The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index :: Right or Wrong? :: A Question of Ethics, Converting VHS to DVD (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

Good to here.
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3
mkiger
View Profile
Loyal user
228 Posts

Profile of mkiger
Seems like a grey area. The intent of magic books and videos are to teach the purchaser new skills. If my mechanic fixes my car so I can get a new job he does not get a cut of my wages ever after.

But a book/video is sold to a customer for personal use, what you do with it after paying for it is your business. You bought it, you did not lease or license it, if you want to give it away or sell it you are within your rights.

Ethically, the guy who made the video or wrote the book is losing a sale, so I really do not know.
Howard Coberly
View Profile
Loyal user
Irvine, California
239 Posts

Profile of Howard Coberly
Quote:
On 2003-12-23 02:04, cfrye wrote:
The situation as I see it is that if you trade or even give away your VHS copy of the material then you have unfairly profited from another person's intellectual property without compensation. If you were to donate your only copy of a tape, it would be OK because you would no longer have the use of the material (equivalent to giving away a car). However, by copying to DVD and therefore retaining the use of the material, you benefit from the material while passing the same material to someone else who either didn't pay for it or paid you for material to which you don't own the rights.

In a nutshell: if you keep a copy of the material on DVD and then give away the VHS copies without the permission of the copyright holder, you have violated their rights. I almost said "stolen," but it's obvious you want to do the ethical thing in this situation.

What I recommend is that you contact the copyright holders directly and ask their permission to donate the tapes to a magic library. If they choose not to grant that permission, you should either keep the tapes or destroy them.

I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree with the on-going argument in the magic community that once a person pays for a trick, video, etc., in good faith, he is being unethical or breaking some copyright law by re-selling the items or givng them away.

Neither is the case. I'll repeat my points on this subject. If I were to buy a used car from an individual instead of buying a brand new car from a dealership, by your logic, I am acting unethically by taking money away from the people who make the cars. If I borrow a cup of sugar from my neighbor to put in my coffee because I ran out, by your logic, I am acting unethically by not going to the market and buying more sugar instead. By borrowing it, I am taking money away from the sugar manufacturers. This scenario can be and often has been taken to the level of the absurd.

If I pay the price asked and purchase anything that is for sale, I have the right to resell, loan or give it away at my discretion and there is nothing unethical about it unless I entered into some agreement with the seller beforehand not to do so.

I would be willing to bet that many of the same magicians who complain about their items being resold/loaned out/donated have, at some time in their lives, resold something or bought something second hand or borrowed something without ever giving a thought to whether they were acting unethically. A lot of magicians tend to think that our world is different from the rest of the world. We put up with a lot of false advertising for tricks under the excuse that to tell the entire truth would give away too much of the effect. If I buy a trick and find out later that the description was not accurate (see my other posts on this subject) the prevailing sentiment among other magicians seems to be "well, you should have known better".

How many magicians will carry this attitude into other aspects of their lives? If you install a new furnace in your house for 1,000 dollars and it doesn't work as advertised, will you just say, "Hmmm, oh well, I guess I'll know better next time". I would guess that the person would take immediate action to fix the situation or get his/her money back.

Getting back to the point at hand, as far as copyright laws are concerned, I'm not a lawyer so I can't give you an informed opinion on that subject but I have to say that if giving away or re-selling DVD's is violating copyright laws there are millions of people all over the world right now who broke the law by giving them as Christmas gifts not to mention the fact that they acted unethically by giving a gift to someone rather than telling the recipient to buy the item so as not to take money away from the manufacturer.

I know that, as in any entertainment field, it's extremely difficult to keep afloat and make a living in magic but we shouldn't place nonsensical constraints on others in our community just to try to keep money in our own pockets which, to me, is itself unethical.
"Our town used to be more fortunate...not a single winter passed without the visit of some star.
There used to be famous actors and singers, while today, God only knows! Nobody visits except magicians and organ-grinders. No esthetic satisfaction."
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27307 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2005-12-29 23:47, Howard Coberly Irvine,California wrote:...I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree with the on-going argument in the magic community that once a person pays for a trick, video, etc., in good faith, he is being unethical or breaking some copyright law by re-selling the items or givng them away....


