Legally, Is there a difference?

[wwjd]

My question is;

Legally, is there a difference between recording TV shows vs. copying DVDs rented from Netflix or Blockbuster?

[rkr1958]

Yes ... BIG DIFFERENCE. Recording TV for viewing later is called Time Shifting and is legal in the US. Copying rented DVDs, by any standard, is illegal and constitutes warez with respect to all resonable interpertations of fair use.

[wwjd]

Suppose the TV shows include movies, not from HBO or Showtime, but movies non the less?

Also, how many times can the TV recordings be viewed? Is there a time limit?

I do not copy rented DVDs but I have seen a few postings here and there that say that recording TV shows is also illegal.

I recently got into this very discussion with an aquaintance who solved his video quality problem by renting DVDs from Netflix. When I said that was illegal and piracy, his reply was that what I was doing, which is recording stuff from the TV, was just as illegal.

[ricardouk]

interesting

lets say im recording a new tv series from the tv with a standalone dvd recorder, im copying a tv program not yet released on dvd.

isnt that against the law?

after 6 months it gets released on dvd and by then its illegal to copy it.

[lordsmurf]

that say that recording TV shows is also illegal.

We card for people that DOWNLOAD tv shows, as that's not currently a valid form of timeshifting. Don't confuse this with a VCR or DVD recorder at home.

I recently got into this very discussion with an aquaintance who solved his video quality problem by renting DVDs from Netflix. When I said that was illegal and piracy, his reply was that what I was doing, which is recording stuff from the TV, was just as illegal.

I assume you mean "by renting DVDs from Netflix ... and copying them".
The acquaintance is a moron. See these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._v._Universal_City_Studios
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-shifting

[wwjd]

I am talking about recording, using a capture card for example. I was not considering downloading movies or tv shows.

This whole copyright thing is very confusing. I record, not download stuff from TV. I burn it to DVD for later viewing but I may or may not view it multiple times. I do not distribute it or sell it. In fact my primary motive is to be able watch it at a later date WITHOUT the bloody commercials! Is that illegal or not?

I bring up the Netflix thing because I hear more and more people say that if you want to get good quality recordings, go the Netflix route. There is no doubt it is illegal because at the beginning of every disk they copy it says that it is illegal. It does not say that on TV but I have seen threads and articles that say, to the letter of the law, that it is illegal.

[wwjd]

lordsmurf,

By the way thanks for the links. I started looking at them after I put out my last post. I will look it over.

[solarfox]

I am talking about recording, using a capture card for example. I was not considering downloading movies or tv shows.

This whole copyright thing is very confusing. I record, not download stuff from TV. I burn it to DVD for later viewing but I may or may not view it multiple times. I do not distribute it or sell it. In fact my primary motive is to be able watch it at a later date WITHOUT the bloody commercials! Is that illegal or not?

According to the Betamax decision, no, over-the-air recording for later viewing is not illegal.

[yoda313]

Hi,

Is there a time limit?

I think I seem to remember one of our mods ADAM saying that you're technically supposed to erase the recording after you've watched it once.

HOWEVER, I don't think that is enforcable at all and I have not done that at all.....

Kevin

[lordsmurf]

I think I seem to remember one of our mods ADAM saying that you're technically supposed to erase the recording after you've watched it once. HOWEVER, I don't think that is enforcable at all and I have not done that at all.....Kevin

For as much as I've seen that said, I've never read that anywhere else. I think that's just his interpretation.

[yoda313]

Hi,

Oh ok. It did seem to be rather harsh and not in a lot of documentation.

Kevin

[gadgetguy]

Lordsmurf wrote:

yoda313 wrote:
I think I seem to remember one of our mods ADAM saying that you're technically supposed to erase the recording after you've watched it once. HOWEVER, I don't think that is enforcable at all and I have not done that at all.....Kevin


For as much as I've seen that said, I've never read that anywhere else. I think that's just his interpretation.

I would tend to accept Adams interpretation because I believe he has read the actual documents of the decision in the aformentioned case. As informative as Wikipedia is, it is not complete. If you read closely you can see where sections of the text is missing and nowhere does it quote the entire text of the decision nor the dissent. And it does not provide links to any court documents. Remember that all Wikipedia entries are entered by the users and often pertinent information can be left out. Subsequent users can edit/add to an entry to attempt to "set the record straight", but still can leave out details whether deliberately or inadvertently. Blatant falsehoods are usually weeded out pretty quickly, but can often remain for days before someone notices.

[CaptainVideo]

In fact my primary motive is to be able watch it at a later date WITHOUT the bloody commercials! Is that illegal or not?

Highly illegal in the US. You can timeshift but you cannot edit out the commercials. Would you get caught and sued? No way, but by the letter of the law it is illegal. The advertisements are what enables the broadcast to be free in the first place.

