Review screeners do not say for "promotional use" they are generally "watermarked" with either constant or repeat notices that the copy is for preview or review only There have been several cases involving people who tried to sell review copies of new release ( not available on video) films that were indeed prosecuted. These involved very high end studio titles and in at least two cases distinctly watermarked Oscar screeners. I am not sure we are in disagreement unless you in fact believe that copies of films not legally released in the home market but sent as review screeners ( and marked as such) are legal. Oh and most review screeners also include a label asking for the film to be returned and an address though few companies follow through
So do we disagree on this or not? On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Deg Farrelly <[email protected]> wrote: > The specific item mentioned in the original email indicated that the DVD > was labeled with "promotional use" only. It did not indicate that the > promotional use of the video appeared on the screen while playing. > > Whether a label on the case or a marking on the DVD.... the essence of the > 9th circuit ruling was the the distribution of promotional items is a gift, > transferring ownership. Once the gift was made the Doctrine of First Sale > kicked in and there are thus no limitations on the use of the physical > copy. Lend, discard, sell..... all covered by law. > > There are mitigating factors in the ruling... some key points being that > the materials were distributed freely with solicitation from the recipient, > and that the material provided no information about the * return * of the > material. That is not necessarily the situation with screeners. As Dennis > points out in his response, his screeners are marked "Property of Milestone > Films". (While this may be insufficient notice to withstand a lawsuit, I'd > wage adding "For preview use only, return to Milestone Films... address" > would.) > > Unless you can cite case law in which other "promotional use" materials > were deemed the property of the studio, company, etc. I think it is safe > to assume that the Augusto case sets legal precedent. > > For those who like the nitty gritty, the court opinion is available here: > www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/01/.../08-55998.pdf > > > > -deg > > deg farrelly > ASU Libraries > Arizona State University > P.O. Box 871006 > Tempe, Arizona 85287-1006 > 480.965.1403 > > > -------------------------- > > > Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 21:41:40 -0400 > From: Jessica Rosner <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Videolib] For promotional use only > > > Actually the music case involved a copy that only came in a label marked > promotional use. I am assuming this DVD came with promotional use warning > on the actual DVD. The case you mention specifically involved a "label" not > an actual "notice" on the DVD itself ( which of course would be be > impractical with music). I am also unclear if the item in question is even > released on video. Obviously I don't know the nature of the promotional use > writing. In general it appears either throughout a DVD or "flashes" every > few minutes which would make it unsuitable for library use ( which of > course is the point). A number of studios carefully mark screeners and > aggressively go after anyone who sells them, but in general that involves a > very detailed "watermark" allowing the rights holder to track each copy. > > > > > One of our nursing instructors gave us this PBS DVD to add to > collection. > > > On the front of the DVD it states: For Promotional Use Only * Not for > > > Broadcast. Our cataloger mentioned she had not seen this on a DVD > before. > > > I?ve watched it and looked on the website and cannot find any other > words > > > of caution/wisdom/insight. It is 2 hours long, not a promotional type > of > > > length. **** > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > I am assuming the ?Not for Broadcast? means no PPR. Is this correct? We > > > are a little stymied by the ?For Promotional Use Only?. **** > > > 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) [email protected]
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.