As I understand the argument the issue raised is not one of copyright but of the ethics of using the material taught on the video after having sold the video.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
JackScratch
View Profile
Inner circle
2151 Posts

Profile of JackScratch
OK, my 2 cents, and you lawyers can check me on this, but I believe the "Fair use act" actualy requires you posess originals in order for copies to be legal.
silverking
View Profile
Inner circle
4574 Posts

Profile of silverking
JackScratch is absolutely correct. If you have copies, you must have originals. Sell the originals, and you have to destroy the copies......wanna keep the copies, then you either have to keep the originals or destroy them....no donating is permited.
Fair use allows you to make a back up of anytning you own.
As for using the material in your act after you sell the video's, that's the purpose of the videos...to teach you how to do something. The only time you would have to worry about not be legally permitted to do the material if you sell the video is if, in the original purchase agreement, there was an express statement that ownership of the video is what constitutes a license to perform the material.

Of course a lot of videos are teaching material in the public domain, and it's worth remembering that just because somebody renames the Ambitious Card something like CardClimber, doesn't make it theirs.
Bill Palmer
View Profile
Eternal Order
Only Jonathan Townsend has more than
24315 Posts

Profile of Bill Palmer
Gee, Howard Cobberly Irvine, California, I think you are missing the whole point.

Let's take your used car analogy. There is nothing wrong with selling your car to someone else. But once you have sold it, you have forfeited the right to go over to that car and drive it off without his permission. It's not yours. You don't own it any more.

Many of us do learn from material other people show us. But I'm one of those guys who hardly ever throws anything away or sells it. Sometimes I give things to the club -- not VHS tapes, unless I have legal DVD's of them. Giving a tape you make a copy of to your magic club is like photocopying all of your lecture notes and then giving the originals to the club.

But there is nothing at all wrong, immoral, illegal or unethical about giving a book, DVD, prop or anything else to someone else as a gift, unless it is specifically prohibited in the original purchase agreement.

You can't give away a Fitch-Kohler holdout, legally, unless you are Bob Fitch or Bob Kohler. They own every one of them manufactured. Everyone else leases it.

Let's face it most of us know when what we are doing is wrong. The rest don't care or they haven't been informed. The ones who do care will stop. The ones who don't will continue to manufacture crappy magical apparatus.
"The Swatter"

Founder of CODBAMMC

My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups."

www.cupsandballsmuseum.com
JackScratch
View Profile
Inner circle
2151 Posts

Profile of JackScratch
I'm not certain I agree with your used car anology Bill, though I do agree with the point. To realy be respectful of someone elses work, you should just keep your purchases, you just can't go wrong with that. Legaly, it gets trickier, and myself, I think it better not to mess with that.

On the subject of the Copies DO NOT DESTROY THE ORIGINALS. If you do, the fair use act requires the destruction of all copies. Kepp the copies and originals, both. That is the only way your copies are legal. If you destroy the originals, they are not legal. In fact, if you do not posses the originals, copies are not legal, regardless of what happened to the originals. Ethics are moot when the law doesn't allow it.

Here, enjoy

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Ooooh, this is particularly interesting. Seems a lot of us, myself included,may have been very very wrong. Read the last Faq.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html#backup
silverking
View Profile
Inner circle
4574 Posts

Profile of silverking
Hi JackScratch

I'm not seeing anyting substantially different than what is being said here in that last link, what part were you lookin at?

Cheers
Howard Coberly
View Profile
Loyal user
Irvine, California
239 Posts

Profile of Howard Coberly
Quote:
On 2005-12-30 02:50, Bill Palmer wrote:
Gee, Howard Cobberly Irvine, California, I think you are missing the whole point.

