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!

  • adhocfungus@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    It was definitely considered piracy by the public at the time. Everyone I knew called it a “legal grey area”, but as far as I know it was legally permissable.

    The media companies tried their hardest to make it sound like you were destroying the entire industry and you’d go to jail for life as soon as they caught you.

    What makes me mad is the boomers I watched copy rentals and NFL games are the same ones telling me I’m stealing by using an ad blocker.

  • GeekFTW@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Partially off-topic but I rarely get the chance to tell this story:

    My old man was a porn hound. Talking wall of VHS tapes. You know what I’m picturing, that was his living room. Had 4 VCR’s hooked up at once with several switches, a few switchboards for colour and audio correction, whole 9 yards. Lost an eye when I was a kid so always wanted to make his viewing ‘optimal’ for him.

    What he’d end up doing was go down to the local Variety Video, rent 5-6 tapes, come home, and dub em over the weekend. Then once dubbed, remove the label with some heat, open the cassettes (the og and the copy he made) and swap the reels so he’d have the original one (which would be ever-so-slightly better quality than the copy he made, again, cause of his sight). Then seal em up, return the copy and no one was the wiser. Did this for close to 15 years before the place closed down (for unrelated reasons) and had his huge wall of big titty wank material for years to come lmao.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

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

      • synthsalad@mycelial.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          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…

  • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Recording home videos for personal use within your immediate family was protected. Screening for people beyond that was not. Mr. Rogers famously gave us what little protection we had and insured that we could even have home VHS recorders. Testified before a congressional committee that was on the verge of banning it, changed one critical mind and that stopped it.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      ad-skip to present day. encryption and drm is being introduced into the new atsc 3.0 broadcast standard, and some stations are already using it.

      • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The beauty of working in video production is I always have a tool I can run stuff through for very legal and very cool capture purposes.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” — Jack Valenti, MPAA president, 1982

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      You wouldn’t download a serial killer.

      But you could download countless murder-mystery audiobooks and ebooks from Libby, so that’s a close second.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    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.

  • Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    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; © 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.

  • greentreerainfire@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Not an answer to your question, but in the 80s/early 90s my grandmother used to tape movies off the tv, I believe she actually copied VCR to VCR so she could make a copy without commercials. She’d then cut out the description from the TV Guide, and scotch tape it to the top of the video cassette tape.

    • Dharma Curious (he/him)@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Oh damn, that TV guide tip is genius! We used to handwrite on a post it and then cover it with packing tape to kind of laminate it.

      My folks were also too cheap/broke to buy blank VHS tapes, so we used to get regular movies at yard sales and cover the little tab area with electrical tape. Lol.

  • chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    My brother and I (mostly him, just helped a small bit) used to distribute Anime this way. He’d buy laserdiscs of Anime like Rurouni Kenshin (OVA/Prequel)and Yu Yu Hakushou, then download translations for subtitles and time them on the computer, using a bluescreen pass through and onto some SVHS VCRs. From those two SVHS VCRs, he’d use 9 others to copy them onto VHS tapes for distribution via mail. He’d charge cost iirc, not making profit on it.

    I’m 100% sure it would be considered piracy if the companies had a way to find out. Plus VHS tapes had piracy warnings on them back then anyway.

  • Banzai51@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Only if you sold it. Back when cassette tapes first came out, the mystic 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.

      • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The implications of “magic is data” are fun. It leads to stories like Unsong where you can brute-force enumerate incantations until you find a good one. I also like the concept of Wizard’s Bane. I haven’t read it, but my understanding is that magic turns out to be Turing-complete, and the protagonist creates a LISP evaluator in magic, which enables them to outcast their enemies who are still doing the magical equivalent of writing assembly.

        • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          You’d probably also enjoy The Laundry Files. Math is magic, and while you -can- do it in your head, using computers is a lot safer and more efficient. Includes such gems as a basilisk gun integrated into CCTV camera systems.