CWB

I am just posting to say how angry I am that my post to the Indiana Jones reviews thread was deleted by Static Cling.

1. His deletion posting called my post "threadcrap" which is just offensive, particularly coming from a moderator;

2. My post, which used no offensive language at all, made the point that there is a hypocritical attitude in a site that will not allow the posting of URLs to sites that supply bootlegs, but will allow the posting of threads reviewing such bootlegs. I also likened it to similar situations with other crimes;

3. This deletion effectively stifled discussion of that point;

4. The same moderator then deleted the post of Commander Dan who apparently criticised Martin Blythe of Paramount who had basically made a similar point to me by boycotting a thread that condoned bootlegs - inconsistent or what?

Does this site condone bootlegs and if not, why does it support the review of bootlegs?

For clarification, if you haven't guessed, I think that the site should not allow the posting of threads reviewing bootlegs.

AndyCapps

Please don't take offense to the term "threadcrap". Thread crapping is an affectionate term for making a post that does not follow the topic of the thread. A review thread is not the place to discuss what you posted. This is the proper place.

Static Cling

Thanks for your post, CWB. In my (and Martin's) defense, and also so you don't think I'm avoiding this thread, he was addressing comments about Paramount that had already been made in the thread, which I feel is within his rights as a studio representative.

Also, next time you have a problem with moderator action, please e-mail that moderator directly, or at least do it in conjunction with opening a thread in here... I don't visit the Feedback Forum regularly, so I was unaware of this thread until I was told about it.

CWB

You have avoided giving an answer to this important and fundamental question.

Blade

No this site does not condone the purchase of bootlegs or the posting of information on how to get them. Quite vehemently against it in fact, and if you do a search on bootleg* you'll see that when we catch them (we can't catch everything) we delete the how to info and post a warning.

We've been making something of a fudge-like exception (the discs themselves can be discussed, but not how to buy them) for the Star Wars DVDs, as the crime is more one of other people doing something George Lucas (et al.) doesn't want other people to do, rather than actually diverting proceeds he would otherwise be getting. This is different than your traditional bootleg as there are no official Star Wars Ep. 4-6 DVDs that people could legally purchase.

The new Indiana Jones thread has prompted a (still ongoing) internal discussion of our policy on this matter.

If anything changes, we'll be sure to let everyone know.

chanster

I really don't see a difference between Star Wars DVD's and any other bootlegged DVD.

A review is subtle condoning of the material, and whets peoples appetite for the bootlegged material.

Umm, no the crime is making a profit off of material that is not yours. That is stealing, no matter if Lucas could (and chooses) not to make a profit off.

This argument is a slippery slope - any DVD that is in the catalogue of a company could be ripe for bootleg discussion just because the property owner does not want to sell it on DVD.

RandyM

I agree with Blade. If something is not available, I don't think it is in the same category as "stealing". It's kind of a gray area. I think you should be more flexible for something that everyone wants, and would buy, but can't.

As an example on alt.binaries.multimedia.buffy-v-slayer, they allow posting epsiodes of Buffy and Angel only if they haven't been released on R1 DVD. I own S1 and have S2 of Buffy on pre-order (and will order all the seasons as they are available), so I don't consider it stealing if I download later episodes.

I guess it's technically stealing, but I don't see how it's the same as someone buying a bootleg for $10 instead of an available legitimate release for $25.

Original Desmond

yeah i agree if something isn't available on dvd, discussion about bootlegs should be allowed

mikehunt

regardless of if it's available on dvd the copyright holder could sue/have the makers of teh boot leg arrested. it's still illegal. trust me, I almost got busted for selling the robotech episodes in real video format on 5 cds on ebay. this was clsoe to 2 years before the first dvd came out. I had to pull the auction

Three Day Delay

I think a review of a bootleg is quite different from the condoning of bootlegging itself. A review of a bootleg is not going to change anyone's ethical stance on whether or not to buy a bootleg.

I consider this similar to the posting of coupon deals that are meant to target a certain market, or the posting of the best programs to get MP3's.

chanster

So let me get this right - It is OK to talk about Spiderman DVD because it is not available and has not been released yet?

Give me a break...

Blade

chanster, if you reread my post, there's nothing in there that really contradicts anything you've said. To sum up, I did call it a crime, and I did say that it is a "fudge" (ie, we're purposely looking at it funny so we don't feel too bad about this), and furthermore, it has (until very recently) been a single exception in a unique situation (ie, no DVDs for 4 years).