Let's take your used car analogy. There is nothing wrong with selling your car to someone else. But once you have sold it, you have forfeited the right to go over to that car and drive it off without his permission. It's not yours. You don't own it any more.

Many of us do learn from material other people show us. But I'm one of those guys who hardly ever throws anything away or sells it. Sometimes I give things to the club -- not VHS tapes, unless I have legal DVD's of them. Giving a tape you make a copy of to your magic club is like photocopying all of your lecture notes and then giving the originals to the club.

But there is nothing at all wrong, immoral, illegal or unethical about giving a book, DVD, prop or anything else to someone else as a gift, unless it is specifically prohibited in the original purchase agreement.

You can't give away a Fitch-Kohler holdout, legally, unless you are Bob Fitch or Bob Kohler. They own every one of them manufactured. Everyone else leases it.

Let's face it most of us know when what we are doing is wrong. The rest don't care or they haven't been informed. The ones who do care will stop. The ones who don't will continue to manufacture crappy magical apparatus.

Actually, the car analogy is completely valid in the context in which I made it.

The analogy had to do with the mistaken belief that it is unethical to resell something that one has purchased in good faith because it is taking money out of the pockets of the originator of the item. It had nothing to do with selling something and then going and trying to use the item again. Re-using the item after selling it has nothing to do with the context in which I made the car analogy.


Posted: Dec 31, 2005 2:57pm
------------------------------------------------
By the way, Bill, I've noticed a hint of condescension in your replies to those who don't agree with you. It's really not necessary and it automatically weakens any argument you try to make. And besides, you spelled my name wrong.
"Our town used to be more fortunate...not a single winter passed without the visit of some star.
There used to be famous actors and singers, while today, God only knows! Nobody visits except magicians and organ-grinders. No esthetic satisfaction."
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27307 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Did folks catch that under the law as cited, one is NOT entitled to make a backup/dupe/archival copy of your digital media for magic works?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Bill Hallahan
View Profile
Inner circle
New Hampshire
3227 Posts

Profile of Bill Hallahan
Jonathan, the law says you can make backups of copyrighted digital files.

The relevant section from the last link:
Quote:
Under section 117, you or someone you authorize may make a copy of an original computer program if:

  • the new copy is being made for archival (i.e., backup) purposes only;
  • you are the legal owner of the copy; and
  • any copy made for archival purposes is either destroyed, or transferred with the original copy, once the original copy is sold, given away, or otherwise transferred.

The law states you cannot sell a copy.

There is a section that states:
Quote:
You are not permitted under section 117 to make a backup copy of other material on a computer's hard drive, such as other copyrighted works that have been downloaded (e.g., music, films).

This would apply to some e-books, but it would not apply to purchased DVDs, unless explicitly stated at the point of sale.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch"
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27307 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2005-12-31 16:48, Bill Hallahan wrote:...you authorize may make a copy of an original computer program ...


good for computer programs. not so good for videos and ebooks.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Bill Hallahan
View Profile
Inner circle
New Hampshire
3227 Posts

Profile of Bill Hallahan
I'm not a lawyer, but here's how I read the law.

The page I quoted does mentions computer programs explicitly, however, the law I quoted is for "Digital Files", which would also include the files on DVDs.

And Section 108. Limitations on exclusive ri......archives law clarifies this substantially. If the purpose is only backup, i.e. archiving, you are allowed up to three copies under the law of any copyrighted material unless otherwise prohibited by the copyright holder. Resale of copies is forbidden and if the original is sold, the copies must be destroyed. Note also that the law as written does is not restricted to just public libraries or archives.

Note also that the Fair Use clause, developed through several court decisions, provide the guidelines that are used to determine if copyright law has been breached. Nobody would ever be prosecuted for making a backup, unless otherwise prohibited by the copyright holder.

