Slashdot Mirror
Lost Star Wars Footage Found On LaserDisc
drxenos writes "A LaserDisc purchased on eBay was found to contain raw footage from Star Wars VI: Return of the Jedi. From the article: 'The origin of the LaserDisc isn't entirely clear, but it was purchased for $699 off eBay, apparently once used to demonstrate Lucasfilm's EditDroid station — one of the first digital film editing systems sold nearly 30 years ago. Ironically, George Lucas himself never used EditDroid to make a movie; the Star Wars clips were loaded simply to show off its capabilities to prospective buyers.'"
May the force be with us all...
Write boring code, not shiny code!
We can only hope...
Will you pathetic losers ever stop wanking over that moronic movie series.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV_-oGZ0U1k
The BBC is still looking.
You don't own Star Wars anymore! You can't insert Jar-Jar into that footage!
Unless JarJar makes a cameo, I no care
It turns out these *are* the EditDroids we're looking for!
I am officially gone from
The Mon Calamari battleships shoot the Death Star first.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
So I guess there will now be a "special extended digitally remastered unseen original footage director's uncut edition" that everyone will have to buy.
Time to offend someone
shouldn't have sold it then(repossessing).
would be easy to argue that whoever has it doesn't have any broadcast rights to it of course.
And why would have stepped ON Jabba's tail instead of over it?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
It was always there.
Was the video itself on the disc digital? I doubt it. The control was computerized, fine. Also, was this system for editing *movies*? How would the resolution be good enough for projecting on a screen? I would rather find out the specifics of the system.
Mostly random stuff.
It has been known about for a while so if they were going to act I'd imagine they already would have, which is surprising. They could sell this stuff as part of the extras on yet another re-release, and there could potentially be some things they wouldn't want released (a lot of shots of Carrie Fisher in that bikini had to be dropped because of wardrobe malfunctions).
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Since it was not a part of the released film, it could be argued that it was never copyrighted. Of course the argument would cost millions...
Video or it didn't happen.
Since it was not a part of the released film, it could be argued that it was never copyrighted. Of course the argument would cost millions...
Er... what? The act of creating something - no matter what you do with it - assigns copyrights to the person who or group that creates it. If you run out with your smartphone, right now, and shoot some never-plan-to-"release it" footage, you own the copyright on what you create. Period.
You're probably confusing that basic fact with the question of whether or not the person who creates the work registers that work with the US Copyright Office. Registering the work allows you to go after an infringer in federal court, and to seek damages beyond the normal value of the work. If you don't register the work, you still own the copyright, and can use the courts to stop someone else from infringing on it, and you can sue them for what you'd normally have charged them for that use, if they'd asked you first. No punitive damages.
Federal venue for infringement or not, you make something, you own the copyrights. If you assign those rights to someone else, they own the copyrights. But someone who finds some media that contains the work? That doesn't convey copyrights.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I don't know about that but Carrie Fisher liked to party (she had a bit of a coke problem) and some people say they filmed some gang bang scenes after hours.
It's my understanding that copyright is bestowed at the moment a work is created, whether it is officially filed or not.
Since it was not a part of the released film, it could be argued that it was never copyrighted. Of course the argument would cost millions...
It could be argued but you'd be laughed out of court.
If it's CAV format laserdisc then this is a real find!
I think we're all missing the real news here, folks:
Somebody paid almost $700 for a fucking LaserDisc!!!
mind == blown.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
The coke part is certainly true, and most amusingly obvious in her glassy-eyed stare in the Star Wars Holiday Special. But the gang bang thing sounds like a Chinese whisper rumour based on the fact she did technically "feature" in a porn film, but just talks in it and doesn't get naked or anything.
Well, they have sold the content to someone. That someone is free to watch that material. However, the footage is still under copyright, so whoever currently owns the copyright can prevent it from being distributed to anyone else (except by selling the original LaserDisk).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I'd pay to see him in court arguing that he owns the rights to Star Wars.
No sig today...
I don't recall if I saw this scene in the theater, during "Jedi's" initial run, or in preview clips shown on TV, but:
There's a scene in Return of the Jedi in which Luke goes mano a mano with a storm trooper riding one of those cycles used to zip around Endor.
Luke knocks the guy's helmet off, revealing a dark haired guy with a rather skinny face.
I do know that this brief reveal was cut out of the sky cycle chase as it was shown on the Laserdisc.
