Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

What happened to the "old movies on YouTube" thread?


FredCDobbs
 Share

Recommended Posts

It is a very difficult issue because a person browsing a video-hosting site has no reasonable method of determining whether any particular video is in Public Domain or if the studio/producer has authorized the upload other than statements made on the site.

 

The full responsibility for determining legality of any particular video on a site rests solely with the site which has allowed the video to be uploaded onto their computer(s) since the upload is a copy of the material. 

 

Since its inception, YouTube has been one of the "good guys" concerning copyright infringement. They were instrumental in crafting the process by which studios can quickly and easily notify sites of infringing material. They quickly delete all instances of copyright infringement when it is found and ban users for repeatedly violating copyright laws. I have been told that they are active also in behind-the-scenes analysis and detection to prevent those banned from creating new accounts under different names. 

 

I am sorry to say that I do not understand the current hubbub. It is not as if there had a been a: "Watch this video I uploaded before it is removed for copyright infringement" thread. 

 

A video which has been available on YouTube several years is de facto not an infringing copy because studios routinely scan the site and issue take-down notices which YouTube quickly honors. I believe that it must be quite rare for an infringing video to escape detection for any considerable length of time.

 

I understand that this is a sensitive issue for TCM because of its business ties to studios. I personally feel that deleting an entire thread which did not create, support, or encourage copyright infringement in any manner was a bit heavy-handed, but I recognize that it is their right to make such decisions.

 

I must wonder if they will now remove the ability to post links to any videos on this site.

 

I share your concerns, jamesjazzguitar, concerning copyrights. My own publications have been in academic journals. It is known well that professors copy what they wish with no concern for law or ethics. It is also that my husband writes fiction. Part of his income comes from royalties.

 

I find it hard to believe that the folks that created the thread and posted links on it didn't know the material wasn't authorized by the owners of said material.   I think these folks knew exactly what they were doing  (they are all very knowledgably about movies) .    So to me the thread was supporting and encouraging copyright infringement.        

 

As TP said it isn't reasonable to ask the TCM moderators to determine how 'valid' a link is or not.    I hope that all links are not prohibited but instead users don't create blatant threads or post links they know allow access to unauthorized material.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe that the folks that created the thread and posted links on it didn't know the material wasn't authorized by the owners of said material.   I think these folks knew exactly what they were doing  (they are all very knowledgably about movies) .    So to me the thread was supporting and encouraging copyright infringement.        

 

As TP said it isn't reasonable to ask the TCM moderators to determine how 'valid' a link is or not.    I hope that all links are not prohibited but instead users don't create blatant threads or post links they know allow access to unauthorized material.

I think what happened originally, if I remember correctly, is that Fred was becoming increasingly disillusioned with all the newer movies airing on TCM. So his idea was to start a thread where he could talk about classics from the studio era and provide pointers on where others could find those films if they were no longer on TCM. His tool of choice was Youtube. And with the previous software, he did not embed the videos into his posts. But after the upgrades, the embedded videos became the norm-- and that is when all this should have been questioned and clarified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe that the folks that created the thread and posted links on it didn't know the material wasn't authorized by the owners of said material.   I think these folks knew exactly what they were doing  (they are all very knowledgably about movies) .    So to me the thread was supporting and encouraging copyright infringement.        

 

As TP said it isn't reasonable to ask the TCM moderators to determine how 'valid' a link is or not.    I hope that all links are not prohibited but instead users don't create blatant threads or post links they know allow access to unauthorized material.

 

I didn't.  So I am a bit upset that the thread was pulled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what happened originally, if I remember correctly, is that Fred was becoming increasingly disillusioned with all the newer movies airing on TCM. So his idea was to start a thread where he could talk about classics from the studio era and provide pointers on where others could find those films if they were no longer on TCM. His tool of choice was Youtube. And with the previous software, he did not embed the videos into his posts. But after the upgrades, the embedded videos became the norm-- and that is when all this should have been questioned and clarified.

 

Thanks TopBilled,

 

With the new message board software added last year, it was the embedding feature that began to cause all the problems and controversy, since a large link appeared on the screen, within a surrounding image of the TCM message board web page, and with a large still frame photo from the movie in the link, and that made it look like the movie was being stored on the TCM website and offered for free viewing specifically by TCM.

 

In the previous 15 or so years, all links to film clips, audio, etc. showed up simply as a URL address and that made it obvious that the link was NOT ON the TCM website or part of TCM.

 

But when the embedding feature started, that made a big photograph/video link to a movie look like it was a TCM presentation.

 

I tried several different ways to get rid of the large embedding appearance, but nothing worked. Even when I posted just the URL address to the link, the board’s software often converted that to an embedded link with a large image from the movie.

 

I am retired and I can’t walk much or get out of the house, and I can’t afford to buy a lot of mail-order DVDs, so I spend a lot of time watching old movies on TV and that’s why I’ve had TCM for the past 20 years and I pay a high price for it. But when the newer movies started being shown, I have no interest in them, and I find myself many days and nights just sitting here, not watching my TV, but still paying a high price for my satellite service.

