Slashdot Mirror


Miramax C&Ds Kung Fu Movie Reviewer

Mirkon writes "When a movie distributor attains rights to a film, it's rather predictable that they go after individuals offering the movie for sale or free. But Miramax took it a step further - as reported by Wired and on the site itself, Mark Pollard of Kung Fu Cinema received a Cease & Desist letter from Miramax concerning a link on Kung Fu Cinema to a movie purchasing site for the Jet Li movie Hero (set to be officially released in North America in April 2004). Fearing Miramax (and thus Disney) and their army of lawyers, Pollard deleted the link, as well as another for Shaolin Soccer, also unreleased in North America. Pollard criticized the studio for not permitting the original version of such films to hit the states, saying "If they own the rights to this film, then this film is not available to U.S. consumers -- period." The EFF also has some comments regarding the fact that Pollard has done nothing wrong in the first place."

60 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. In other news .. by junkymailbox · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot links to a story that links to Kung Fu Cinema that links to a movie purchasing site.

    Beware the wrath of Miramax lawyers!

    fp?
  2. I have mixed feelings... by eurleif · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But it seems like this is somewhere along the lines of telling someone where the nearest drug dealer ir (not comparing the two crimes). Isn't/shouldn't that be illegal?

    1. Re:I have mixed feelings... by Kenja · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Please explain how ordering a DVD from Hong Kong is the same as buying drugs.

      Hold on, let me strap my self in for this one, I'm sure its going to be good.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:I have mixed feelings... by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But it seems like this is somewhere along the lines of telling someone where the nearest drug dealer is.[sic] Isn't/shouldn't that be illegal?
      Um, no.
      Talking isn't/shouldn't be illegal.
      Doing things that harm others is/should be illegal.
      If person A is selling drugs, and person B is saying where person A can be found, then go and prosecute person A.

      --
    3. Re:I have mixed feelings... by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Funny
      Owning drugs is illegal. Owning a movie isn't illegal. Playing a movie you own shouldn't be illegal.

      Corporations are brainless organisms which only care about making profit. They're like yeast. They'll merrily shit in their environment until everything that forces them to work is illegal and anything that reduces their profit (IE, competition) is illegal. Like yeast, their shit will probably eventually kill off the colony, then someone will drink it like a fine port. Er... or something.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    4. Re:I have mixed feelings... by the_consumer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Who did person A harm?

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    5. Re:I have mixed feelings... by gaijin99 · · Score: 4, Informative
      But it seems like this is somewhere along the lines of telling someone where the nearest drug dealer ir (not comparing the two crimes). Isn't/shouldn't that be illegal?
      Generally, telling people how to commit crimes, or telling them where they can obtain illegal things isn't illegal itself. The "Anarchist's Cookbook", for example, includes detailed (if boobytrapped) information on all manner of things ranging from cooking up Meth, to building pipe-bombs. Its perfectly legal.

      This makes sense from pretty much anystandpoint you want to look at it from, even though it does sometimes produce odd results. It goes back to the basic idea that crimes are actions, you can't arrest someone for speculating about how nifty it would be to rob a bank (you can, however arrest someone for *planning* to rob the bank, you don't have to actually wait for them to do it). If it were otherwise we'd be entering the wonderful world of Thought Crimes (TM).

      Besides, the way it works now leads to some very amusing situations, such as the "wine brick" that was sold during prohibition. This was basically a compressed bunch of raisens. The instruction sheet contained an interesting warning:
      Caution: Never mix contents in two gallons of warm water
      to which you have added a pinch of yeast, and one pound of sugar.
      If this mixture is left to stand in a cloth covered container
      for two weeks, an ALCOHOLIC beverage will result, which is illegal.

      --
      "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
    6. Re:I have mixed feelings... by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What the fuck are you smoking? This isn't about selling illegal substances, this is about selling movies. Not bootlegs, either - these are perfectly legit copies.

      What's happening is that Miramax is taking its sweet time releasing the movies in the US - so the free market steps in, and people start buying DVDs from overseas retailers. If that's illegal now, then we got big problems.

    7. Re:I have mixed feelings... by hymie3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um, no.
      Talking isn't/shouldn't be illegal.
      Doing things that harm others is/should be illegal.
      If person A is selling drugs, and person B is saying where person A can be found, then go and prosecute person A.


