Classic Milwaukee tv clips

[jeffski]

:eek: Just came across this link on youtube..most clips are from the mid 80s but there are a few 70s gems. Enjoy! :  http://www.youtube.com/user/milwaukeetvmadman

[Gamera]

Yeah, I noticed that a few months back.  There are some really great memories in there and I'll check in from time to time.  I wanted to share that awhile ago too but wasn't sure if some would overreact to with copyright concerns and cause him to shut down.

[Dick Nitelinger]

Yeah, I noticed that a few months back.  There are some really great memories in there and I'll check in from time to time.  I wanted to share that awhile ago too but wasn't sure if some would overreact to with copyright concerns and cause him to shut down.

So if the station objects to the posting of their materials on a website not connected to them, you consider that an overreaction?

[Gamera]

So if the station objects to the posting of their materials on a website not connected to them, you consider that an overreaction?

Depends on the definition of "the materials" I suppose but generally, no.  That's between the station and the website.  And if "the station" wishes to pursue that option they're entirely within their right.  Whatever I think doesn't matter in this scenario.  Given the crowd here, if my sharing the website caused exposure that resulted in me no longer being able to enjoy the clips, I'd have nobody to blame but myself.  It's not my place to police copyrights.  Therefore I kept silent.

Besides, let's be realistic here.  We're talking about old, grainy VHS transfers of C. C. Conrad wiggling her fingers and ads for Phil Tolkan selling a 1971 Chevy for $688 that includes a cabbage patch doll.

[LoadStar]

Depends on the definition of "the materials" I suppose but generally, no.  That's between the station and the website.  And if "the station" wishes to pursue that option they're entirely within their right.  Whatever I think doesn't matter in this scenario.  Given the crowd here, if my sharing the website caused exposure that resulted in me no longer being able to enjoy the clips, I'd have nobody to blame but myself.  It's not my place to police copyrights.  Therefore I kept silent.

Besides, let's be realistic here.  We're talking about old, grainy VHS transfers of C. C. Conrad wiggling her fingers and ads for Phil Tolkan selling a 1971 Chevy for $688 that includes a cabbage patch doll.

I believe this right here is PRECISELY what "fair use" was made for. It's not for profit (at least not to the poster - maybe to YouTube, but that's an incidental profit IMHO) sharing of the videos, for education, commentary, and criticism. Additionally, since there remains absolutely no market for these videos in any other venue, sharing these videos therefore has no impact on their value to the copyright holder.

So yes, I would personally believe that any copyright holder that gets upset about these videos would be overreacting.

[Dick Nitelinger]

I believe this right here is PRECISELY what "fair use" was made for. It's not for profit (at least not to the poster - maybe to YouTube, but that's an incidental profit IMHO) sharing of the videos, for education, commentary, and criticism. Additionally, since there remains absolutely no market for these videos in any other venue, sharing these videos therefore has no impact on their value to the copyright holder.

So yes, I would personally believe that any copyright holder that gets upset about these videos would be overreacting.

Hmm...I didn't recall that the question was put to you.

It will be interesting to see if what passes for "fair use" nowadays survives a serious challenge. In my professorial days, we were instructed that it covered our copying a graph or excerpt and using it in a class with a limited attendance, etc. That is different from popping a whole slew of clips up on a world-wide website that is accessible to millions of people. The stations may not care because the clips are old and it brings them some publicity, but if they do, I, for one, don't think it's an overreaction.

- Dick :OnAir:

[Gamera]

Whether or not the question was posed to LoadStar, he has a great point.  It's an interesting issue that is being played out all over the world right now thanks to the internet.  I personally believe a great many copyright laws need to be updated and adjusted to keep them relevant thanks to new technologies that just didn't exist yesterday.  Content creators should be entitled to their content, although common sense dictates that once that content is shared and mass produced you will lose some control over it.  I believe the laws should better address this.  Again, I'm no lawyer.  I think it's just common sense though.  You can't ignore the technology or its potential to work for you.

