Boycott SmartFlix!

GenJerDan said:
So....I'd suggest distributing instructional video on two-sided disks. One side being the DVD, the other being an audio CD. Plenty of musicians around to provide music for it.
Click to expand...
Just dump the audio only, from timeline of the master edit, and place that on other side of the DVD, in CD audio format. Avoid potential litigation for distributing 3rd parties music, in the event the music is challenged in any form, etc. Then drive around in the car, listen, learn about the HVX, as an example. :happy: Does spoil the DVD/CD disk labeling though.

GJD, that's a better idea than I had to make the instructions into a Macromedia Director computer program, for all the reasons we already know.
 
TwistedLincoln said:
...And more importantly to everyone here, it seems likely that putting a small piece of software on a DVD isn't going to prohibit rental of that DVD -- if the primary purpose of the product is the video, my guess is that the laws that cover that video would apply...
Click to expand...
Interesting Tony. Perhaps back to Macromedia Director created content, with limited EULA, interactive instructional "computer program" DVD-rom.

Tony, you may be hard pressed to get purchasers to sign EULA documents for products and return/facsimile same to your office, although I see your intention/purpose. How about implementing an "[ ] I agree, to the following terms and conditions..." tick box at the on-line POS, and at the same time you are recording the name/address of the purchaser and the credit card details, etc? I still see flaws in this though, like almost any model.
 
Christopher Barry said:
How about implementing an "[ ] I agree, to the following terms and conditions..." tick box at the on-line POS, and at the same time you are recording the name/address of the purchaser and the credit card details, etc? I still see flaws in this though, like almost any model.
Click to expand...

Clearly, that's a much more realistic idea. Few (if any) buyers would fax you back a contract.

I'm not sure if such a thing would hold up in court, but keep in mind that any lawsuits that come would be civil ones, not criminal. So establishing your intent in a clear and easy to understand manner will go a long way to winning, even if there are legal loopholes.


Just a thought, but rather than focus on ways to prevent the rental system from happening, perhaps we should come up with some ways to exploit it:

Perhaps one could add a "digital coupon" to the DVDs. You would add a main menu entry entitled "Special Rental Coupon Code." When selected, this option would display a coupon code. This code would allow the viewer to purchase a copy of the disc from you at a discounted rate roughly equal to the original purchase price minus whatever the average rental fee is. If no one ever rents out your DVD, so much the better. But if they do, customers will have the opportunity to purchase the DVD at the original price they would have paid if they hadn't rented it.
 
TwistedLincoln said:
And more importantly to everyone here, it seems likely that putting a small piece of software on a DVD isn't going to prohibit rental of that DVD -- if the primary purpose of the product is the video, my guess is that the laws that cover that video would apply. Otherwise all someone would have to do to stop the use of anything would be to attach a piece of software to it
Click to expand...

DVDs can have software on them, obviously. But they are sold/rented/distributed with the permission of the owner. That's allowed.

These 200+ posts are about proventing someone from distributing somewhting without the consent of the owner.
 
I'm not one to make call-out posts, and this isn't intended to be one . . .

But it doesn't appear to me that Travis is responding with quite the sense of urgency you'd expect from a man who's concerned with defending his professional reputation.
 
Apropos nothing, can anyone here, actually document financial loss as a result of having their DVD on SmartFlix?

I mean, we all understand the theory (and I personally buy it), but there is a competing theory (of Travis, which I don't buy). Now, we can all have theoretical arguments why Travis is wrong, but I'm asking hard proof questions.

I also understand that it may not be easy, but really, you know, a documented case is very convincing - otherwise we're just spinning our wheels "he said, she said". Not more talk, but proof.

So: hard proof please?

I think providing such a documented case would be an extremely powerful tool for further actions. Let's have it.
 
Here is an idea. How about when you create your video and send it out for distribution, you include a form with the DVD that the customer fills out at the time of purchase. This form would document where the sale took place, who the buyer is, and provide a contract stating that they do not indend to purchase the video for resale or distribution. It would also probably be nice to have some kind of tracking number on the disk itself, so if it ended up in a place like Smartflix, you would be able to identify it easily. I don't think that having the buyer fill out a form at the time of purchase would be too inconvienent. Most of the work would be on the seller, but if they are keeping track of sales for you already, they I can't imagine that it would be too much more work.

Legally, a contract can be as simple as a napkin with signatures of the buyer and seller on it, so the form would hold up in court. The only issue is that most lawyers will not take a case of breech of contract for an amount of $60. There has to be enough money involved for them to even make it worth their while.
 
cecil995 said:
Legally, a contract can be as simple as a napkin with signatures of the buyer and seller on it, so the form would hold up in court.
Click to expand...