      Yes, it should be illegal. If I were to say "There's a lot of drugs in [insert name of local "urban" housing project]", that would be okay. If I were to say "Go down to the corner of 4th and MLK Blvd, and talk to the guy in the red stocking cap. Tell him Leroy sent you", then that would be an accessory to a crime (purchasing drugs).

      I *should* be able to report facts. As in "These movies have been out for years and are legally purchaseable by non-US residents at these sites."

      It's all about intent. If the intent is to get around importation regulations, then it's wrong. (Personally, I believe the restrictions are detestable, but that's another story). If the intent is to point out how corporations buy distribution rights and sit on them for a really long time to prevent competition with their home-grown crap movies, well, that's just reporting facts/giving opinions.
    8. Re:I have mixed feelings... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'd like to see some basis for your assumption that a company owning the copyright to something prevents people from buying or importing from another country.

      The relevant laws are 17 USC 106 (the right to distribute), 109 (first sale), and 602 (importation).

      The relevant case is Quality King v. Lanza Research, 523 US 135 (1998).

      "[The prohibition] encompasses copies that are not subject to the first sale doctrine-e.g., copies that are lawfully made under the law of another country...."

      The importation is direct infringement -- the linking is likely contributory infringement, as there is an underlying direct infringement, probably constructive knowledge of infringement, and material contribution to the infringement.

      Keep in mind that these are not knockoffs or illegal versions, they are 100% legit for their country of origin.

      Of course -- 602 doesn't _just_ apply to piratical copies though; it applies to copies that were lawfully made, just not lawfully made under US law. If Miramax owns the rights under US law, only it can lawfully make, or cause to be made, copies. The fact that it was lawfully made in DVDistan is basically irrelevant.

      The companies have no right whatsoever to restrict buyers from purchasing foreign versions, or selling those foreign versions in North America. Sending out a C&D is just legalspeak to frighten people off.

      No, they've got this right. It's not often used, and it's not well known, but they have got it. It's pretty stupid though, I admit.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    9. Re:I have mixed feelings... by RevDobbs · · Score: 3, Funny
      If I were to say "Go down to the corner of 4th and MLK Blvd, and talk to the guy in the red stocking cap. Tell him Leroy sent you", then that would be an accessory to a crime (purchasing drugs).

      <div style="voice:jayLeno">Didja ever wonder why "Martin Luther King Boulevard" is always in the scariest, most violent neighborhoods around the country? Why is that, huh?

    10. Re:I have mixed feelings... by ZorinLynx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But uhh, gee.. We're not COPYING anything.

      I fail to see how buying an import DVD from Hong Kong is copying.

      Personally, I detest artificial market restrictions. It's just as bad as DVD region coding.

      -Z

    11. Re:I have mixed feelings... by KendyForTheState · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thank goodness I'm not 'most people'... they sound pretty stupid!

      --
      ...I just came for the free beer.
  3. Uh... by hookedup · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Hello McFly!

    You sell something in one country, other people in other countries are going to want it!
    How exactly does this make marketing sense?

    1. Re:Uh... by MindStalker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yea, but they idea that they can stop free trade of legal copies of their movies from one country to another is what is rediculus. Yes they have the freedom to market as they wish, but you simply can't control the aftermarket of legal copies.

  4. Not a fan, but if I was.. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd be fairly To'd. links should not be illeagal under any circumstances. I really think that this is a freedom of speech issue which should be tried. We need a lager group to support him, or for Miramax to attack someone who already has support.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  5. I recently bought both DVDs... by elysian1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    at my local Chinatown. They're both pretty easy to find.

  6. I cannot believe this by mirko · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was in San Francisco in September and I bought the Hero DVD in Chinatown !
    (I also got a French subtitled version of Shaolin Soccer one year and a half ago !?)
    How can Miramax be *that* late and how can they ignore that one may find these DVDs in Chinese shops ?

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:I cannot believe this by Dielectric · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Miramax isn't late, they're just busy releasing the other crap that marketing thinks middle America will like. Really good movies get the shaft with alarming regularity.

      The studios ignore the mass pirates because it's sexier and easier to go after file sharers with a big marketing campaign. To combat the pirates in China, Russia, etc, they'd need actual guns and stuff, because there are real pirates out there that will kill you if you raid their CD duplication factories.

