Wizard of oz copyright

oblioman · 12-03-2009, 04:56 PM

Okay gents,,,looking for an answer that google schmoogled me on,,,and Bing just dont cut it. Me BD collection includes the new re-release of the Wizard of Oz. Been wanting to make a copy of this for the grandkids but wish to keep it legal. According to the law, this movie should be public domain but have read conflicting reports that since it contains re-worked or added soundtracks,,it is no longer public domain and falls under new copyright laws. All thoughts, opinions, and smart ass answers are welcome.

Loves2Watch · 12-03-2009, 05:06 PM

If it is on Blu-ray it is illegal to copy because you have to decrypt it. That is where the issue lies, not the copyright of the content itself. According to the DMCA it is illegal to remove, alter or decrypt any content/copyright protection on the disc itself in the US.

oblioman · 12-03-2009, 05:36 PM

Understanding the encryption side of the draconian law, me challenges the DMCA in the fact that they are keeping public domain content out of the publics hands by the encryption measure, and this measure alone. So, if me makes a bit for bit copy, a clone so to speak,,,,,,,should be legal.

Lee Stewart · 12-03-2009, 05:52 PM

This may have something to do with it not being in the public doman - it has continued to be shown theatericially over the years:

Quote:

In 1986, the film was acquired by Turner Entertainment as part of a deal involving a majority of MGM's pre-1986 library. In 1996, Turner merged with Time Warner, and since then Warner Bros. Pictures has been handling distribution for all media on Turner's behalf.

The film was re-released again in U.S. theaters by WB on November 6, 1998. The version was a new remastered print which contained the Warner Bros. '75th Anniversary' logo at the beginning and restoration and sound remixing credits at the end (none of these extra credits have appeared on any video release).

In 1999, the film had a theatrical re-release in Australia, in honor of the film's 60th Anniversary.

On September 23, 2009, The Wizard of Oz was re-released in select theaters for a one-night-only event in honor of the film's 70th Anniversary and as a promotion for various new disc releases later in the month. This event also marked the first time the film was shown in High-Definition.[20] An encore of the high definition 70th Anniversary edition was shown in theaters on November 17, 2009.[21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wiz..._Oz_(1939_film)

oblioman · 12-03-2009, 06:27 PM

showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.

Lee Stewart · 12-03-2009, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oblioman

showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.

Try page 4 for the starting point for some detective work:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ45.pdf

And this looks interesting:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~dkarjala/...McDonough.html

oblioman · 12-03-2009, 07:00 PM

thanks lee,,,looks like the Wizard is at it 70th year,,so it should become public domain.

edit,,,scratch that idea,,,,75 years!!!

Chris Gerhard · 12-03-2009, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oblioman

Understanding the encryption side of the draconian law, me challenges the DMCA in the fact that they are keeping public domain content out of the publics hands by the encryption measure, and this measure alone. So, if me makes a bit for bit copy, a clone so to speak,,,,,,,should be legal.

Ha, well public domain has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not someone can use copy protection when releasing a videodisc. A reason to use copy protection on a public domain title is simple, protect the work so your release can sell more copies, prevent or make it more difficult for someone to acquire a copy rather than purchase the release. I am not an attorney but I would think defeating copy protection to make a copy of a public domain film would not fall under the DMCA. The DMCA doesn't require copy protection be used on protected works but only indicates if digital copy protection is used, defeating it to make a copy is a crime. Any rights owner can release protected programming without copy protection if that is what they want to do. There are of course still limitations on what can be done legally with a copy of a protected work but there are legal uses once the copy is made, primarily what is now known as timeshifting.

There are legal ways to extend or renew copyright terms but that is for an attorney to understand, I haven't tried yet. I do know that some films well beyond the normal copyright period are still copyright protected. Now that I think about it, I will read about the process and try to get an understanding of how that is accomplished, starting with Lee's links.

Chris

Chris Gerhard · 12-04-2009, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Try page 4 for the starting point for some detective work:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ45.pdf

And this looks interesting:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~dkarjala/...McDonough.html

There is no fair use law that requires these studios release public domain titles without copy protection. A law requiring a film on videodisc be released so you can copy it is not now, nor will it ever be part of our legal code is how I see it. Whether or not it is a public domain title has no relevance to that fact. You have the right to not purchase something with restrictions that prevent your ability to use it as you want.

Programming broadcast into your home is restricted by law as far as copy protection, I believe the FCC for one has jurisdiction. Cable pay channels and free over the air channels are treated differently in that regard but I would have to read about it to explain the copy protection options afforded the networks and cable companies. That is not the same as a product that is offered for sale and you purchase it, any company can choose to use any legal means available to copy protect products like that including AACS and BD+.

Chris

iDarren · 12-05-2009, 09:49 AM

LOL they're keeping it out of your hands by making the magnificent blu ray (the quality of which you could never create yourself), and it's the blu ray that you want to copy...

Quote:

Originally Posted by oblioman

Understanding the encryption side of the draconian law, me challenges the DMCA in the fact that they are keeping public domain content out of the publics hands by the encryption measure, and this measure alone. So, if me makes a bit for bit copy, a clone so to speak,,,,,,,should be legal.

Loves2Watch · 12-05-2009, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oblioman

Understanding the encryption side of the draconian law, me challenges the DMCA in the fact that they are keeping public domain content out of the publics hands by the encryption measure, and this measure alone. So, if me makes a bit for bit copy, a clone so to speak,,,,,,,should be legal.