Could it be on this new find?
I could just RTFA but I'm contractually obliged to bring this up whenever the subject of Star Wars material is broached.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Prior to 1978, in the US, a copyright notice was required to claim copyright. Mere creation was not sufficient. That doesn't apply to a work created circa 1983.
Until 1989, either a copyright notice or registration within 5 years was required, something which may apply in this case. My understanding is that the 1989 change in law also brought pre-1978 works which lacked a notice under copyright.
As Wikipedia puts it "Until the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, the lack of a proper copyright notice would place an otherwise copyrightable work into the public domain, although for works published between January 1, 1978 and February 28, 1989, this could be prevented by registering the work with the Library of Congress within five years of publication."
No doubt, an IP lawyer will pop up and clarify things, but the GP may be correct in thinking this may not be copyrighted. I doubt a copy of this work was registered, and it may lack a notice.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Er... what? The act of creating something - no matter what you do with it - assigns copyrights to the person who or group that creates it. If you run out with your smartphone, right now, and shoot some never-plan-to-"release it" footage, you own the copyright on what you create. Period.
That's true for works created today but the US did join the Berne Convention until 1989. Works created before this time, including Return of the Jedi, needed to be registered or at least be published with a copyright notice. This material was not published, at least not in a conventional sense.
In the fall of 1982 I saw a pre-release version of Return of the Jedi. Our high school had some connections to Lucas. An announcement was made that the front office had tickets available to a LucasFilm prescreening of "Twice Upon a Time" (I still have the large blue tickets saved away somewhere). They had booked a large theater in San Francisco for the screening. At showtime a person walked out and regretfully informed the full house that Twice Upon a Time wasn't to be shown, so instead they brought Return of the Jedi (wild cheers erupted).
Some of the special effects weren't finished, and some scenes had only rough editing. I remember several of the scenes were trimmed down quite drastically in the release version. The dance scene in Jabba's palace was really, really (really!) long. At the end of the movie we were all given a questionnaire to fill out on how we felt about various scenes.
All in all, a very cool experience for someone who grew up during the original releases of episodes 4 through 6.
Video proof or it never happened.
Well, they can't prevent it from being distributed. I mean, the cat's already out of the bag. This content is sure to be appearing on the torrent sites soon, if it hasn't already.
Prior to 1978, in the US, a copyright notice was required to claim copyright. Mere creation was not sufficient. That doesn't apply to a work created circa 1983.
In a work print or other special pressing, copyright information is likely to be overlaid on the video.
...wait till you find out about old baseball cards, or stamps!
They had to be discarded. In the clips they kept referring to it as Episode III.
It's my understanding that copyright is bestowed at the moment a work is created, whether it is officially filed or not.
Yes and no.
You're referring to what is usually called a "manuscript copyright" which only covers the work until you distribute it. The second you distribute the work at all other rules come into play. You'd have to speak with a copyright lawyer for the full details, but essentially you have to put a notice on any distributed work or you're basically giving free license to distribute and use.
The problem is whether or not you will be able to actually defend your copyright. If you don't have it formally filed then you're going to have a VERY difficult time defending it in most cases unless you can prove not only that you are the original creator, AND that you never authorized it for ANY kind of release.
In the case of the LaserDisc, it was almost certainly copyrighted under a limited release license.
I guess that part of the title is just carried over from the story, but what makes the footage "lost"? Simply the fact that it hasn't been released? Unless there's specific evidence to the contrary (which the story does not provide), there's no reason to assume the footage doesn't exist in a vault somewhere.
Video proof or it never happened.
If only there was an unreleased laser disc ...
Well, they can try, but...
FGD 135
had to use Google to find out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laserdisc that disk is huge! it looks like it is one foot in diameter. guess you had to use an external drive to watch laserdiscs on your PCs because the drive won't fit inside the case.
Who actually shot first?
Table-ized A.I.
He could always just claim Antigua & Barbados as his country of residence, and then tell Lucas/Disney to go sodomise themselves with a vibrating R2D2.
Modded troll because of your spam.
Now they just have to find a Dragon's Lair to play it on...
...and yes, at the time LaserVision discs routinely went for many hundreds of dollars. (more for porn)
What I would like to know is: Is this a pressed laserdisc or an LD-R? (Laserdisc version of DVD-R, and, yes, there were such things; I have a few.)