As I already said, we are reviewing this policy. However, this is not the only thing we're going over right now, so I'm not predicting any immediate changes.

Finally, I'm not really sure what your last post is supposed to mean? I haven't been to the Main forum since I last logged on, but unless people are discussing an actual DVD, as opposed to the forthcoming DVD, I'm not sure what the problem is.

Thunderball

No, Spiderman is in theaters,and already slated for a November/December XMAS release I'm s ure.

Star Wars is the ultimate movie, which everyone wants, but no one will bring to DVD.

Soup Nazi

Everyone? Not I, my friend ...

CWB

There are some very dubious attempts to justify copyright theft here. And the moderators have admitted that they are fudging the issue.

The latest lame excuse is "It is not for sale, therefore it is fair games for theft".

Well those of you who support this argument, don't go to the cops if your car is stolen - after all it is not protected if it was not up for sale!

And the site owners continue to allow reviews of illegal items.
How long does it take to review this dishonest policy?

Static Cling

This may surprise you, but we've been discussing this topic off and on since before you brought it up, and there's an active discussion going on about it right now. Please recognize that other forum issues can and do come up, in addition to the lives we have... or attempt to have... off-forum, so it does take time to review certain policies and make a change to them.

We do see both sides of the issue. But as of right now, we haven't come up with any concrete reasons to change the policy as opposed to keeping it the way it is. However, like I said, it's being discussed... so this could change at any time, and we'll let everyone know if it does.

If there are any people who know about copyright law out there, I have a question that might help our discussion and any policy change we might make: how legal would it be to discuss the quality of bootleg materials in other ways? As in, an article in a newspaper, or two people talking about bootlegs in person, or someone doing a piece on bootlegs on the evening news on TV? Are there gray areas in which you could discuss certain aspects of them, but not others, and that would make a difference between breaking the law and not breaking the law?

Mister Beefhead

The attitude around here is not hypocritical in the least. how hard is it to grasp the concept? Discussion of any bootleg disc should be allowed, just not information on how to bootleg or how to acquire bootlegs.

Following CWB's line of reasoning, since you do not allow links to or sale of illegal items, any post talking about doing anything illegal, i.e. smoking pot, speeding, driving without a seatbelt, talking on a cellphone while driving, etc, should immediately be deleted. Clearly this is a ridiculous attitude.

CWB

Thank you to the aptly named Mr Beefhead for calling my attitude of honesty and clarity "ridiculous".

This site is all about DVDs and films and is visited my large numbers of people to discuss (mainly) those issues - not speeding, drugs etc.

Clearly a large number of visitors have no compunction in stealing, or there would be no demand for reviews of bootleg DVDs and VCDs.

But the site itself presumably needs a measure of cooperation from distributors (ie copyright owners) and I would have thought that any self-respecting organisation would not only want to be legal but would want to be whiter than white on this issue.

The risk it runs (apart from allegations of hypocrisy) is that it can be accused of conspiring in, or aiding and abetting the theft of copyright material by assisting the market for such materials (by helping the dishonest among us to choose which stolen version to purchase from the copyright thieves).

The site knows it is on dangerous ground when it calls its solution a fudge that only applies to the Star Wars films.

After all, the site does aspire to have standards, hence its rules. How can a site that forbids even bad language in postings (because it might be offensive) not forbid incitement to commit a crime? By the use double standards, that is how.

And how does such muddying of the waters look to younger site members? If the site and its adult members condone theft, then obviously an example has been set for them.

focker

You should really visit the Other Forum sometime.

I think the mods have taken a very reasonable stance. There is nothing wrong with discussing the quality of illegal material. DVD Talk isn't selling bootlegs and they're not telling anyone where to get them. I don't see any problems at all. Restricitng discussion to a few cases in which very popular movies are unavailable legally also makes sense, because it keeps this from becoming some kind of bootleg discussion forum. This policy makes practical sense and I'm no lawyer, but it seems like the policy is also legally sound.

GeoffK

While I am not crazy about the way in which this issue was brought up or the tone of the accusations flung around it. I have taken a look at our policy and going forward here's our new policy:

- NO bootleg discussion threads.

CWB

Out of curiosity, which argument(s) swung it for you?