The law for downloaded copyrighted files is different.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch"
Bill Palmer
View Profile
Eternal Order
Only Jonathan Townsend has more than
24315 Posts

Profile of Bill Palmer
Quote:
On 2004-02-07 18:58, Peter Marucci wrote:
Kevin writes (and his point is argued by others): "So unless it concerns the welfare of the nation or a significantly large amount of money, respect for intellectual property is not an issue?"

So what would you do -- close all the libraries for the very same violations?

Please join the REAL world!

In a "perfect world", this would not be an issue.

But, then, in a "perfect world", poverty, hunger, and terrorism wouldn't be issues, either.

This shows the true depth of knowledge that Peter Marucci has of the ethics of magic and the copyright laws. Libraries do not have photocopies of books, generally speaking. In fact, libraries are among the major purchasers of books, DVD's, videotapes and just about every other form of media. Each copy they purchase is done legally, and as long as they don't let out copies, they are staying within the law. Those of us in the publishing business have no beef at all with libraries. They help us.

For example, one of my favorite books is Illustrated Magic by Ottokar Fischer. How do you think I found it? The Houston Public Library had a copy when I was a kid. As soon as I could purchase a copy of my own, I did so. Ditto all the Hofffmann books.

Unless Canadian libraries are giving away photocopies, Marucci is completely off-base on this one. Wouldn't be the first time, though.


Posted: Jan 2, 2006 2:03pm
---------------------------------------------
Quote:
On 2005-12-31 14:36, Howard Coberly wrote:
Quote:
On 2005-12-30 02:50, Bill Palmer wrote:
Gee, Howard Cobberly Irvine, California, I think you are missing the whole point.

Let's take your used car analogy. There is nothing wrong with selling your car to someone else. But once you have sold it, you have forfeited the right to go over to that car and drive it off without his permission. It's not yours. You don't own it any more.

Many of us do learn from material other people show us. But I'm one of those guys who hardly ever throws anything away or sells it. Sometimes I give things to the club -- not VHS tapes, unless I have legal DVD's of them. Giving a tape you make a copy of to your magic club is like photocopying all of your lecture notes and then giving the originals to the club.

But there is nothing at all wrong, immoral, illegal or unethical about giving a book, DVD, prop or anything else to someone else as a gift, unless it is specifically prohibited in the original purchase agreement.

You can't give away a Fitch-Kohler holdout, legally, unless you are Bob Fitch or Bob Kohler. They own every one of them manufactured. Everyone else leases it.

Let's face it most of us know when what we are doing is wrong. The rest don't care or they haven't been informed. The ones who do care will stop. The ones who don't will continue to manufacture crappy magical apparatus.

Actually, the car analogy is completely valid in the context in which I made it.

The analogy had to do with the mistaken belief that it is unethical to resell something that one has purchased in good faith because it is taking money out of the pockets of the originator of the item. It had nothing to do with selling something and then going and trying to use the item again. Re-using the item after selling it has nothing to do with the context in which I made the car analogy.


Posted: Dec 31, 2005 2:57pm
------------------------------------------------
By the way, Bill, I've noticed a hint of condescension in your replies to those who don't agree with you. It's really not necessary and it automatically weakens any argument you try to make. And besides, you spelled my name wrong.

Okay, Mr. COBERLY, what do you find condescending in my replies to those who disagree with me? Be specific.

BTW, I never hint.

And at what point did anyone ever say that selling or giving away a videotape or a DVD, as long as it was an original (and no copy was kept), was immoral or illegal?
"The Swatter"

Founder of CODBAMMC

My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups."

www.cupsandballsmuseum.com
Parson Smith
View Profile
Inner circle
1937 Posts

Profile of Parson Smith
Bill Palmer wrote:
Marucci is completely off-base on this one. Wouldn't be the first time, though.

I have not heard from Peter Marucci in several months.
Does anyone know if he is OK?

Peace,
Parson
Here kitty, kitty,kitty. Smile
+++a posse ad esse+++