Lord Boron
Sr Member
A smart move on thier part. The "nothing to see here" approach.
another SW ANH resto project (Team Negative 1)
- Thread starter nwjedidave
- Start date
Solo4114
Master Member
I mean, that's cute and all, but legally it doesn't matter. If the version can be traced back to them, then they're just as screwed as if they tweet/facebook post/etc. about their progress.
It's all infringement, and the real question is simply if/when Disney wants to drop the hammer on people like this.
It's all infringement, and the real question is simply if/when Disney wants to drop the hammer on people like this.
Brent M
Sr Member
They bought LFL almost three and a half years ago so I'm pretty sure at some point during that period they have been made aware of fan preservations and edits. Perhaps they're taking the same passive approach that the company had under Uncle George for the many years prior to the buyout.
Solo4114
Master Member
I expect so, particularly when something like this makes pseudo-national news (not sure if Yahoo! news counts...).
As we've discussed before, the fact that they haven't done anything about it doesn't really mean anything. In some cases, just based on a cost/benefit analysis, trying to stop the re-seeding of, say, Adywan's or Harmy's stuff is a fool's errand. But something like this, something that's just starting to get publicized, that's doable.
Anyway, as Brian says, it wouldn't surprise me if Disney began enforcing its copyrights a bit more aggressively than LucasFilm did (which is to say, they will likely enforce at all) when it comes to fan-made stuff. They won't be as loosey-goosey as LFL was.
cboath
Master Member
I didn't read the articles, but what was the upshot? Fans doing it because the studio won't? or what?
It's been said repeatedly that because of the exposure, well, in nearly all cases they go after people when they are trying to get that exposure. Seems this case is the rare exception. The forces behind it weren't looking for massive recognition - it's existence was picked up by media and then it got thrust into the spotlight. Being national news was far from the intent.
I mean, Harmy's stuff has been around what? 4-5 years? And he's done multiple passes of all 3 as well. He never got the exposure so it has pretty much been a non-issue as far as the powers are concerned.
None of this applies to legality of course and i'm not saying it does or should. I'm just saying if you tolerate under the radar stuff, you shouldn't hammer a guy who was on the radar and only got 'above the radar' because he did a great job.
If anything, i imagine they're upset because it proves they've not played straight with the public since they claimed a restoration was impossible for anything but the SE.
It's been said repeatedly that because of the exposure, well, in nearly all cases they go after people when they are trying to get that exposure. Seems this case is the rare exception. The forces behind it weren't looking for massive recognition - it's existence was picked up by media and then it got thrust into the spotlight. Being national news was far from the intent.
I mean, Harmy's stuff has been around what? 4-5 years? And he's done multiple passes of all 3 as well. He never got the exposure so it has pretty much been a non-issue as far as the powers are concerned.
None of this applies to legality of course and i'm not saying it does or should. I'm just saying if you tolerate under the radar stuff, you shouldn't hammer a guy who was on the radar and only got 'above the radar' because he did a great job.
If anything, i imagine they're upset because it proves they've not played straight with the public since they claimed a restoration was impossible for anything but the SE.
Axlotl
Master Member
I have a hard time believing Disney is really worried about this.
Sure, it's copyright infringement. Possibly even piracy.
But when Disney releases the OOT on blue ray, everybody who downloaded this - heck, everyone who worked on it - everyone with bootleg copies of the OOT, is going to buy Disney's DVDs. Disney knows this. They won't lose any money.
Sure, it's copyright infringement. Possibly even piracy.
But when Disney releases the OOT on blue ray, everybody who downloaded this - heck, everyone who worked on it - everyone with bootleg copies of the OOT, is going to buy Disney's DVDs. Disney knows this. They won't lose any money.
Sourdoh
Sr Member
Ditto.
Also, Disney has found out that litigating against fans is counter-productive, and expensive just to get some guy or gal in Sheboygan to quit making models of the Disney Nautilus. In the 70s they used to send out Cease and Desist letter by the bushelful and scared the crap out of people. That was the era when they went after the Child Care place that had Disney characters painted on their building. Disney got so much bad publicity about that one that they put their lawyers back on the chain in the backyard for a while. Since then they have only let the dogs loose on really egregious pirating, or character theft (mostly in the Asian markets), and left fans alone for the most part.
Last edited:
Solo4114
Master Member
Minor points:
- Copyright infringement = piracy. When people talk about online piracy, legally speaking, they're talking about copyright infringement. There's no distinction in the law.
- Disney might not lose money. But that doesn't really matter when you consider other legal issues involved. To tie back to the notion of visibility, Disney basically HAS to act if someone gets "too visible." If they fail to, then they expose themselves to a laches defense, meaning that Disney knew about it, did nothing, and thereby waives claims for damages, even if they can get an injunction going forward. Harmy can (arguably) survive because he's not really widely known. There hasn't been national news coverage of his stuff, so Disney -- if it doesn't want to go after him because, really, who cares -- can at least sort of claim "We didn't know" if they change their minds later. When something hits the national news, though, they have to shut it down.
- There are other issues involved besides copyright infringement. Disney has trademarks at stake, too. Failing to enforce your trademark rights can result in you abandoning the mark. Now, obviously, it'd be difficult to prove that based on one isolated incident of ignoring someone infringing your trademark...but what if it's more than one isolated incident? Now you have problems.
It's a little different, though. It's not just some kid who puts on his own Mickey Mouse play or whatever. We're talking widespread online distribution of pirated material. That's way different from "Hey, your dry cleaner store didn't get a license to use Bambi on its sign!"
So, again, the basic attitude of "tolerated infringement" with respect to the rightsholders of our favorite franchises holds true: keep it under the radar, dummy.
Brent M
Sr Member
Actually stories about Harmy and the Despecialized Editions have been prominently featured on the Yahoo! home page just like the recent story about Team Negative 1's Silver Screen Edition. I would argue that his works are much more widely known than this most recent release and for many years now they have left him alone. Hope I didn't just jinx him by saying that.
cboath
Master Member
As I said Harmy's been around years. This TN1 release is 6 weeks old. Harmy may have gotten a yahoo story, but he wasn't getting ET and Variety and trade publications either.
6/1 half dozen of the other I suppose.
But i think that's more of the point - with harmy they can simply say 'didn't know' and be done with it if pushed. When this is coverd by TV and trade mags, it's impossible to claim ignorance. I really hope they get their V2 out at some point. The details they pulled in that sample were mind-blowing.
6/1 half dozen of the other I suppose.
But i think that's more of the point - with harmy they can simply say 'didn't know' and be done with it if pushed. When this is coverd by TV and trade mags, it's impossible to claim ignorance. I really hope they get their V2 out at some point. The details they pulled in that sample were mind-blowing.
reedfranklin
Member
Is this version available? Does anyone know where I can get a copy?
Thanks,Reed
Thanks,Reed
sztriki
Sr Member
OMG that looks beautiful! The colour timing is a bit too muted for my usual taste in HD movies on first sight, but on the other hand it really gives that old-school cinema vibe with clarity and crispness of 4k! When Teamnegative 1's original edit came out I checked it out, but wasn't too excited as it looked really raw. Never knew it's getting a 4k clean-up. I have Harmy's stuff but damn, I'm looking forward to these now.
clancampbell
Sr Member
Very nice, but.
colours seem way too muted and exterior shots look far too bright, to the point that a lot of detail is simply blasted out of the picture....
Rich
Similar threads