    2. Re:I cannot believe this by mirko · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the other crap
      Well, as perceived from Europe, "Hero" had was outstanding bith in terms of picture and storytelling : not just another blockbuster. IMHO, it was the best picture of 2003, ex-aequo with Devdas, an Indian "opera".

      You'll understand if you watch the Chinese army hailing...

      About "Shaolin soccer", I have to say it was really funny, but of course, soccer doesn't seem as popular in America as in Europe...
      (I personally don't like to watch soccer but the movie made it quite enjoyable)

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
  7. This is why.... by Kenja · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is why I ordered a copy of this killer movie from Hong Kong the day Miramax said they where going to be doing the US release. Every movie Miramax has gotten its hands on has ended up being ripped apart in re-editing.

    The movie realy is good. A simple story told from several view points using a diferrent color scheme for each one. If you can, watch the original and do not go to the US release.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:This is why.... by LeoDV · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. I did the same for Shaolin Soccer, the U.S. version of which 20 minutes were cut and the movie was re-scored with shitty hip hop instead of the brilliant orchestral music of the first movie. I had the DVD one year before it came out in the U.S. and when that version finally came here I didn't even budge -- I had owned the movie for three years.

      As far as Hero is concerned, it's a fantastic movie, and definitely meant for the big screen, that's why I'm happy and grateful that it was released here (France) in its full version and glory. I saw it three times, the photography is purely brilliant, as is the storytelling, writing, fight choereography (it was refreshing to see someone else than the ubiquitous Yuen Wo-Ping).

      Why is it that Miramax is often the last studio promoting good, independent American filmmakers, but butchering the good foreign filmmakers?

  8. Miramax release dates -- hah by ceenvee703 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    the Jet Li movie Hero (set to be officially released in North America in April 2004).

    Yeah, I believe that one. Shaolin Soccer was supposed to have come out this past summer... saw trailers for it during Bend It Like Beckham and saw movie posters for it hanging in theaters. Has it been released theatrically here? No. Even if it had been, it was going to be a highly-edited version.

    That's why people end up having to buy things like Hero "illegally." In fact, I think I'll go order a copy right now... before Miramax tells eBay to cease and desist...

    --
    "This? I can make a hat, I can make a brooch, I can make a pterodactyl..."
    1. Re:Miramax release dates -- hah by ansible · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bah. I've seen the original Shaolin Soccer, and it was hilarious. Please, do we really need Hollywood editors to "fix" it for American release?

  9. Not wrong, maybe... by wrinkledshirt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The EFF also has some comments regarding the fact that Pollard has done nothing wrong in the first place.

    Whether or not he did something wrong is irrelevent. It's whether or not he did something unprofitable. Some corporations these days seem to believe they have a god-given right to profit, and that censorship and lawsuit chill is an acceptable tool to that end.

    Until the average freedom-loving American starts to wake up to this and works to get the courts to adjust, it's probably only going to get worse. What happens when they realize that not talking about it on a website doesn't curb the problem? Tinfoil hats, people, they'll be after your thoughts next.

    I'm sort of kidding, but not really. They're already blaming text messaging for ruining movie profits.

    --

    --------
    Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...

    1. Re:Not wrong, maybe... by splattertrousers · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Whether or not he did something wrong is irrelevent. It's whether or not he did something unprofitable. Some corporations these days seem to believe they have a god-given right to profit

      Companies that are out to make a profit stick around. They get investors. Most companies that aren't out to make a profit disappear rather quickly. Therefore, most companies that exist are out to make a profit. It's not evil. It's pure business.

      Companies will do what they feel they need to do to make profit or to stop losing profit.

      and that censorship and lawsuit chill is an acceptable tool to that end.

      It's both acceptable and successful. They said, "please stop telling people where to buy this DVD that our contract says shouldn't be sold in the US", and the guy in question said, "OK".

      It's not as if they passed a law that trampled this guy's rights. They just asked him to stop and he did. IMHO, he should have said "no", but he's allowed so say "OK" if he wants.

      It's just unfortunate that saying "no" would cost the guy a lot of money and time. Something needs to be done about that, IMHO.

    2. Re:Not wrong, maybe... by the_mad_poster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know, I saw a story about that somewhere and I didn't know if I should laugh or cry. They (the movie studios) were bitching that people shouldn't be allowed to have text messaging tools like cell-phones and whatnot in movie theaters because people were leaving the Hulk and similarly lame movies and TM'ing their friends not to see it. They would leave the studio and immediately let a dozen people know that the movie was a bonafide peice of Hulking (sorry) crap-a-roo.