[Noahtuck]

I think I seem to remember one of our mods ADAM saying that you're technically supposed to erase the recording after you've watched it once. HOWEVER, I don't think that is enforcable at all and I have not done that at all.....Kevin

For as much as I've seen that said, I've never read that anywhere else. I think that's just his interpretation.

Yeah, i was looking for that also, never seen anything that said that exactly or any kind of time limit..... just people saying it 8)

Most of the country for the last 30 years would be felons
Because most everyone since the VCR became a common item in households, has had tons of tapes of tv they recorded 8)

[wwjd]

Where exactly does it say that commercials or any part of the recorded TV show can not be edited out?

So, let me get this straight; It is legal to record a tv show for a future single viewing which then has to be erased or destroyed. Additionally this recording may not be edited, specifically the commercials.

I need to see that in plain English!

[ghoster]

so if i buy a movie off pay per view record it to blank dvd. thats ok but if i rent a movie and record it a blank dvd its not ok. i really don't see a difference.

[non-linear]

so if i buy a movie off pay per view record it to blank dvd. thats ok but if i rent a movie and record it a blank dvd its not ok. i really don't see a difference.

Welcome to the wonderful world of copyright.

Seriously though, copyright laws have so many gray areas -- that's why there are lawyers out there who specialize in this area. All I know about copyright law is that it's far too complex for my simple mind.

[NiteLite]

Your questions will be setteled when High-Def becomes the norm. Things are going to change drastically.
Already the differences in digital or analog are very different. The Sony Betamax decision for analog versus the DMCA for digital.
Once or even before HD Broadcasters will have the option to charge you for recording their content. PPV will probably be first with options of $15 to $20 for a digital option to record. About $10 for an analog recording to DVD or VCR, and the standard $4 to $6 to just watch as is. These will be controled by the broadcaster and the selection you pick will turn on filters or release them.
Next will probably be the major movie channels, HBO, Starz, Showtime, etc.
Then if any other channel other than OTA channel wants to follow suit look out. Also with the recent removal of commercial skip buttons on TIVO and the like and a push to remove them on all recording devices. Also with debate about making the removal of commercials a prohibited feature look for all simple recording to become very complicated. And the gray areas will be as a cloudy day or broadcasters will make the decisions for us and trying to bypass them will be difficult.
While new technology is exciting and wanted the ability to freely use it will be complicated and discouraging.
Bummer.
NL

[adam]

I think I seem to remember one of our mods ADAM saying that you're technically supposed to erase the recording after you've watched it once. HOWEVER, I don't think that is enforcable at all and I have not done that at all.....Kevin

For as much as I've seen that said, I've never read that anywhere else. I think that's just his interpretation.

If you just read the Betamax decision the court comes right out and says it explicitly. Or you can just look up the definition of the word "time-shift."

Taken directly out of the Betamax ruling:

Two kinds of Betamax usage are at issue here. 2 The first is "time-shifting," whereby the user records a program in order to watch it at a later time, and then records over it, and thereby erases the program, after a single viewing. The second is "library-building," [464 U.S. 417, 459] in which the user records a program in order to keep it for repeated viewing over a longer term.

A "single viewing" would still allow you to watch it a few times, if for example each member of your family watched it separately. But if you go beyond that then it is no longer permissible time-shifting.

[adam]

so if i buy a movie off pay per view record it to blank dvd. thats ok but if i rent a movie and record it a blank dvd its not ok. i really don't see a difference.

No time-shifting does not apply to PPV. As the Supreme Court explained in the Betamax ruling the purpose of time-shifting is solely to allow you to watch that which you have paid to watch. You need the ability to time-shift because no one can watch every channel all the time, and there is no way to control regularly scheduled programs. But since you have the ability to plan out and choose when to watch PPV, there is no need to time-shift.

[disturbed1]

There is a time limit on how long you can keep certain shows.

Watch the fine print at the end of most History channel shows. It clearly states that the only form of recording that they allow is for educational use, and the program can not be retained for longer than 21 days.

Or something to that effect. It does say educational use only for recording, and a definte time period for which the recording can be maintained.

Most shows/movies are aired with a copyright. When you back up or copy the show to a medium (CD/DVD) this does violate the copyright, and is against the law, since those medium are considered to last a lifetime. The purpose of timeshifting is not to have an permanent copy, which recording to DVD will give you.

If for some reason the law was to inspect your house, and found copies of TV shows/movies in you DVD collection, you better believe the MPAA and other associated copyright holders would try and get every dollar out of you.

[junkmalle]

If for some reason the law was to inspect your house, and found copies of TV shows/movies in you DVD collection, you better believe the MPAA and other associated copyright holders would try and get every dollar out of you.

