Frustrating as this is, I don't really see how trailer re-editors (a group I include myself in) can realistically claim any sort of material ownership of these restorations. They're composed entirely of material owned by others, with even the editing decisions mimicking those made by the original editors.

It's rewarding work and the end results are always appreciated (my aforementioned Sorcerer trailer has an absurd number of views relative to the rest of my tiny channel) but I don't see anyone going to court for ripping them off.

(2022-10-30, 04:37 PM)jonno Wrote: Frustrating as this is, I don't really see how trailer re-editors (a group I include myself in) can realistically claim any sort of material ownership of these restorations. They're composed entirely of material owned by others, with even the editing decisions mimicking those made by the original editors.

It's rewarding work and the end results are always appreciated (my aforementioned Sorcerer trailer has an absurd number of views relative to the rest of my tiny channel) but I don't see anyone going to court for ripping them off.

Believe me that's not at all how it works in the industry. Restoration work, while it may not necessarily be protected under copyright, is universally seen as the work of the person or company that performed it. Even with a public domain work, if a label like Criterion released it no one else with any respect would copy it and sell it under their own label.

It doesn't matter who owns the copyright, and besides we're talking about trailers where the copyright value is low anyway. Like low enough to the point that the companies that own the copyright quite literally WANT you to share it like shareware as it's material that advertises their IP.

Right, and for those working in the actual industry, that's exactly what you'd expect.

It's just that enthusiasts who put these things together off their own bat, then share it on a common access platform in the spirit of 'here's a cool thing I made', can't expect the same kind of protection nor, sadly, respect.

(2022-10-30, 05:06 PM)Valeyard Wrote: It doesn't matter who owns the copyright, and besides we're talking about trailers where the copyright value is low anyway. Like low enough to the point that the companies that own the copyright quite literally WANT you to share it like shareware as it's material that advertises their IP.

I wouldn't goes as far because I get a ton of copyright claims on posted trailer at my channel. I've never countered them, because they aren't mine. I've asked FT Depot and Denis-Carl what they do with these copyright claims. They do the same: nothing.
But what SC did here is just wrong and disrespectful.

That's messed up.

Why didn't SC contact you and ask permission?

If you're anything like me you would have granted it.

So now not only did they steal a fan 's work, but they botched it up with cropping!

A thread posted on Blu-Ray.com goes a long way. Your evidence is undeniable and makes the company look bad.
Also, I would definitely complain to StudioCanal directly, because I have a feeling that they might not even suspect it, someone who was hired to do this job might have cut corners in order save time hoping that it wouldn't be noticed, so StudioCanal could be a "victim" too in all this.

That is so bogus, bendermac, but Studiocanal is maybe the crappiest "major" home video distributor, so no wonder they resort to this.

We have a worst label in France: it's called ESC. They have made an habit of using fanmade synced audio tracks available on fan projets, taken from VHS or LD, that they upmix to fake DTS HDMA hoping nobody will notice.

They didn't even crop out all of the "Trailer restored by Bendermac" for that one shot, big mistake on their part. What a bunch of asses for using this.

(2022-10-30, 04:37 PM)jonno Wrote: Frustrating as this is, I don't really see how trailer re-editors (a group I include myself in) can realistically claim any sort of material ownership of these restorations. They're composed entirely of material owned by others, with even the editing decisions mimicking those made by the original editors.

It's rewarding work and the end results are always appreciated (my aforementioned Sorcerer trailer has an absurd number of views relative to the rest of my tiny channel) but I don't see anyone going to court for ripping them off.

I couldn't agree more. I'm not sure what people expect. The only thing I would ask of a company doing that would be to contact me for a high quality version, instead of just ripping it from YouTube.