      The justification for this idiotic "thought" process? Yep, you guessed it! It's cutting into our profits when people TM other people not to go see a movie! Ohhh... boo-frickin-hoo. At what point does the fact that your product is total shit actually kick in around here anymore? I love how these big interests are so conveniently redefining the rules so that they have a right to steal people's money in the name of "profits".

      By the way.. if you're wondering what a crap-a-roo is, it's like a kangaroo, only crappier.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    3. Re:Not wrong, maybe... by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 3, Interesting
      IMHO, the problem is that defense is too expensive. You ought to be able to hire a lawyer for one hour (e.g. $200) to get your facts straight, and then not have to pay another dollar (unless your case really needs it) until after the judge/jury has given the verdict.

      I haven't been sued yet, so I don't know what all the damned expenses are. But I strongly suspect they're bullshit. I wish someone who has stood up to a bully, would post about what all the costs were. Then we can start attacking the parts of the system that are creating these costs.

      For great justice...

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    4. Re:Not wrong, maybe... by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Not only is the private citizen doing nothing wrong when posting methods that the US consumer can purchase a product, or get the best deal on product, but the firm that thinks they can suppress such information is exhibiting increasingly unsustainable historical behavior.

      US firms pretty much want the opportunity to purchase source material or finished parts anywhere in the world, put those items together into a product anywhere in the world, engineer those products anywhere in the world, support those products anywhere in the world, and then sell those products to US consumers without any tariffs, tolls or taxes. The firms say any government imposed fees will cause unnecessary friction in trade that will only hurt the consumer. OTOH, these same firms want the government to create as much friction as possible for the consumer that attempts to find the best way to spend his or her money.

      This is really just modern imperialism pushed by multinationals. It is no different from the British government forcing the Indian people to pay a tax on a critical produce they could easily purchase themselves. This is really no different from certain countries denying their women independence by denying them an education. This is really no different from the imperialistic method of stealing local resources, manufacturing them in the imperialist country, and then selling them back to the oppressed savages. These are really just laws that limit arbitrage opportunities to a privileged few.

      US firms cannot have it all. Firms cannot claim the right to destroy communities by exporting production to cheaper labor markets, and then deny those communities the opportunity to bypass US firms in their purchasing decision. Firms cannot claim the right to limit the availability of product to the US consumer, the one basic right we still enjoy in the US, just because it will hurt the bottom line.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  10. The Failure of the Region System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The "Region system" for CD's makes no sense, as all it does is hinder sales.

    If I am in Region 1 and want one of the many Region 2 DVD's (that will never come out in Region 1), I have to get a hacked DVD player, or get a pirated/cracked version of the CD.

    Next time you see those "Movies: They're worth it" anti-piracy ads about lost revenues, remember that the movie industry is throwing roadblocks in the way of those who want to legally purchase AND view legitimately-pressed DVD's. If they wanted money, they'd make the DVD's available to those who want to buy them.

    1. Re:The Failure of the Region System by DigitumDei · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well I live in a region 2 area and I have to say that 2 out of every 3 DVD players here is "region free". That said, I think the regioning helps people like MiraMax think they can easily get away with stopping release of movies in certain regions. All part of the greater scheme of sucking as much profit out of you as possible. :P

  11. Another case of idiots in legal departments by downix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And here is Miramax proclaiming it a grand victory. It is such a victory that they just forced hundreds of formerly potential customers into p2p file sharers. Miramax must love how they're encouraging the illegal file sharing that their other movie studio bretheren have damned as dangerous. Give a hand for Miramax, another promoter of P2P technology.

    A file swapper is not born, he is created when something desired is not availible at the price desired. When that something is not availible at all, that turns all of those that wish it into p2p file junkies.

    Sorry state of affairs, honestly.

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
  12. Re:This is why....PAL. by Kenja · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As it turns out, no. The DVD I got is 100% real, multi region NTSC. The original company knew there was a US market for the movie and released several versions of the DVD that work fine in the US and UK.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  13. Exclusive rights to movies? by yar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It appears that Miramax is stating that their exclusive rights to movie distribution include the purchase of IMPORTS. Since when is it illegal to import a legal copy of a video from another country? There are import CD and movies available at video and music stores all the time.

