. THEY can charge us for it legally and if we don't pay for what they charge us for then we are stealing it. I know this is going to sound mean (and it's not intended to because I'm genuinely baffled) but didn't your parents ever teach you guys that taking things that belong to someone else without paying is stealing? When did it become justifiable to you to take what doesn't belong to you without paying for it? Stef I certainly wouldn't argue that stealing isn't wrong but when you're dealing with issues regarding different media platforms (on emerging technologies), it's not always clear as to what the definition of "stealing" is. For instance, an ABC exec once said that anyone fastforwarding through the commercials of a show they recorded on a DVR was "stealing" from the network. Most would disagree. (I only slow down to catch movie trailers :) ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScribeToo Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 I've said it before, and i'll say it again: Guilty Until Caught Don't you mean Innocent until Caught? I mean.. if you ask me, you're guilty as sin just for showing up here today .. but aside from that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourouttheforty Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 I'm not gonna lie, but if I hadn't "pirated" bootlegged show mp3's and videos, I would not have gotten as crazy about drum corps as I am now. I doubt I would have gotten the urge to march if I hadn't had some really great shows like Star 91 and Phantom 96 to name a few of my favorites of the top of my head, but instead had been limited to the show that our band went to every year and the PBS broadcast. I bet there are a lot of other people who are like me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
year1buick Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 so lets say I rip a stream from a live feed. I know its wrong. But its maad cool as well as useful. Also, how in the hell is DCI gonna track me down? They can barely hold their site up when everyone goes and checks the scores at night. I've said it before, and i'll say it again: Guilty Until CaughtWhat about recording a corps in the lot? That seems to me like it would fall under the DCI Copyright rules or whatever. There's no way they can stop everything, its even hella easy to record video AT A SHOW! Just whip out ur cam, and shoot. No one cares. I'll even go as far as saying DCI doesn't really mind. I buy over $100 of merch with just the finals DVD alone, i think its ok if I let out a lil "arrgghh" every once and a while ^0^ EDIT: If I get a lap dance I most DEF can record that for future use From what I understand, it's not a copyright violation for you to make a personal recording from a public parking lot, so long as you don't distribute or show it publicly. (Which would include uploading to the net.) However, many people (especially since 9-11) run into problems when photographing prominent sites such as ball parks, bridges, etc. I've read of people being accosted by security types for taking pictures of a ball park from a public sidewalk, because the team has registered the building as a trademark. Despite what they may claim, so long as you’re in a public spot, and not breaking any other laws, you can snap away. (You just can print it in a poster.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScribeToo Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 I certainly wouldn't argue that stealing isn't wrong but when you're dealing with issues regarding different media platforms (on emerging technologies), it's not always clear as to what the definition of "stealing" is. For instance, an ABC exec once said that anyone fastforwarding through the commercials of a show they recorded on a DVR was "stealing" from the network. Most would disagree. (I only slow down to catch movie trailers :) ) I'm not trying to be unreasonable.. I really really do understand about emerging technologies and the need to adapt as those technologies progress -- I promise I'm not burying my head in the sand.. but the law, as written right now.. and the legal disclaimers on DCI's site being clear as they are, makes it pretty black and white. The absence of action against the theft is probably an indication that they are in the process of adapting.. or that they really don't care.. either way is fine with me. My point ultimately is just that taking something someone else owns and offers for sale without paying for it (whatever that may be) is theft. When we log in and purchase our pay-per-view login credential, it's presumed that we DID READ the terms of our agreement and by clicking "ok" we not only read them but AGREE to them.. that's how they could prosecute if they chose to. As for the pirated stuff out there.. no kidding it's there. No kidding it's gotten easier and easier to obtain and post.. I'm just saying it doesn't change the fact that it's theft in the first place. Stef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedicadet05 Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Don't you mean Innocent until Caught? I mean.. if you ask me, you're guilty as sin just for showing up here today .. but aside from that... na, thats right. Guilty until caught. Cause when ur caught ur screwed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScribeToo Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 na, thats right. Guilty until caught. Cause when ur caught ur screwed. *tsk* but I've got the goods on you!! :lolhit: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beavs Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 I'm not gonna lie, but if I hadn't "pirated" bootlegged show mp3's and videos, I would not have gotten as crazy about drum corps as I am now. I doubt I would have gotten the urge to march if I hadn't had some really great shows like Star 91 and Phantom 96 to name a few of my favorites of the top of my head, but instead had been limited to the show that our band went to every year and the PBS broadcast. I bet there are a lot of other people who are like me. I'll have to agree. Back in the napster days my "free" downloads of dci corps mp3s boosted my interests in drum corps. I soon after marched in drum corps, and since then have bought every finals dvd set. Besides, watching free crappy quality recordings of drum corps isn't going to keep me from getting the DVDs after finals, or the tour DVD from my favorit corps. I wanna watch this stuff in high quality audio and video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartyount Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 When we log in and purchase our pay-per-view login credential, it's presumed that we DID READ the terms of our agreement and by clicking "ok" we not only read them but AGREE to them.. that's how they could prosecute if they chose to. Yes - they can prosecute, but will they win? The point I (and others) ha've been trying to make is that they can draw up a contract that has any terms they want to put in there. The problem is that they may be putting terms in the contract that cannot be legally upheld. Someone could sign a contract that they'll give away their firstborn child. That doesn't mean that they are legally obligated to do so under the law, because it's not legal to ask someone to do it in the first place. Along those same lines, it may not be legal for DCI to say that you can't record the broadcast stream. The television broadcast companies claimed that they had the right to protect their copyrighted material by saying that it could not be recorded by a VCR or other means. Yet there was a legal ruling that this was not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.