Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Director wants his film on The Pirate Bay, pirates deliver…

<< < (2/5) > >>

Edvard:
His permission perhaps, but not the distributor's or studio's permission he is under contract with for that picture?
-40hz (July 26, 2014, 04:38 PM)
--- End quote ---

Article says it was done with public money for TV release, so I don't think the film's relationship to the producers is the same as your average Hollywood or even independent film in that respect.

So...anybody want to throw themselves on the sword he himself doesn't plan to sacrifice himself on?
--- End quote ---

For the record, he did upload the Youtube copy himself, after the first torrent upload was crappy quality.

The big sticky that I got from the article was that it wasn't the movie itself that was the problem, but the licensing of the music used in the soundtrack.  That is why it isn't in syndication, because the broadcaster would be responsible for paying the copyright holders of the music (already happening with it being up on Youtube), and they don't want to do that, so the movie can't be shown without re-licensing the soundtrack, no matter who holds the rights to distribute it.  The director just wants people to be able to see the movie.  The legality of his request may be questionable, but I suspect rather trivial (IANAL), so he's probably in the clear, but I can't say he's not taking his own risk.

app103:
The same thing happened to the original PBS production of Ursula LeGuin's The Lathe of Heaven, from 1980. It took 20 years before it could be released again, because of the music...mainly because of a piece of a Beatles tune (integral to a plot point in both the novel and the film), which in the end they replaced with a cover of the song in the re-release, because it was easier and cheaper than using the original. But it was still a lot of hoops to jump through and cost them a lot of money to be able to re-release it, back in 2000.

Renegade:
Does anyone see the insanity here yet?

40hz:
Article says it was done with public money for TV release, so I don't think the film's relationship to the producers is the same as your average Hollywood or even independent film in that respect.

-Edvard (July 26, 2014, 05:03 PM)
--- End quote ---

I wonder if that makes any difference. The BBC is funded with public money and they're pretty rabid about media rights. As is Canada with their "public" stuff. Guess it depends on which public money you're using.

The legality of his request may be questionable, but I suspect rather trivial (IANAL), so he's probably in the clear,
-Edvard (July 26, 2014, 05:03 PM)
--- End quote ---

Possibly. But in my experience it's only trivial until you get served with papers. Once that happens, it's far from trivial even if the claim being filed has absolutely no legal merit.

but I can't say he's not taking his own risk.
--- End quote ---

Fair enough. I wasn't aware he schlepped a copy over to YouTube on his own. I stand corrected.  :) :Thmbsup:

Curt:
What a lack of effort. The director is of course not a nincompoop, I hope, so maybe he is a stranger to computers, the Internet, YouTube and such? I mean, the movie he has uploaded is merely 320x240 pixels - I will not watch 81 minutes in such a microscopic format - and the dialogue is all in Dutch and not subtitled!

Who is he uploading for?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page