    1. Re:Exclusive rights to movies? by dschuetz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Since when is it illegal to import a legal copy of a video from another country?

      Since always, actually. It's quite annoying.

      Remember how anal-retentive the folks who make "Beanie Babies" were a few years back? They were exercising their import-control rights so strongly that people buying legal, licensed beanies from abroad were having them seized at customs.

      Essentially, if someone owns the copyright for a product in this country, they can restrict the importation of any copies of that product from abroad, even if that product was purchased legally (and for which they already received payment).

      So, technically, I shouldn't be allowed to buy a copy of West Wing in the UK, even though WB gets a cut of the sale from their UK arm. (of course, now that they finally released it in the US, it doesn't matter).

      This has been the case for years, but it's rarely strongly enforced. Personally, I'd love to see something like this go before the courts -- I can see (but don't agree with) companies having an interest in (and rights to) regulate the wholesale importation of goods, but for individual purchases, they should go away.

      As for this particular story (which I haven't read yet), if the movies in question were available for legal sale elsewhere, there shouldn't be anything wrong with having a link on the site, even on a US-hosted site for US-based audiences, just because the web's a global medium and they could argue the link was a service for overseas readers.

    2. Re:Exclusive rights to movies? by FunkyChild · · Score: 2

      Essentially, if someone owns the copyright for a product in this country, they can restrict the importation of any copies of that product from abroad, even if that product was purchased legally (and for which they already received payment).

      Except for the fact that Miramax would not own the copyright, they would have licensed distribution rights. There is a world of difference, and although I don't live in the US, I can't see why buying the DVD from overseas would be illegal at all.

  14. Lager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    a lager group? hooray!

  15. WTF... by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whatever happened to the concept of a free market economy? Shouldn't people be able to purchase this film, and tell others where to do the same, without fear of being sued for it? What law(s) would this even violate?

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  16. A US Movie Company C & Ds a US based movie com by matchlight · · Score: 2, Informative

    A whois of kungfucinema.com shows it's registered to a person in Seattle Washington. I think that's how they can bully the guy. I'm sure if there was a HK based movie selling site, there wouldn't be much that Miramax could do, unless they also owned the HK rights to the movie as well.

    This is a classic example where even when a big corp. is wrong, making them do the right thing would cost too much time and money with almost no return.

  17. You should lose your exclusive distribution rights by mocm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if you delay distribution for more than 1 year. Some companies seem to buy up exclusive distribution rights for asian movies just to prevent them from competing with their own products. Like Disney did with Studio Gibli and Miramax with Hero, Shaolin Soccer or others. (Just try to get a DVD of Drunken Master 2).
    These tactics are in total contrast to the purpose of granting distribution or copyrights. Which should promote the arts and encourage artists to publish their work.

    --
    ***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
  18. Oh... by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey, am I breaking the law by linking to places where you can buy this DVD??

    Please C&D this post.

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  19. Of course he did something wrong! by palad1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    He did the movie a disservice by writing something about it.

    All we need to know about Shaolin Soccer and Hero can be accessed using AOL keywords SHAOLIN SOCCER and HERO.

    Move along citizen, the computer is your friend.

  20. No by IshanCaspian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The trick is, if we allow consumers to decide what they want for themselves, they will find and come to expect GOOD movies, which are much more difficult to make than "Gili". It's easier to ensure that you have a good return on your investment in a movie when you can totally control what it's competing with. Additionally, it's easier to milk each region for what it's worth, rather than having one price.

    In short, they don't care about hypothetical sales for "hero." They want kung fu fans to shut up, get out there, and start paying up for whatever they have decided is the kung fu movie for december 2003 is. Stop telling them what you want. The movie / music industries will tell you what you want, and when you can have it.

    --

    But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
  21. Similar to Anime Fansubs by starbuck8968 · · Score: 2, Informative

    This reminds me of anime fansubs you can get from newsgroups or bit torrent. While the anime isn't licensed in the US all is good and download all you want. But as soon as its licensed, the links go down (for torrent at least) and you're out of luck if you didn't get all the episodes.

    1. Re:Similar to Anime Fansubs by MooCows · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, not really
      The most important point here is that anime fansubs are technically illegal
      (you're downloading something somebody worked hard for for free, some lawyer proved this is illegal, although I can see the point)

      While if you buy a DVD from another region, you're actually spending money that goes to the producers.
      In this case you have actually bought a product

      Why should this be illegal just because you live somewhere else? It's ridiculous!
      If you aren't satisfied with the products offered in your country/region you should be allowed to purchase it somewhere else.