The Antipodean

I have to agree this is probably the way to go. The half-in, half-out policy as it is now is pretty shaky, and I have to admit posting reviews of boots while not telling folks how to get them is a little weird. Either you're in all the way or you're not. My two cents anyway.

RandyC

My guess would be the ongoing discussing that was occurring in the moderator forum?

vaporware

It's probably for the best anyway. If you did have a boot and posted the specs and features you would get a deluge of e-mails asking where it could be bought from. I actually deleted all of my posts in those threads because my e-mail box was getting swamped.

GeoffK

BINGO! Randy hit the nail on the head.

There has been an ongoing dialogue about this in the Mods forum and I arrived to the policy changed based on the issues and concerns of the people who moderate the forum.

Keyser Soze

So... my "Song of the South on dvd" thread in reviews wasn't the reason for this new rule... (good)

Anyhow, it's nice for everyone to be on the same page.

-k
###

RandyC

We are glad you understand and agree with our new "Keyser Rule."

Keyser Soze

[slaps himself on the forehead...] <B>Doh!</B>

Oh well, wouldn't be the first time. Remember... I was the one who got the "lock your own threads" option taken away too.

(Are you sure you guys don't want to ban me?) Maybe <B><I>I'm</B></I> the true reason that the fun left the forum!



-keyser "making trouble" soze
###

new2theplace

Since it seems to have been determined that ANY discussion of bootlegs is no longer allowed at DVDTalk, I am amazed to see this thread which not only mentions the word "bootleg" many times, but actually talks about where they can be found. I'm confident that this terrible thread will be locked as soon as possible.

Blade

If you really think that a thread needs moderator attention, it's easier, and much more effective, to use the Report this Post to a Moderator feature, than to create a post in this forum.

However, from what I assume is a sarcastic tone in your post, I presume that you think we've gone overboard in some way. If you'd like to discuss that further, feel free.

In this particular case, the thread is discussing another site's policy on bootlegs, not bootlegs themselves. Should the thread head in that direction, I'm sure the moderators will take care of it then (or as soon as they are notified).

chess

while i completely understand geoff's new policy, i also saw a distinct value in the two big "bootleg" threads (Star Wars/Indy) which i'm sure was the reason they were allowed to exist in the first place:

so that DVD talkers weren't getting ripped off with shoddy products...regardless of their source. there are simply a lot of variations of these movies on DVD and it's important that people know the good from the bad from the ugly.

my guess in regards to both trilogies is that anyone who goes through the trouble of researching those threads to GET THE BEST POSSIBLE PRESENTATION...will undoubtedly buy the official releases for the same reason. i know i will.

in regards to the star wars trilogy, i think the "5-star set" pretty much ended the quality debate...which was largely the reason it was closed i suspect. the discussion had changed from a debate about which version was best to a "meet and greet" for sources.

but i have yet to hear of a quality widescreen boot of the indy trilogy, and i wish that thread could have stayed around as i'll probably eventually buy a boot set...but probably not the right one.

slippery slope? maybe. but i see a distinct difference between

a) discussing the general quality of different versions of films that are unavailable and unplanned on the DVD format with plans to buy the official release in the future.

b) discussing boots of films that are in theaters or have existing/planned releases.

to me it is quite literally the difference between stealing and borrowing...but maybe i'm rationalizing.

i personally own 3 bootlegs...probably 3 more in my future if there's no indy announcement...and song of the south has suddenly peaked my interest [thanks keyser for contributing to my delinquency]. Anyway, the point is that i'm not a regular consumer of bootleg material, and my guess is that i represent a large majority of DVDtalkers in that regard.

TK-421

It's a disappointment that a discussion of the various features and qualities of the discs has to be squashed like this. While this is a "private" forum and I can't claim any first amendment rights per say, there is nothing illegal about the discussion of illegal products. I am also curious Geoff, why did you decide to make this decision?

It's unfortunate that this policy has been established, as I was a contributor to the Star Wars threads. At least the threads weren't deleted, so people can still refer back to them.

Static Cling

Did you read the thread all the way before posting?

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...35#post2461435

TK-421

Indeed I did, this post is quite vague though.

Unless I'm not aware of it, I don't have access to the dialogue in the Mods forum, so I don't know what issues and concerns the people who moderate the forum brought up.

bboisvert

Not to open a can of worms here, but...