 

I clearly labeled my thread OLD MOVIES, but a lot of people posted links to newer movies, which were probably available on DVDs, and that made some guys mad, especially those who worked at or owned DVD rental and sales stores. But I was not the one posting the newer movies. I posted mainly links to very old movies from the 1930s, and most of them were in the public domain and were un-restored 16 mm prints.

 

Fred

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks TopBilled,

 

With the new message board software added last year, it was the embedding feature that began to cause all the problems and controversy, since a large link appeared on the screen, within a surrounding image of the TCM message board web page, and with a large still frame photo from the movie in the link, and that made it look like the movie was being stored on the TCM website and offered for free viewing specifically by TCM.

 

Yes, the upgrade caused a lot of changes (some good, others not so good). 

 

I can understand a concern about the rising costs of cable and getting your money's worth.

 

Part of the issue is that TCM is trying to appeal to a wide set of viewer preferences. I don't fault them for that. But there are still plenty of studio era classics awaiting their premieres on TCM. And I am looking forward to seeing those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading all this makes me think of the people who choose to enforce the speed limit by driving 55 in the fast lane. And tattlers in school. Always spoiling fun. And in the name of fairness.

 

Fred, I hope youre not guilt ridden at having robbed these filmmakers of what is very likely a substantial pittance.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fred, the thread is gone but what a great thread it was. Mostly movies from the thirties to the sixties with just about every actor and actress and genre from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Some really good stuff was posted on that thread. I would bet the TCM programmers got some ideas from it, too.  Really good stuff on the TCM classic movie station message board.

 

Jake

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe that the folks that created the thread and posted links on it didn't know the material wasn't authorized by the owners of said material.   I think these folks knew exactly what they were doing  (they are all very knowledgably about movies) .    So to me the thread was supporting and encouraging copyright infringement.        

 

 

As I stated previously, there is no reasonable method for a person browsing a video-hosting site to know if any particular video infringes copyright. There are so many variables and so great a lack of comprehensive and authoritative material that specialist researchers often require a hundred hours or more to make such determinations. Even they often make mistakes. It is in my opinion simply not reasonable for a casual user to be faster or better than such trained and experienced professionals.

 

For a person to be knowledgeable about movies means little when it comes to rights issues.

 

One print of a movie might be in Public Domain while a different print of the same movie remains under copyright because of differences in songs, title cards, restoration work, or a number of other factors.

 

A studio might give one user of a video-hosting site a license to place a movie on the site. How are those browsing the site to know that only that one copy is legal while others posted to other sites are illegal?

 

Attorneys specializing in copyright law earn very high fees simply because there are few cut-and-dried issues.

 

The matter of rights is so very convoluted that TCM has had to replace movies in their schedule because a rights issue came to light between the time the movie was scheduled and the time it was to air.

 

A reasonable approach for the casual user is to find material only on sites with a well-respected approach to copyright infringement and which quickly remove any infringing material when it is found.

 

YouTube is such a site. 

 

 

As TP said it isn't reasonable to ask the TCM moderators to determine how 'valid' a link is or not.    I hope that all links are not prohibited but instead users don't create blatant threads or post links they know allow access to unauthorized material.

 

I am sorry to say that I do not know to whom you are referring re: "TP." I have read all replies in this thread other than those of users who are on my: "ignore" lists because of their bullying, lying, or what I perceive as their insufferable pride in their utter ignorance. I have found no users whose usernames would contribute those initials.

 

I believe that no one expects Moderators here to determine validity of links. A link is not a copy of the material, and TCM does not host user-uploaded videos, so determining copyright is not an issue for them. 

 

I can not claim to be an authority of all which was posted in that thread because I read it only sporadically. I saw no instance of any poster advocating copyright infringement or posting a link with recommendation that it be viewed prior to the hosting site removing the video for copyright violation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To everyone that posted movies, I appreciated having the chance to see the them. For me it is mainly because I will not purchase a movie I've never seen and it increases the chance of a purchase. The last one I viewed was My Cousin Rachel and I liked it. So thanks to all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To everyone that posted movies, I appreciated having the chance to see the them. For me it is mainly because I will not purchase a movie I've never seen and it increases the chance of a purchase. The last one I viewed was My Cousin Rachel and I liked it. So thanks to all.

 

Would it be worth it for only a few bucks to buy old movies/serials already put together and neatly packaged?

 

This sells for a mere $2.00 on Ebay.

 

$(KGrHqZ,!mIE4luqwwplBOSKfDMb-g~~_32.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be worth it for only a few bucks to buy old movies/serials already put together and neatly packaged?

 

 

It is against my nature to buy a thing before I know that I like it.

 

I can not afford waste. It is my situation that I have heavy debt from schooling and licensing and certification fees. I have currently three employments but they are on-call, as-needed positions with small remuneration when I am not active. It is not practical for me to have full-time employment with guaranteed salary. I would qualify for government charity through EITC if it were not for technicalities. 