If the MPAA started doing this they'd all be lynched.

[yoda313]

If for some reason the law was to inspect your house, and found copies of TV shows/movies in you DVD collection, you better believe the MPAA and other associated copyright holders would try and get every dollar out of you.

If the MPAA started doing this they'd all be lynched.

Hi,

Yes exactly. They may be trying to do the downloading attack but if they tried to go into every single house for tv shows from twenty years ago on tape they'd be in for a huge revolt. I think that kind of attack would finally show the extreme view of the mpaa and others. Sure they have the right to protect their content but not the extreme hunting by them.

Kevin

EDIT - they have security forces at stores to protect they're product but they don't wire the products to self destruct if they're shoplifted out of the store. Nore do they put electric shockers on the unit if they leave the store without paying. They have the right to do as much as they can to protect they're goods but they're are limits to whats acceptable and sensible in the eyes of the buying public.

[ROF]

In fact my primary motive is to be able watch it at a later date WITHOUT the bloody commercials! Is that illegal or not?

Highly illegal in the US. You can timeshift but you cannot edit out the commercials. Would you get caught and sued? No way, but by the letter of the law it is illegal. The advertisements are what enables the broadcast to be free in the first place.

Free?? Last time I looked I get sent a bill for close to $100 a month for these broadcast feeds to reach my home. I think I've more than paid my fair share for the limited broadcasts that I may decide to record without commercials.

[yoda313]

hi,

I think captainvideo is referring to OVER THE AIR signals from the main stations. Not cable/satellite.

Kevin

[kicko]

at 1st i thought this question was dumb, but the more i think of it the more like many laws nothing is clear about what you can and can't do. with so much "ON-demand" viewing now what is the difference? if i recorded a program and watched it many times over 24hrs(ppv) or a months time(cable tv on- demand shows) ? its the same thing, what if i tivo E.T playing on HBO, then watched it 5 months later? this will get harder and harder the more on-demand style viewing is used.

[adam]

Well, I still think the question is dumb But only because I think it should be obvious that it is illegal to rent and copy. The time shifting aspect appears to be a topic of debate though.

The MPAA has no authority to raid private homes. They would have to file a criminal complaint and have the police execute a search warrant...just like everyone else in America has to do. But the MPAA has stated that they are going after people who distribute either physically or through the internet.

But that was not even what disturbed1 suggested. He said if for some reason the police searched your premises for other reasons, like maybe a drug bust, and discovered infringing material as well. The MPAA probably would be notified and they could file a complaint if they wanted. I still doubt they'd bother but they'd have that right.

[ROF]

I don't think anyone could claim that copying rented material is legal. the illegal issue of that is printed on the box cover, displayed whenever you start the video, and there is even a reminder inside most stores where you rent this material.

The problem with TV broadcasts is, especially now that a new law has been passed, how do you market Tivo, VCR, DVD-Recorder, etc. without stating that you can store up to x amount of hours for later viewing? Does the marketer now need to state that after watching these shows you must delete them, you can not view them more then once, and that after a certain length of time you can not watch the show?

How many VCRs would have been sold if that was on the packaging?

The broadcast recording devices are, at best, used legally about 3% of the time, while the rest is done illegally.

Under current law, recently passed, the VCR is now illegal to own and use.

It's a device that is mostly used for infringing purposes.

[wwjd]

Adam wrote:

Well, I still think the question is dumb But only because I think it should be obvious that it is illegal to rent and copy. The time shifting aspect appears to be a topic of debate though.

There is no debate that copying rented DVD is illegal, the reason for the question was whether recording tv material is just as illegal.

So far the concensus is, that it if you do not erase or destroy the recorded material after watching it then it is in fact illegal. Hence, to the letter of the law many of us who DO NOT copy rented DVDs but do record and retain copies of recorded material from TV are breaking the copyright law also.

[adam]

Under current law, recently passed, the VCR is now illegal to own and use.

It's a device that is mostly used for infringing purposes.

No its not. The Betamax ruling is still good law. Even if a device IS used for mostly infringing purposes, it is still legal so long as it still has a "substantially non-infringing purpose." VCRs and the new breeds of PVR like Tivo have been ruled to have such purposes and are therefore perfectly legal.

Even though its really a legal fiction, people are presumed to know the law since its in the public record. Therefore, hardware manufacturers are not required to educate people as to how to use their devices to lawfully timeshift. Tivo is currently in litigation regarding its ability to store content indefinitely and play it back multiple times. Its not so much that you shouldn't be able to do this, its the way they do it. They've got like playlists and favorites and other such classifications and services that induce people into being the "library builders" that are not protected by time shifting.