How does this new policy affect the "replacement covers" thread:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=208779

Which often discusses creating covers for unavailable DVDs and also links to sites that provide custom Star Wars and Indiana Jones covers? What are the new guidelines for that thread?

DVDave

Well, I may be a little late here, but review of bootlegs isn't new for DVD sites. thedigitalbits did some reviews of the infamous Star Wars bootlegs back in 2000, as well as some other titles. They have also exhausted other means to get the Star Wars Trilogy on DVD as well. They also had a hand in getting EP1 on DVD quickly. A link to that ongoing cycle is here (granted it is an old discussion):
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/starwarsdvd/index.html
People ARE going to buy these as most people want these movies on DVD, and, in the Star Wars arena, have had these movies released on VHS, yet no barebones release on DVD. The review thread merely helps me make an informed decision and not put any more money in the bootleggers pocket than necessary. Just look at any auction site that has these bootlegs available and, legal or not, people ARE buying them at ridiculus prices. They were before i saw any "reviews" posted in this forum, and they will after this ridiculus policy of not allowing discussion on this issue is implemented as well. What is this forum for, is it for discussion not for anyone to create rules based on them getting up on a soapbox (OK, so maybe I am too ).
To quote, Chess said,
I am in agreement with that as well as the fact that, even though I've bought the bootlegs, I most likely will buy the official released versions. However, it is highly likely that the original version of the Star Wars Trilogy will not be released AT ALL on DVD due to Lucas mucking up the movies by constantly changing them. This further muddies up the discussion.
I, for one, think that this policy of not allowing this discussion should not be because a vocal (or maybe a couple more) person believes that these bootleg reviews should not even be discussed. I see their points to some extent, but i do not necessarily agree with the supression of discussion of this issue simply because these bootlegs are illegal. The fact of the matter is that most of these bootlegs are crap, little better than VHS, however even the diehard DVD fans on here are STILL buying them.

Then again, don't listen to me, I have bought bootlegs, and have also sped and not worn my seatbelt on occasion so I may not be the one to listen to one this subject

Commander Dan

This is an EXCELLENT point that deserves reiteration, and quite frankly, there is nothing illegal about the discussion of bootlegs or even where to get them. Only the ACT of actually purchasing and/or selling them is illegal.

Now do not get me wrong, as I am not totally ignorant. I am well aware that if folks are discussing bootlegs, then that promotes the sale of them. However, we DO legally have the RIGHT to discuss them if we so desire. (Although admittedly, I am not sure what “legal” rights we actually have in the context of an Internet message forum.) After all, the burden of obeying or disobeying the copyright law rests solely on the individual in question, and NOT DVDTalk.

So, what we have here is a kind of enforced censorship by DVDTalk when it comes to discussing boots. I find myself asking, “Why would DVDTalk deny us our legal right of free speech and discussion?” I speculate that it may be because DVDTalk wishes not to invoke the wrath of copyright holders. Although, I do not really know what the copyright holders could possibly do to DVDTalk if they allowed the discussion to take place.

All of this is leading me to the question “WHY can’t we discuss bootlegs or where to get them?” Rules are fine, and I typically do not go around trying to “make trouble.” However, I respond much better to a rule or enforcement if I know WHY the rule is in effect, even if I do not happen to agree with the reasoning.

TK-421

While I agree with your points Commander Dan, unfortunately the response will boil down to "This is my forum. If you don't like the rules, go play somewhere else."

This is similar to the uproar when Geoff laid down the rule that gun talk was prohibited on the forum last year (or was it two years ago?). Everyone interested in the subject complained, but ultimately Geoff said he hates guns, and that was that. (Note: If this has changed, please let me know.)

And I'm not necessarily disagreeing with this, Geoff puts up the money for the hardware, hosting, bandwidth, etc.. But I am with you in that I want to know why the final decision was made.

DVDave

"Gun Rule"? now this "I say so" attitude makes more sense. I don't remember that incident. So I reckon actually making any point contrary to the site admin's feelings or political views is wrong now? Please tell me this is not correct.

RandyC

A bit much to make that leap to "making any point contrary to the site admin's feelings or political views."

There are some rules that have been in place. Some based on legal issues. Some on offensiveness. Some that are totally arbitrary.

The gun rule was not an incident but a request by Geoff to not post about guns as far as bargains. That was his wish and it is his site.