There is no obligation on the part of 2nd party seller to do anything regarding the sale of a "restricted" item. In theory the owner could contact them with literal proof that the seller "signed" ( perhaps online) a contract not to resell the item, they might remove it but I find that somewhat far fetched. This of course applies only to a legally obtained copy not an actual bootleg. Realistically I don't see a lot of copies of somewhat specialized mostly non fiction films sold to individuals directly from copyright holders flooding the used market. However it is incumbent on the rights holder who chooses to have multi-tiered pricing including home use to make it very clear at the point of sale and to have some record showing this.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Susan Albrecht <albre...@wabash.edu> wrote: > Now that I’m back at work and can double-check the example I used, it’s > clear that the original company *is* involved with selling through Amazon, > both new copies and instant streams. So that just puts this back to the > same old point of “Once you have chosen to go with additional vendors > selling home use copies, you can’t insist institutions buy from you and pay > a higher price.” Not unless they need PPR, anyway. > > > > I still wonder about used copies of DVDs, though -- used, but *not* OP. Is > it Amazon’s or Barnes & Noble’s or Half.com’s or eBay’s obligation to police > their marketplace sellers, to make sure they’re not selling used items which > are available new only from the original seller? Or is it the original > seller’s responsibility to watch out for this? Or does the fact that it’s > a used copy change everything, and libraries have the right to purchase used > copies to add to their circulating collection if they so desire? > > > > Forgive me if there’s obvious stuff here I should be remembering. The > coffee is still on its way in…. > > > > Susan > > > > > > *From:* videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto: > videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner > *Sent:* Thursday, May 05, 2011 6:03 PM > > *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu > *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] Challenge to using a home video instead of > institutionally licensed video > > > > OK I am totally confused. Did the original seller/owner sell home use > copies and was this one supposedly "used". The question would be > > if the seller had literally signed off ( as in the proverbial I agree to > these terms) when they bought it, in that case the original company could > take action against them and have some reasonable claim that it was not a > legal copy, though few places do that. > > > > The mystery is where did the copy come from and under what terms. > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Susan Albrecht <albre...@wabash.edu> > wrote: > > I don't think I was clear in my use of the word aftermarket. It's NOT the > original film distributor selling copies through amazon, and it's not Amazon > selling. It's 'used' dealers selling through amazon. I didn't check in this > specific case, but just like with 'used' dealers of books selling through > amazon's aftermarket site, sometimes the copies are listed as brand new, > factory sealed. So that's my question. Or are you saying that if anyone is > selling a DVD through amazon as an aftermarket dealer, they must have gotten > the original distributor's permission? > > Susan > > ________________________________________ > From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [ > videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] on behalf of Jessica Rosner [ > jessicapros...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 4:01 PM > To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu > Subject: Re: [Videolib] Challenge to using a home video instead of > institutionally licensed video > > > Susan > The seller can either control it completely in which case there is no > aftermarket or they choose to allow secondary sellers in which case they not > maintain the tiered pricing. Most of the folks I work with are currently > only selling to institutions. The soonest they would even think of a retail > version is 18 monthts to two years and even them no certainty. Basically > they simply can't afford to sell the home market though there would be some > interest in their films. Selling 200 copies and getting back $15-$20 per > copy would never cover the expenses and they made some really good films. > Films where the majority of audience/use is academic are best sticking to > institutional only sales. > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Susan Albrecht <albre...@wabash.edu > <mailto:albre...@wabash.edu>> wrote: > Jessica said: > One last thing. I have mentioned this before but for whatever it is worth > there are a lot of filmmakers and distributors who sincerely believe there > is something called "institutional video" and that schools and libraries > must pay more than individuals. I actually have one I am dealing with myself > and nothing I do including sending a copy of the copyright law will convince > him otherwise, because he was told this by another sales rep and this case > it is titles widely available through pretty much any standard wholesaler/ > retailer. > > > Susan: > I think this is sometimes true. A few months ago, I had a similar > experience with someone pretty new to the film distribution world. I > ordered a copy of a DVD the very first moment I could get my hands on it, > and at that time, what was available was a $30 home-use DVD. I didn’t > really need PPR and so I didn’t worry about it, just bought it. A few > MONTHS later, I received an email from someone at the company, which > contained an invoice for the “institutional” price, along with commentary > similar to what a number of you received in this case. > > I ended up having a bit of an email exchange and then a very nice phone > conversation with the woman, followed by more emails, in which I explained > why I didn’t think she really had a leg to stand on and in which we > discussed tiered pricing, PPR, secondary sellers such as Amazon & Midwest > Tape, etc. I had fallen in love with the film [Pelada, btw] and had decided > I was willing to pay the difference between the home use and the > institutional simply because I supported what these young folks were doing > with their project, but I also ‘warned’ her that she had better be prepared > for others she was contacting to NOT be as friendly NOR as willing to pay > the cost difference. She had really not been very informed about this stuff > and was quite happy to discuss it. I honestly don’t know how much trouble > she eventually ran into with others. > > Now, to throw in another wrinkle. When I bought, it was available only > from the filmmakers (who really should’ve had home use & institutional sales > prepared to go simultaneously). To my knowledge, the home use was never > available through any secondary source. So let’s say they had done it right > and, from the beginning, had had tiered pricing and were the exclusive > distributor. What happens once *aftermarket* sellers begin offering up > copies through a site like Amazon? It isn’t Amazon directly selling it. > Anyone care to take that one on in terms of institutional obligations?? > > Susan > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors. > > > > > -- > Jessica Rosner > Media Consultant > 224-545-3897 (cell) > 212-627-1785 (land line) > > jessicapros...@gmail.com<mailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com> > > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors. > > > > > -- > Jessica Rosner > Media Consultant > 224-545-3897 (cell) > 212-627-1785 (land line) > jessicapros...@gmail.com > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors. > > -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.com
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