 

I have no room for it. Our shelves for DVDs are so very full that we have resorted to placing rarely-watched DVDs in crates in storage. We have stopped our practice of recording to DVD the broadcast movies which we do not know and might like. We now leave them on DVD recorder's hard drive until we can view them. There are movies on that hard drive from months previous because we have not both had time to watch them.

 

Our purchases of DVDs is limited to movies and television programs which we know well, and we want the best possible viewing experience.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is against my nature to buy a thing before I know that I like it.

 

I can not afford waste. It is my situation that I have heavy debt from schooling and licensing and certification fees. I have currently three employments but they are on-call, as-needed positions with small remuneration when I am not active. It is not practical for me to have full-time employment with guaranteed salary. I would qualify for government charity through EITC if it were not for technicalities. 

 

I have no room for it. Our shelves for DVDs are so very full that we have resorted to placing rarely-watched DVDs in crates in storage. We have stopped our practice of recording to DVD the broadcast movies which we do not know and might like. We now leave them on DVD recorder's hard drive until we can view them. There are movies on that hard drive from months previous because we have not both had time to watch them.

 

Our purchases of DVDs is limited to movies and television programs which we know well, and we want the best possible viewing experience.

 

Funny,  once I have seen a movie my interest in purchasing access to it goes down,  big time.     I have around 10 DVDs all I received as gifts.    (but I do have 500 or so movies on Beta tape, which I'm still not willing to throw out even though I don't watch them!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny,  once I have seen a movie my interest in purchasing access to it goes down,  big time.     I have around 10 DVDs all I received as gifts.    (but I do have 500 or so movies on Beta tape, which I'm still not willing to throw out even though I don't watch them!).

 

Imagine have 500+ copies of the same movie!  :wacko: 

 

http://www.vice.com/read/this-guy-is-trying-to-collect-every-single-copy-of-the-movie-speed-on-vhs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is against my nature to buy a thing before I know that I like it.

 

I can not afford waste. It is my situation that I have heavy debt from schooling and licensing and certification fees. I have currently three employments but they are on-call, as-needed positions with small remuneration when I am not active. It is not practical for me to have full-time employment with guaranteed salary. I would qualify for government charity through EITC if it were not for technicalities. 

 

I have no room for it. Our shelves for DVDs are so very full that we have resorted to placing rarely-watched DVDs in crates in storage. We have stopped our practice of recording to DVD the broadcast movies which we do not know and might like. We now leave them on DVD recorder's hard drive until we can view them. There are movies on that hard drive from months previous because we have not both had time to watch them.

 

Our purchases of DVDs is limited to movies and television programs which we know well, and we want the best possible viewing experience.

 

I assume this is one room in your house.  ;)

 

dvd-library.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume this is one room in your house. 

 

 

It would be wonderful to have such space!

 

This is the shelves at the top of our entertainment center:

GHbQfNF.jpg

 

This is approx. five hundred DVDs. We use mostly slim-line CD cases as a means of saving space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was nothing illegal about the Youtube thread, even TCM has a Youtube channel with movie clips.

 

True, however I wonder if in THIS case the "legality" of TCM posting movies on YouTube is because either TCM owns the rights to the movies they've uploaded into YouTube, or that their contract with whomever owns the rights to the movies allows such a thing while TCM is a particular leaseholder?

 

However, and with that being said, I agree with what I perceive to be SansFin's general sentiments in this thread and believe the responsibility of what films are NOT available to be seen on YouTube ultimately rests with the person or entity who may own the rights to a film and then IF they might wish to have the powers-that-be at YouTube remove it from their files.

 

I mean, if I owned the rights to some copyrighted movie and felt protectorate of it, the first move I'd make or have my attorney make would be to check if the most ubiquitous video source out there today, namely YouTube, was presenting it and then I'd demand YouTube remove it IF I so desired.

 

(...bottom line: in this case, I don't believe that it's the consumer who has the responsibility be the most cognizant of all the legalities inherent in watching and even linking others to any YouTube video...it's MUCH more the responsibility of the owner of some copyrighted material)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be worth it for only a few bucks to buy old movies/serials already put together and neatly packaged?

 

This sells for a mere $2.00 on Ebay.

 

$(KGrHqZ,!mIE4luqwwplBOSKfDMb-g~~_32.JPG

Absolutely it would be worth it, if I were looking for that particular genre of movies. Here are two movies listed on Amazon that I would like to have - Since You Went Away $74.15 new $27 for used. These are dvds. For Pete's Sake $44. Neither of those are on YouTube but for me those prices are insane.

I recently viewed Tobacco Road and loved it. I couldn't find a dvd for it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely it would be worth it, if I were looking for that particular genre of movies. Here are two movies listed on Amazon that I would like to have - Since You Went Away $74.15 new $27 for used. These are dvds. For Pete's Sake $44. Neither of those are on YouTube but for me those prices are insane.

I recently viewed Tobacco Road and loved it. I couldn't find a dvd for it though.

And then there's this insanely low priced double set right here at TCM's Shop

72gaae.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...