1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
Back when we would record onto VHS, is that considered piracy? Found a super bowl XXXI tape from my Uncle circa 1997. I'm curious lol.
Also side note, have any of you dabbled in digitizing old VHS? Have quite a few home videos on VHS and I'm wanting to preserve them for the future. I've done a bit of research and have come across a wide array of information. I know that doesn't really qualify as piracy, if there's a better comm for this, please direct me there!
I had a friend whose family owned a video store, while it wasn't exactly legal he could get me copies of everything and they were completely perfect Pirates.
I mean covers, labels and the actual tapes. They had specialised machines for all of it and they did it pretty perfectly.
Ive tried doing it myself by linking two machines together and the results were watchable but not on the same level as the machines he was using.
I did a lot of research on digitizing old VHS tapes and ended up going with a local, professional service to have mine converted.
If you want to do it yourself, this site and its associated forum are a great starting place to learn how: https://www.digitalfaq.com/editorials/digital-video/professional-analog-workflow.htm
Not in Australia. Relevant section of the Copyright Act 1968 as it would have existed back then, for those interested:
Click to view
COPYRIGHT ACT 1968
- SECT 111 Filming or recording broadcasts for private and domestic use
(1) The copyright in a television broadcast in so far as it consists of visual images is not infringed by the making of a cinematograph film of the broadcast, or a copy of such a film, for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made.
(2) The copyright in a sound broadcast, or in a television broadcast in so far as it consists of sounds, is not infringed by the making of a sound recording of the broadcast, or a copy of such a sound recording, for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made.
(3) For the purposes of this section, a cinematograph film or a copy of such a film, or a sound recording or a copy of such a sound recording, shall be deemed to be made otherwise than for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made if it is made for the purpose of:
(a) selling a copy of the film or sound recording, letting it for hire, or by way of trade offering or exposing it for sale or hire; (b) distributing a copy of the film or sound recording, whether for the purpose of trade or otherwise; (c) by way of trade exhibiting a copy of the film or sound recording in public; (d) broadcasting the film or recording; or (e) causing the film or recording to be seen or heard in public.
The same laws still apply today, just reworded. By the way, this practice of recording live TV is known as time shifting.
I guess it'd be a fuzzy space that falls right in why VCRs and cassette decks with record functions where allowed to exist. Time and format shifting are generally allowed, but retention or lending of it would be feasibly unauthorized distro. It's that space carved out by the Sony/Betamax rule that says 'if a tech has substantial non-infringing use then go for it' in effect.