      --
      The path I walk alone is endlessly long.
      30 minutes by bike, 15 by bus.
  22. Shaolin Soccer by CrazyTalk · · Score: 2, Informative
    Shaolin Soccer was playing ever-so-briefly my local cinema here in the US, so I dont know what they mean by "not released". After seeing the beyond-bad previews, there was no need to see the film.

    On a side note, there is a "Shaolin Martial Arts Studio" that I often pass by, and I can't help but think of that movie and laugh (and picture kids kicking flaming soccer balls) whenever I see that sign.

    1. Re:Shaolin Soccer by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Informative

      I saw Shaolin Soccer (a dub of the hong-kong flick), its freakin' funny.

      Its a parody of martial arts movies, there is no way an american corporation can do it justice, they can only butcher it.

      However I do support cutting out the part where they sing in a restaurant...that was lame, and might have made sense to chineese viewers, but was mostly weird for me.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    2. Re:Shaolin Soccer by malducin · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not released because Miramax, which own distribution rights in the US hasn't officially released. What you probably saw was a theatre getting/importing a reel and showing it, or maybe as part of a film festival.

  23. Free trade, my ass, Disney's face by Demona · · Score: 2
    I already knew Disney and Hollywood were protectionist thugs who, like all thugs, believe in one set of rules for them and another for the proles. But I didn't realize it's gotten even worse since the last time I ranted about this same subject.

    Fuck the Mouse that Whined. Nobody has the right to interfere with free trade of lawfully obtained property between consenting adults.

    --
    Fuck Slashdot
  24. Re:This is why....PAL. by inquisitor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hong Kong is NTSC. It is also very cheap, even for legitimate discs (as this site sells). After all, if it's legal there, it's usually legal for you to import it, although not to sell. You might need an all-region player (HK being in region 3), but a lot of legit HK discs - like Shaolin Soccer - are code 0 anyway.

    Over in the UK, all of our our DVD players can play both PAL and NTSC, almost all of the cheap supermarket ones are already or can be made multiregion by remote, and certain high-street hi-fi chains sell modded MR product (I have a MR Pioneer 360 from them). Even our version of Amazon sells modded multiregion kit - the current top spot is a modded Sony DVP-NS330. Multiregion is much more widespread here, and that's a good thing for British consumers (even though most of them don't know about it). I try to let my friends know.

  25. I got to see both of those movies a long time ago! by dido · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Man, this is absolutely incredible. There was a theatrical release for both movies (which both TOTALLY ROCK!... I can only hope that Miramax & Co. don't butcher them!) here in my country a long time ago! Hero was released here late last year, and Shaolin Soccer not long after if I recall correctly. Now, Shaolin Soccer, and maybe even Hero, have actually even been popping up on the Chinese cable channels (with English subtitles, thank goodness) occasionally. Does a whole lot of good for them to be closing the barn door after the horse has already run around more than half the world for about a year ongoing, don't ya think?

    --
    Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
  26. Miramax's "rights" by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "Please be aware that Miramax Film Corp. is the exclusive licensee of the right to distribute Hero on all home video formats, as well as through other forms of exploitation in, among other territories, the United States and Canada. Your actions in this regard are completely unauthorized and violate valuable rights held by Miramax."
    What Miramax is talking about here, is purely a private deal between Miramax and the makers of the film. It is not in any way related to copyright law or the social contract to which all citizens are bound. You are not a party to this contract and not in the slightest bit bound by it.

    It is 100% legal for a US Citizen to purchase the film from an importer (or by importing it themselves) without going through Miramax. If Miramax doesn't like the fact that they don't really have exclusive control of the market, then they should sue the makers of the film for selling copies in the far east without somehow guaranteeing that none of those copies will get to America. This is ridiculously impossible to do, of course, but that's the just the nature of how impractical an exclusive distribution contract is. There's no such thing as geographical exclusive control anymore; this is a global economy.

    Miramax's argument is deception, and the person to whom they wrote the C&D, was not violating their rights.