What I find particularly interesting though is that in my short time on these boards each time an issue like this has arisen, it hasn't been the network folks that have voiced their opposition.  Instead it's Mr. Nitelinger, almost as if he was the copyright holder.  And while he may have some permission thanks to his local connections, his site and objectives would seem to parallel those of these other similar sites.  :huh?:

[LoadStar]

The stations may not care because the clips are old and it brings them some publicity, but if they do, I, for one, don't think it's an overreaction.

- Dick :OnAir:

Just to clarify a point: A lot of the commercials in the aforementioned collection on YouTube aren't even station promos, they're commercials from local and national businesses. The stations don't hold the copyright to those. In the vast majority of cases, the copyright holder doesn't even exist at this point.

Yes, the stations could object to the posting of their promos, bumpers, and such (though I think fair use would still apply), but they have no standing to object to the posting of the rest of the commercials.

[John L]

I see a lot of videos on u-tube in which some are copyrighted material. Being the viewer and knowing whats copyright, I expect the person who uploaded the video has made arrangements with the owner or company as far as the rights to put it on u-tube.  Such as the case of some high school musicals like "Joseph and His Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat", "Music Man, and "Oliver!". Personally the people uploading them, I doubt they realize it is copyright and having a video of the play themselves even thou they have it for private use is probably illegal.  There is a online form that can be filled out on u-tube for any copyright owner to file if he sees any of his material illegally online.  Actually anyone can fill it out, but before you do be sure you know whether the person has an illegal copy, because afterall they may have made arrangements to purchase or obtain copyrights.  I would hope for their sake they have done that, otherwise they could be fined.  You do know that people who have friends or relatives in stage plays like to videotape them and that is illegal to do so even if its for private use only.

-John L.

[Dick Nitelinger]

What I find particularly interesting though is that in my short time on these boards each time an issue like this has arisen, it hasn't been the network folks that have voiced their opposition.  Instead it's Mr. Nitelinger, almost as if he was the copyright holder.  And while he may have some permission thanks to his local connections, his site and objectives would seem to parallel those of these other similar sites.  :huh?:

As I recall this is only the second time I've responded to something involving copyright issues here. The first was when (I think it was you.) posted a link to an animation they had done (which I liked) based upon a photo that appears with permission on my website.

I seem to recall pointing that out, as well as the fact that asking permission had some benefits, as it built up goodwill with the copyright holders. The individual posting the material was told by someone at the station that an element that appears in the material (the WVTV ID cube) was copyrighted.

Likewise, I took issue with the analogy that one could copy a song without telling the original copyright holder. You may get away with it without the original copyright holder knowing,  but that doesn't mean that it is right, or that one wouldn't be subject to a license fee.

In the case of this thread, I took exception to your statement re: that you were worried that someone would overreact and shut the page in-question down. If the original copyright holder objects, how is that overreacting? I have no claim to any of that material, and so can't object, but I can take exception to the idea.

Yes, I have permissions. Some years ago, when I passed along a request I'd received from someone re: wanting to use materials the station had provided to me, a station manager told me:

Dick, the permissions that you have already been granted are for use in your own written publications and on your website.  I'd like the permissions to stop there.  

(Station name) is not now and does not want to be in the business of supplying materials to collectors, etc.  And we feel it is important to protect our copyrights.  You have been very respectful of those copyrights.  We trust you.  We don't know who we can trust beyond that.

I earned that respect, and am quite proud of having done so. I've been given unprecedented access to historical materials by the local Milwaukee stations because I've always respected their copyrights. I'm suggesting that others might earn the same respect if they too ask for permission.

- Dick :OnAir:

[techguy1975]

One thing that strikes my mind, especially in regards to the old commercials...  Do people still hold any copyright to these?  If I recall, copyrights have to be renewed every X years. Take for example "Its A Wonderful Life" sometime in the 80's, someone forgot to renew the copyright on it, it fell into the public domain for a brief time.  As one person pointed out, alot of those businesses just don't exist anymore, any copyright claim they had would probably disappeared when the business closed, or just expired on its own and never used.

I find it highly unlikely that if one of the local stations found their clips on their that they would make a huge stink at first, they may send a Cease & Desist (SP??) order and demand the clips be taken down, which can be done quickly and easily, then the problem ends, unless the person who posted them decides to be difficult.