this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54698 readers
422 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

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



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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!

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Banzai51@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Only if you sold it. Back when cassette tapes first came out, the ~~mystic~~ music industry sued, and the Supreme Court ruled it fair use. So VHS tapes were under the same umbrella. We wouldn't get that same ruling now.

Holy hell, that was one hell of an autocorrect on mobile.

[–] synthsalad@mycelial.nexus 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

In 1984, this issue made it all the way to the US Supreme Court, which ultimately decided that recording television to tape using a VCR for personal use (“timeshifting”) is fair use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc.

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 1 points 5 months ago

To the top with you! I see some opinions quoted, but yours is the right answer.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago

Came here to say "Time shifting".

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

For personal use, so not for distribution and a copy made on your own, not procured from someone else, right?

[–] synthsalad@mycelial.nexus 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The Wikipedia article has these relevant quotes from the court opinion:

The question is thus whether the Betamax is capable of commercially significant noninfringing uses ... one potential use of the Betamax plainly satisfies this standard, however it is understood: private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home.[7] [...] [W]hen one considers the nature of a televised copyrighted audiovisual work... and that time-shifting merely enables a viewer to see such a work which he had been invited to witness in its entirety free of charge, the fact... that the entire work is reproduced... does not have its ordinary effect of militating against a finding of fair use.[8]

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

So yeah, private, non commercial, in the home, for content you would have otherwise been able to see for yourself in the past by the "regular" means available to you.

Which is vastly different from going on the internet and downloading a movie with your favorite torrent program when you wouldn't have otherwise been able to see it...

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 1 points 5 months ago

The VCR was invented, marketed, and sold to do this very thing. When the VCR first came out (same for betamax) they didn't sell pre-recorded tapes because the only way they had to make those was to manually record them individually in real-time which was prohibitively expensive. That's also why movie rental places caught on: early VHS movies were too expensive for most to afford. But not too expensive for a business to rent hundreds of times.

Suffice to say: if recording TV was piracy, it wasn't illegal and the people bitching had no way to enforce their will.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Everything that gives people non-gatekept access to any media is considered "piracy" by the powers that be.

'Home taping is killing music' written above a cassette tape with crossed bones beneath

That propaganda image is from the 80s.

Re: NFL

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Which is weird because neither of those things are illegal. You can absolutely tape the radio. You just can't distribute it. Just like you can copy your own media for your own use as much as you want.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

True, but that doesn't stop them from being propagandized as "piracy".

[–] Banzai51@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

Remember, no business is required to tell the truth. Had a pipeline go through my backyard and you would not believe the lies that company told. Glad I lawyered up instead of believing the lies.