Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 3, 2015 14:14:52 GMT
Guys, I'm going to lock this thread. It isn't going anywhere and as and when anything comes of it, I'm sure someone will start a new thread.
I should point out though that whilst it is fine for film collectors to sell on original 16mm prints etc... providing they are selling the original and not copies, it is not generally allowed for people to sell on material that has been recorded from a TV broadcast. Under current copyright agreements, it's a breach of copyright.
Inflating the price of a tape based purely on the content alone can also be regarded as profiting from others work and could result in the original material being confiscated by copyright holders if proved in court. Creating screen grabs, video clips and discussion of large sums of money on a public forum can also prove intent to breach others rights and can be used as evidence in a case.
As to the actual content and knowing how difficult it is to electronically convert CV2000 material (as far as I know it has only ever been achieved once) I personally don't think the material is worth anything, even if the person who has the tapes had the right to sell the material. He does of course have the right to sell the tapes for the value of the physical tape, or whatever anyone is prepared to pay for 40 year old second hand videotape.
I would respectfully suggest that when discussing this material in the future, you all bear in mind what I've just said.
Paul
I should point out though that whilst it is fine for film collectors to sell on original 16mm prints etc... providing they are selling the original and not copies, it is not generally allowed for people to sell on material that has been recorded from a TV broadcast. Under current copyright agreements, it's a breach of copyright.
Inflating the price of a tape based purely on the content alone can also be regarded as profiting from others work and could result in the original material being confiscated by copyright holders if proved in court. Creating screen grabs, video clips and discussion of large sums of money on a public forum can also prove intent to breach others rights and can be used as evidence in a case.
As to the actual content and knowing how difficult it is to electronically convert CV2000 material (as far as I know it has only ever been achieved once) I personally don't think the material is worth anything, even if the person who has the tapes had the right to sell the material. He does of course have the right to sell the tapes for the value of the physical tape, or whatever anyone is prepared to pay for 40 year old second hand videotape.
I would respectfully suggest that when discussing this material in the future, you all bear in mind what I've just said.
Paul