    It's disappointing that this dude caved in. I can understand it; I might cave into bullies too, instead of paying a lot of money for defense. But there's no way he would have lost, had it gone to court.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  27. Instant review of "Hero"... by heironymouscoward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which I saw last night, since I still live in the Free World (aka Oceania).

    The movie is a telling of an old Chinese story. If you ever read Chinese mythology, you will know that they are mixed from generous helpings of love, drama, treason, duty, battle, beauty and tragedy, set in landscapes of stunning mountains and gorges, and generally featuring the epic plotlines Tolkien was inspired by when he wrote LoTR and the Hobbit.

    Hero is no different. The movie is visually stunning, a tapestry of color and force. It paints an overlapping series of stories, and the five main characters get more and more complex as the film progresses through intense red, blue, white, and green.

    The Kung Fu scenes are dreamlike and truly beautiful. Only the slightest sense of repetition spoils a few of the scenes, but it is easily compensated for by the sensuality of the filming. Yes, it is ridiculous to see people running on water or across tree tops, but this is the story of a person recounting his version o a myth. Some poetry is in order, and Hero delivers.

    The ending - which I won't divulge - is downbeat and not what I would have proposed, but this is true to the style of ancient Chinese stories, which do not - like many Western myths - celebrate the survival of the individual in the face of adversity. Rather, they tell stories of how intense personal tragedy and suffering can be placed into a greater context. A few dramatic deaths serve to highlight the lesson.

    Don't go to Hero expecting to see amazing fight scenes. It's a movie to relax with, a film to see twice, one to take your girlfriend to and to hold her when the lovers die, in true Romeo and Juliet fashion, alone on a mountain top.

    What I liked most about this film - apart from the visuals, the sound, the scenery, and the subtle plot - was its ability to portray all the characters as sympathetic, from the tyranical king, alone in his citadel of a palace, to the assassins and killers, each shown at the end to be Heroes. There are no villains in this film.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  28. Re:This is why....PAL. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The difference is in fps. NTSC has 29.97 (or 23.976) fps, while PAL has 25 fps. If you speed-up/slow-down decoding, you will run into sound issues and you have to resample sound too.

    In short, it is simpler to output NTSC signal for NTSC discs and PAL signal for PAL discs.

  29. The True Case Against Copyright by LuYu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a good example of the censorship that copyright produces. Copyright was created to increase the amount of information available to everyone. Instead, it is being used to keep people from accessing information that they would legitimately pay for.

    The movies studios want to coerce fans into seeing the movie when and where the studios choose. Rather than allowing true fans to appreciate these movies when and where the fans, the customers, might want, they block their distribution. The movie studios do this whether or not the expect to release this movie in a given market. In the end, this leaves a minority of fans who have the interest and the financial means to see a movie locked out of it.

    Whether or not the copyright holders of these movies believe they can make money in a given market, they will refuse to let people watch it. If they cannot make money, there is no incentive. If the information is not distributed, the incentive is not working for society and should not be granted to the rights holders. Either way, the movie studios are blatantly misusing their legal rights. Their legal rights exist to give enough incentive to get information to be disseminated, not to stand as a barrier to the dissemination of that information.

    An individual should be able to purchase any movie from any market that person might desire to purchase from. Just because the majority of people in one area like some given thing does not mean everybody has to. Even if the movie is released in the US market, and most Asian movies are not, it still forces the US version on people, which in many cases has parts cut out of it and may be dubbed. An individual may want to watch the movie with subtitles or in its original language or in its original state.

    The practice of restricting people by region is racist. Regionalizing is saying that because you live in such and such a country, you will pay such and such a price or watch movies in such and such a language. Because you live in such and such a country, you will know such information. What is the difference between this and bathrooms marked Colored and White? I guess Jack Valenti is more of a good-'ol-boy than we thought.

    --
    All data is speech. All speech is Free.
  30. Re:You should lose your exclusive distribution rig by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 2, Informative
    Theres also a III, but it doesn't star Jackie Chan.

    Drunken Master 1 - horrible 1970s kung-fu flick except for the fighting techniques, which are brilliant.

    DM II - The USian Legend of Drunken Master. Note if you get an Asian release of this film you will also get the end scene which was cut from the US release.

