Slashdot Mirror
On The Legality of Public Viewing?
bobej1977 asks: "I'm looking into opening a technology-centric cafe/bar, and am wondering about the legality of showing different types of media in the cafe. Specifically, I'm interested in using a PVR to build a library of popular television shows (Futurama, Simpsons, Enterprise, etc) and making it available to patrons of the cafe. Many establishments show live sports events or even popular shows but where exactly is the legal-line that a business shouldn't cross? While I'm at it, what about showing DVDs in the cafe? While I'm sure that doing so is prohibited, would it be tolerated since I wouldn't be charging to watch them? The precedent I'm thinking of is that some electronics or video rental stores that show movies, in the store. If not, what kind of arrangements could be made to get permission, if I'd like to have a LOTR-a-thon?"
SLASHDOT IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR LEGAL ADVICE.
Get a lawyer. It's cheaper to do it right the first time than get your pants sued off and lose your business.
In Santa Barbara, CA, there are 3 delis that operate under the name Bitterman's Deli. They have a whole Seinfeld theme. They play recorded episodes of the show on a continuous loop using a VCR. I don't know if having video tape (analog) vs. PVR (digital) is distinguished under any laws, but maybe you can call Bitterman's and ask them.
Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
IANAL, but I don't think this is the case. I say this because my local school system actually got in trouble with Disney because it played a Disney animated video on the bus during a field trip. Apparently, that video had was not a version that was "licensed" for public viewing, and thus was an infringment. I don't think it matters *why* you are making a video available for public viewing -- only *that* you are doing it. If public schools have to get special licenses to show videos, I'll bet you do too.
Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
have to order their cable/DBS as an "entertainment" establishment that gives them the right to "rebroadcast" to their patrons at the location. Their prining is much higher than your monthly cable bill call up you cable co or a Sat TV provider to find out pricings, its probably based on seats/TV's/Patrons in the building. Pay-Per-View wrestling and boxing matches are outrageous (One bar I know was charged $2000 to show a Tyson fight), but there were we'll over 600 people that night, so they made that back on the cover.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Legally, you need to license the public performance rights for any program you want to show. This is really, really simple -- talk to a lawyer.
--
Twoflower
1. You're asking a legal question. You want legal advice. Ask Slashdot is a lousy place to get your legal advice. I wouldn't trust anything anyone here (including what I write below) says about this as a reliable indicator that you wouldn't get sued.
2. You would be charging for the content, even if you weren't doing so explicitly. That charge is folded into the cost of the drinks/coffee/muffins/whatever that you'd be serving. After all, you're not showing the content out of the kindness of your heart; you're showing it in hopes that it'll draw people into your shop.
You might think that if you're not kicking people out for not buying stuff, you're not charging; but in at least one circumstance, the U.S. courts have disagreed. In the U.S., business establishments that play background music (e.g. those Linkin Park/Lynyrd Skynyrd/Leonard Cohen songs you hear in the background when you go to your favorite club/bar/coffeehouse) are required to pay money for doing so to ASCAP. Most people don't realize this, but it's true. This is not incredibly aggressively enforced, but it is enforced. My favorite undergrad bar was shut down permanently because it wasn't making regular payments to ASCAP for the taped music it played before bands and in-between sets, and couldn't afford the fines and lump-sum payment once the court found against them.
Now, the music biz has all kinds of weird licensing restrictions and legislation, and I have no idea whether or not playing video content in your shop would be similar to playing music in your shop, in terms of your licensing obligations (once again, you need to talk to a real lawyer). But the fact that it is this way for music should make you look into this in more detail.
You wouldn't trust your lawyer to write some software for you; why would you trust a bunch of programmers/geeks to give you good legal advice? Remember, you are betting your financial well-being on the answer.
"The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
when I saw the headline I was thinking of Public Viewing not as showing DVD's in public venues, but "viewing the public"
Imagine piping in live feeds with the ultimate in reality TV - highly zoomable video cameras (including shotgun mikes) aimed at beaches, at rough streets at night, the Capitol steps in DC, downtown Tikrit, the West Bank, G.W. Bush's nieces antics, Hillary and Bill's arguments, etc.
Now that would be interesting.
The day will come when highly detailed video and audio monitoring becomes sufficiently inexpensive that the issue of what constitutes a reasonable expection of privacy in public will come more to the fore than it is today.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Jesus, who narc'ed on you? Was Mikey Eisner Jr. on board?
There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
They show movies and whatever else projected on the wall. They'll have special advertised "dinner and a movie" nights so you'll know what they'll be playing. I don't know the name of the place but they're right next door to the Stinking Rose.
I'm hearing a lot of disagreement on slashdot (no, I am not suprised). Unfortunately, I'm not a lawyer type and the ones I know are currently 800 miles away at an unspecified location. I think that it is doable but that you're best covering your butt.
And about some place playing music in between sets, I would think someone could get around this by allowing a "patron" to enjoy listening to whatever music they wanted and it just so happened that the rest of the audience "had" to listen to it.
"Would you rather have a playstation addicted dork wearing a star wars t-shirt?"
You need to talk to MPLC:
Happy karma."He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
The Motion Picture Licensing Corporation.
The guys you go to if you want to purchase a one
year "subscription" umbrella license to show
just about anything you'd ever want to play in a public place:
MPLC members have maximum flexibility in programming home videocassettes and videodiscs by being able to obtain them from any source and show them legally.
Any Source?
BITCHIN. You could keep kazaa open in the back
room and download crap all day for public viewing!
For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
Normally Video/Electronics places show the latest releases only because it's part of the promotional package (or, they get paid and/or certain other benifits to show the movie for x amount of time after the release). So they're granted permission to do it.
eugene is wong wrote:
:-(
You're not even allowed to record tv commercials to keep in library for your own personal enjoyment. If you can't do that, then there is no way that you are going to be able to do what you want for free.
I was going to correct you, but then I reviewed Sony v Universal and found that it looks like you are right. In that decision, the Supreme Court specifically looks at the distinction between "Time-Shifting" (recording to watch once and then reusing the tape) and "Librarying" (recording to watch multiple times). Apparently the distinction is important because "Time-Shifting" would be a fair use, but the Court appeared to consider "Librarying" not to be.
I wish it was politically feasable to bring back 14 year copyrights.
----
Open mind, insert foot.