Was this considered 'piracy' back in the day? ( lemmy.zip )

Back when we would record onto VHS, is that considered piracy? Found a super bowl XXXI tape from my Uncle circa 1997. I'm curious lol.

Also side note, have any of you dabbled in digitizing old VHS? Have quite a few home videos on VHS and I'm wanting to preserve them for the future. I've done a bit of research and have come across a wide array of information. I know that doesn't really qualify as piracy, if there's a better comm for this, please direct me there!

KingThrillgore ,
@KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml avatar

You know what I think is funny? The NFL doesn't have any footage of Super Bowl 1, the only known tape of the game is held by a private collector, but he can't watch it due to the NFL copyright. So its sitting in an Iron Mountain facility in the Poconos. And its deteriorating.

SoleInvictus , (edited )

That's actually an urban legend. Most of it was shown again by the NFL back in 2016 after they used various incomplete sources to patch the majority of the material back together.

The bit about the tape has a grain of truth to it. A man found a copy of most of the show in his father's attic, had it restored, and wanted to sell it to the NFL but the two parties couldn't agree on a price. The man and the curator of the organization which restored it both had watched it. It was then kept in a vault due to its value.

It was recently shown to the public by the organization that restored it, so I'm assuming it was never purchased by the NFL. Bummer for the finder.

Edit: I haven't watched all of this, but it appears to be on YouTube. Grab a copy before the NFL finds out!

oktux ,

I did a lot of research on digitizing old VHS tapes and ended up going with a local, professional service to have mine converted.

If you want to do it yourself, this site and its associated forum are a great starting place to learn how: https://www.digitalfaq.com/editorials/digital-video/professional-analog-workflow.htm

Ilandar , (edited )

Not in Australia. Relevant section of the Copyright Act 1968 as it would have existed back then, for those interested:

Click to view

COPYRIGHT ACT 1968

  • SECT 111
    Filming or recording broadcasts for private and domestic use

(1)
The copyright in a television broadcast in so far as it consists of visual images is not infringed by the making of a cinematograph film of the broadcast, or a copy of such a film, for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made.

(2)
The copyright in a sound broadcast, or in a television broadcast in so far as it consists of sounds, is not infringed by the making of a sound recording of the broadcast, or a copy of such a sound recording, for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made.

(3)
For the purposes of this section, a cinematograph film or a copy of such a film, or a sound recording or a copy of such a sound recording, shall be deemed to be made otherwise than for the private and domestic use of the person by whom it is made if it is made for the purpose of:

(a) selling a copy of the film or sound recording, letting it for hire, or by way of trade offering or exposing it for sale or hire;
(b) distributing a copy of the film or sound recording, whether for the purpose of trade or otherwise;
(c) by way of trade exhibiting a copy of the film or sound recording in public;
(d) broadcasting the film or recording; or
(e) causing the film or recording to be seen or heard in public.

The same laws still apply today, just reworded. By the way, this practice of recording live TV is known as time shifting.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines
    •