It takes more than just signatures to form a legally-binding contract, and there are numerous factors which a court may take into account for deciding whether to enforce it.

In any case, that's pretty customer-unfriendly. A better solution is for customers to act honorably.
 
David Jimerson said:
It takes more than just signatures to form a legally-binding contract, and there are numerous factors which a court may take into account for deciding whether to enforce it.

In any case, that's pretty customer-unfriendly. A better solution is for customers to act honorably.
Click to expand...

You are right, it does take more than signatures to make a legally binding contract. A contract must contain the subject matter, competent parties, legal considerations, and mutal assesment and obligation. But the point of the napkin example was that it is not very hard to create a contract.

As far as being customer-unfriendly, I don't see how that is really asking much from them. We have to do things like that all the time for purchases, such as aggreeing to terms when you get any kind of computer software that is installed on your comp, or any time you take your car in for repair I had to fill out a contract when I took my daughter home from the hospital stating that I would not shake her. Shoot, I have even had to fill out a contract when I purchased a $20 guniea pig. If it was really that much to ask from them, then perhaps you give them incentive, like "hey, fill out this form and get a free t-shirt!"

And relying on customer faith as a solution to this problem is like relying on Bush to form an exit stratagy from Iraq, it just ain't gonna happen.
 
OK, don't go down a political road here.

I wasn't arguing practicality; the simple truth is that it IS unfriendly and that a customer acting honorably IS a better solution. (And most states do, by law, require all citizens to act "reasonably" at all times, so while that's a pretty nebulous concept, it's a codification of the principle I'm espousing here.)

But if you want to argue practicality, we as content providers have two basic ways to get our product to market -- sell it directly ourselves over the Internet, or sell it to a distributor or big store like B&H. In the latter instance, I can tell you that no one's going to bother with that sales contract you propose, and if we make it a condition of sale to them, they just won't buy -- because they're not going to make their own customers sign anything like that.

For Internet sales, we could include a checkbox of some kind, but then, customers could buy it from the aforementioned big stores, and it's a coin-toss if it would be upheld anyway.

In either case, we could include some kind of "registration" slip in the case itself, but then it's back to customer faith to send it in.
 
Christopher Barry said:
Perhaps abandon the DVD media model and make the content embedded in an interactive "computer program"? § 109(b)(1)(A)

You can't rent out a computer program, right?

Does content created with, say, Macromedia Director, constitute a "computer program"? If so, it is both PC/Mac cross platform friendly. Sure, not as broad a market as DVD media.
Click to expand...

SmartFlix currently has a line of DVD tutorials with autostarting, interactive Macromedia Director shells. DVDs made by Software Cinema have a menu that opens with a list of titles to select from. This hasn't stopped SmartFlix.

Let me say again, the only way to beat them is to have software that must be installed onto the computer and not just read off of the DVD!!!!! That's when it becomes illegal. Also, encrypt the QuickTime files with media keys.

SmartFlix has told me personally they can't and won't rent DVDs where software is installed or serial numbers/keys are used.
 
SMARTFLIX is also offering to "borrow" my DVDs in return for the generous compensation of $1 per rental and $1 if
the disc is damaged or destroyed. Wow, now I can retire to my private island.

All of my products are clearly marked with copyright notice and the term "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED".
What part of that don't they understand? The information on my DVDs is unique, original intellectual property,
to be shared only with those entities of our choice. By renting my products without permission, Smartflix has
stolen my property and forever deprived me of a legal, legitimate sale at least once a week for each item.

To my knowledge, Smartflix has not informed video producers of their intent, even to the point of purchasing
DVDs under other names and locations (Arlington, Massachusetts). That speaks volumes.

These bottom feeders seem to think that years of expertise, countless hours of work and an investment of tens of
thousands in equipment and product development is worth nothing.
 
I apologize if this had been mentioned already (I'm getting a headache reading the minutae of every post)

One of the intellectual property attorneys I've met mentioned something about extra protection for limited numbers. In other words if an artist makes a limited edition print (say 50 copies, but I am not sure of the number), even if he sells it, he still has some say. He cited an example of a building purchased in NYC where the new owners wanted to renovate and get rid of a sculpture in the lobby. The artist however wanted it to stay, even though he had sold it to the previous owners. He won. For those that have only limited runs of their work, woould this apply/help?
 
its legal

its legal

This horse isn't dead yet. Yep I found my work on this guys site. Never heard from him or his company til it was brought to my attention yesterday that he was renting my DVD's. Yes I know it may very well be legal but I can tell you for sure it doesn't feel good at all. I just can't roll over. I want to add what ever resources I can to make some change in the law. I have not recovered the expense needed to make my videos and now it looks like I well may not.

Add me to the list of people who won't go away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top