used books?I really don't think that changes anything. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that there's no exception saying you can sell something you don't have the rights to as long as you only sell it once.
SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.used books?I really don't think that changes anything. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that there's no exception saying you can sell something you don't have the rights to as long as you only sell it once.
I think this sums up the guy's quandary. He has something of value, but only 1 "customer" he can sell it to legally and hassle free. That "customer" would love to have it, but they know he has nowhere else to go.I really don't think that changes anything. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that there's no exception saying you can sell something you don't have the rights to as long as you only sell it once.
Not 100% sure of what restrictions they had in the 60s broadcast but am pretty sure 99.9% I am correct about this. It would be like you recording the game Saturday and then selling it. If the NFL wants to give a reward (pay) for it then this is the only deal which would work. Anyone else who buys it would be in the same boat.Are you sure? I'm sure they can't sell it for re-broadcast, but as a private sale for personal use only?
used books?
Like you, I have no idea what laws were in place in the 60's, but I do know that if I get the ole' VCR out of the attic and record tomorrow's game onto a VHS tape, it would be illegal for me to turn around and sell that tape, even if it's my only copy and I made no other copies.Not 100% sure of what restrictions they had in the 60s broadcast but am pretty sure 99.9% I am correct about this. It would be like you recording the game Saturday and then selling it.
The fellow who has it can either hold on or take the $ from the NFL. They don't have any other options realistically.
Exactly. You can't sell recordings (which is essentially a reproduction since you're reproducing it on whatever medium it's being recorded to) of any commercial broadcast, since it's a recording of someone else's work.It's a different situation. You can sell a used commercial DVD after all, but not a DVD you recorded from a live broadcast.
EDIT: Or to put it another way, the recording you make of a broadcast is a copy, not an original.
Unpopular opinion because everything that involves the NFL must be spat on since they screwed Tom Brady.Have to side on the NFL this time. Who the **** does that guy think he is? He didn't pay to produce it! Does he own the NFL films? Does he own the TV station that broadcast the game? If he were a true Packer fan or Chefs fan he would just donate it. **** him.
Otherwise, the guy recorded the game, large parts of the 3rd quarter are missing and he wants $1,000,000 and is holding it hostage from fans who wish to see it, since he has no real rights to the broadcast.
Even more reason he has no reason to be asking for $1,000,000.In fact, the guy didn't even record the game -- his dad once worked for the company that did record the game. No word on how he came to possess the tape.
Those who read my posts know that I am quick to attack Goodell and NFL for almost any reason (hey, I stood outside the Federal Courthouse in downtown Manhattan last summer and booed Goodell on the sidewalk). But, in this case, I have to side with the NFL.
It seems pretty clear to me that the tape is the property either of the NFL or the Network that broadcast it.
Simply because the guy who has the tape "has the tape," doesn't mean that his ownership rights supersede those who have a legitimate claim to it.
I'd be very interested in knowing how this guy came into possession of it in the first place. Was it given to him by someone who had legitimate access to it or did it "fall off the back of a truck" as Tony Soprano used to like to say.
I think the offer of ~$50,000 can be regarded as a reasonable gesture of gratitude by the League for the possessor's taking care of the film for all these years. I'd also think that up to $100,000 would be reasonable.
But no one--even the godawful NFL-- should be extorted by another party who has something that belongs to them, so, IMO, it's not right to ask for a million dollars.
Like a lot of art of questionable provenance (i.e., stolen or misappropriated), this tape will probably end up in the hands of a private collector who will be content to sit on it and show it only to family and highly trusted friends. But, if I were the guy who has it today, I'd be very concerned about the FBI setting up a "sting" to entrap me.
I don't know anything about the negotiations that took place, but from what I know from someone who had access to a private viewing at the Paley Center (where the tape was restored), the broadcast is heavily edited. Because tapes were costing a fortune back then, most huddles were edited out, along with halftime and almost all of the 3rd quarter. It's quite possible that the NFL looked at it, and decided that it could never air as such with all the edits, thus it has no value other than to add it to their archive.
Well, since he won't identify himself, one can't make a case as to whether it is "legally his" one way or the other. However, I think it is reasonable to question the provenance of the tape and whether he has legitimate possession of it since he won't identify himself. Until we can know how the person who possesses the tape came into its possession, we can't say whether or not he possesses it legally. Just "having" something doesn't make it "yours."Who are you to decide what is a fair value? Also, the tape is not the property of the NFL or any Network. They have no right to it. Unless someone makes a valid claim that holds up in court that this guy got it illegally, then it is legally his. If it hasn't happened to this point, it seem pretty unlikely that it will. That being the case, he is the legal owner of a piece of league history. If the league wants it they should pay fair value. In this case, the owner decides what's fair value because, presumably, this transaction can only happen between the owner the league. If the league wants it, better pony up the dough.
Ya I was wondering that too. Obviously, at the time, no one had the first clue that the NFL would become what it is and that footage would be worth saving. Maybe his brother worked at the station and said "hey here's something cool - keep it" or something like that.I'd be very interested in knowing how this guy came into possession of it in the first place. Was it given to him by someone who had legitimate access to it or did it "fall off the back of a truck" as Tony Soprano used to like to say.
As mentioned before, I have no idea what the rules were in the 60's, but here in the current day that is not how it works. If I go to a store and buy a VHS tape, that VHS tape is legally mine. If I record tomorrow's Patriots game on it, the VHS tape is still legally mine, but the intellectual property on it is not, and I have no legal right to sell that tape to anyone else. I don't even have the right to broadcast it for free if I wanted to.Who are you to decide what is a fair value? Also, the tape is not the property of the NFL or any Network. They have no right to it. Unless someone makes a valid claim that holds up in court that this guy got it illegally, then it is legally his. If it hasn't happened to this point, it seem pretty unlikely that it will. That being the case, he is the legal owner of a piece of league history. If the league wants it they should pay fair value. In this case, the owner decides what's fair value because, presumably, this transaction can only happen between the owner the league. If the league wants it, better pony up the dough.