    --
    Needle Nardle Noo
  31. Re:Great movies by omega9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmm.. I just screened my copy of Shaolin Soccer for a bunch of friends at a party this weekend. It must have played at least 4 times in a row. I invite you to ask anyone that was there exactly how many times they "break into song and dance periodically for reasons unknown". One of the lead characters sings a brief serenade, which would only classify this movie as "musical-like" as much as any other movie that has anyone singing for longer then 3 seconds. Also, it's not "about a bunch of losers who use magic powers to win local soccer matches". It's a group of brothers who studied kung-fu as children and now live in modern society, one brother having the dream of finding an effective way to teach other the wonders of kung-fu. Did you pay attention when you watched this movie? You sound like a highschool jock describing opera.

    Hero is perhaps visually similar to Crouching Tiger becuase they share the same producer, Bill Kong. Tony Ching Siu Tung even directed the action, the same action director from Shaolin Soccer. And saying "the entire movie consists solely of amazing battle scenes" is crap. The action is incredible, but it stands second to the communication of personal relationships between the characters. It's a shame you weren't able to emotionaly relate to the characters at all, else it would have been an even better experience.

    --
    I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
  32. Kung Fu Dispute by radd0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Great, now everybody is Kung Fu Fighting.

    -r
  33. Re:The True Case Against Copyright-Race card. by LuYu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look at a region map, and yes there's only so much room on a disk, so a language has to be picked.
    I just have been looking at a region map, actually. Language could not be the only factor in choosing regions. Australia is in the same region as Latin America. Japan is in the same region as Europe. The DVD consortium was definitely choosing the Asians it liked better.

    If, on the other hand, that statement was meant to refer to languages on a disk, you are also wrong. Most DVDs can carry as many as five soundtracks in addition to subtitles for ten countries. In Region3: Southeast Asia, DVDs typcially have an English and two Chinese soundtracks and subtitles in Thai, Bahasa Indonesia, Tagalog, Korean (North and South Korea use the same writing system even though they are in two different regions -- maybe Region5 is the Communist region), Chinese Traditional, Chinese Simplified, Malay, Vietnamese, and of course English. Sometimes these disks have other features like extra soundtracks. Really, though, the subtitles can be considered unlimited. Text storage for subtitles will never be a significant portion of 4.7GB even if they included Ancient Mayan. So, if that was your question, no, they do not have to choose a language.

    There is only so much space on a disk for what? Segregation? There should not be any space on a disk for such a thing. People should be able to buy DVDs anywhere in the world and watch them anywhere else. When you buy something it is your possession. You own it (and before anyone considers it, I do not even want to hear the licensing argument -- it is pure BS). You should be able to access the information on it until you break it, throw it away, or sell it. No one should have the right to tell you what to do with your movie that you purchased.

    Does it upset you mightly if all the actors aren't a generic gray, and we all don't speak a universal language?
    Perhaps you missed my point. I am precisely against this. I want access to all DVDs in the world. I should be able to buy movies from India over the Internet if I like and watch them on a DVD player in Europe or on the freaking moon. My intellectual explorations should not be restricted by some fat, cigar smoking, Harvard graduated executive who thinks he is my father and knows whats best for me. I am spending my money, and I will not be told what to spend it on.

    Your post is an insult to all the people who truely suffered and died (of all races) bringing equality to the world, just so you can fulfil your personal vendeta against an individual.
    Nice flamebait. This is not a "personal vendeta against an individual". Far from it. I am against all that would restrict my freedom to learn and think. As far as freedom goes, those are the two most fundamental freedoms of all. Jack Valenti is merely one of those who is working actively to keep the people of the US, if not the people of the world, ignorant for his own profit. I am not personally against him. If you had said I had a vendetta against copyright, you might have had a halfway reasonable argument.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.
    Quite the contrary, actually. Your post has proved to me how right I actually am.
    --
    All data is speech. All speech is Free.
  34. imports for personal use explicitly permitted by Brian+Ristuccia · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since when is it illegal to import a legal copy of a video from another country?

    Since always, actually. It's quite annoying.

    Shipping in single copies of copyrighted works from abroad for personal use is permitted. So is carrying them back in your luggage when you travel. See 17 USC 602 (a) (2), the text of which follows:

    Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501. This subsection does not apply to

    [...]

    importation, for the private use of the importer and not for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time, or by any person arriving from outside the United States with respect to copies or phonorecords forming part of such person's personal baggage; or...

    There's also exemptions for government use, scholarly, religion, and educational purposes, and for libraries. You should read all of 17 USC 602 (a) before jumping to conclusions about whether it's illegal to import videos.