You are looking at it from the wrong perspective, well not wrong but not from the movie studios perspective.

Here is the way they want it and have it setup (RIAA, MPAA)- Get the oblivious US Congress to pass the draconian DMCA by telling them piracy is killing our business and costing us billions when in actuality it will circumvent the statute of limitations on copyrights for movies/music by making it illegal to decrypt/remove/alter the copyright/content protection of a disc be it CD, DVD, HD DVD or Blu-ray.

Since Congress did pass the DMCA, we don't have to change our failed business model because we will always have control of content and make money long after the copyrights have expired. We will also be able to collect on the back end from anyone infringing on the DMCA, by legal suits which we will always win by default due to the law, which will keep our pockets filled forever.

And there you have it...

I really hope that everyone can see and understand this pretzel logic. Media has really pulled the wool over Congress' eyes only for the sake of greed.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with piracy. They have even admitted as such.

I for one am constantly writing letters to my Senators, Congressmen, the EFF and other agencies to get the DMCA repealed as it serves no purpose but to make the RIAA and MPAA rich without any regard for the individual. Dammit, I have rights too and should not have to pay again and again for the same content. I may not own it but I sure as hell should be able to use it where and when I like, for as long as I like after I have paid for it...

Loves2Watch · 12-08-2009, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valeriekee6368

showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.

Write your congressman and voice your opinion on this matter. That is the only way it can be changed.

Lee Stewart · 12-08-2009, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valeriekee6368

showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.

Nope - it is NOT in the public domain:

Quote:

So, bowing to this pressure from the motion picture industry, backed up by similar nudging from the music and entertainment industry, but without any real consent by or benefit to the public, legislation was passed in 1992 to automatically increase copyright protection without exception to a total of seventy five years for all registered works for hire regardless of their commercial value.

1939 + 75 = 2014 - the year the Wizard of Oz goes into the public domain.

oblioman · 12-08-2009, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iDarren

LOL they're keeping it out of your hands by making the magnificent blu ray (the quality of which you could never create yourself), and it's the blu ray that you want to copy...

au contrair,,,but me does have the means to shoot HD video, and edit and render in glorious BD,,,,,also the tools to copy and backup any BD in me collection. Not saying that me does commit this vicious crime against the studio's - but - getting back to me original question, if the Wizard was out of it's copyright protect lease, you can bet that all me grandkids would have a copy,,,and more than a few of the neighborhood kids.

Chris Gerhard · 12-09-2009, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oblioman

showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Nope - it is NOT in the public domain:

1939 + 75 = 2014 - the year the Wizard of Oz goes into the public domain.

Even if a film is in the public domain, copy protection can be used. If it isn't in the public domain, there is no mandate that copy protection be used. I do believe that the DMCA doesn't come into play when public domain films are copy protected but I haven't seen the issue specifically addressed, either in the law or in an interpretation of the law. I would sure expect most or all public domain Blu-ray releases will use copy protection. As we already know, all or almost all films within the copyright protection term are using copy protection but that is by choice.

Chris

12-03-2009, 04:56 PM	#1
oblioman L2W,,,Godspeed Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Someville TN Posts: 7,112	Wizard of oz copyright Okay gents,,,looking for an answer that google schmoogled me on,,,and Bing just dont cut it. Me BD collection includes the new re-release of the Wizard of Oz. Been wanting to make a copy of this for the grandkids but wish to keep it legal. According to the law, this movie should be public domain but have read conflicting reports that since it contains re-worked or added soundtracks,,it is no longer public domain and falls under new copyright laws. All thoughts, opinions, and smart ass answers are welcome.

12-03-2009, 05:06 PM	#2
Loves2Watch Natures Beauty Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Evermore Posts: 18,432	If it is on Blu-ray it is illegal to copy because you have to decrypt it. That is where the issue lies, not the copyright of the content itself. According to the DMCA it is illegal to remove, alter or decrypt any content/copyright protection on the disc itself in the US. __________________ Friends don't let friends buy Korean brand TV's or Blu-ray players. Main HT Room TV, Projector, Receiver, Speakers, Blu-ray player, HD DVD player, Dish Network HD DVR, 300 Disc CD Changer and so on.

12-03-2009, 07:00 PM	#7
oblioman L2W,,,Godspeed Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Someville TN Posts: 7,112	thanks lee,,,looks like the Wizard is at it 70th year,,so it should become public domain. edit,,,scratch that idea,,,,75 years!!! Last edited by oblioman; 12-03-2009 at 07:05 PM.

12-03-2009, 05:36 PM	#3
oblioman L2W,,,Godspeed Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Someville TN Posts: 7,112	Understanding the encryption side of the draconian law, me challenges the DMCA in the fact that they are keeping public domain content out of the publics hands by the encryption measure, and this measure alone. So, if me makes a bit for bit copy, a clone so to speak,,,,,,,should be legal.

12-03-2009, 06:27 PM	#5
oblioman L2W,,,Godspeed Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Someville TN Posts: 7,112	showing it theatrically over the years should have nothing to do with the copyright. If that be the case, we would be in perpetual copyright. And just because a logo was added, does not change the content. For that matter, just because encryption was added does not change the content either. The way me see's it.. the Wizard of Oz is public domain and meets all the criteria. In essence, the DMCA is violating the fair use laws by encrypting this disc. In short,,,what gives the studios the right to encrypt works that are public domain? There is no law that they have to encrypt them.