Author Topic: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....  (Read 2167097 times)

Offline Ari

  • Curator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8495
    • OFFALEATERS HOUSE OF THE DAMNED
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2150 on: March 27, 2012, 12:10:09 AM »
you realise we aren't supposed to own movie posters right?
An Error Has Occurred!
You can't report your own post to the moderator, that doesn't make sense!

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2151 on: March 27, 2012, 12:16:56 AM »
Pfft.

Next thing you'll say is that it's illegal to download movies.

Offline Ari

  • Curator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8495
    • OFFALEATERS HOUSE OF THE DAMNED
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2152 on: March 27, 2012, 12:27:47 AM »
 :D
An Error Has Occurred!
You can't report your own post to the moderator, that doesn't make sense!

Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2153 on: March 27, 2012, 07:53:39 AM »
Of course you can own movie posters under the first sale doctrine under US law.  You can also sue any dealer who misrepresents the originality of a movie poster.  Those issues are not impediments to taking out the tloces of the world....

Offline ddilts399

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2115
    • .5% of my collection online
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2154 on: March 27, 2012, 09:45:14 AM »
Mel,

The issue with first sale doctrine as it relates to new posters, the studios claim at NO point are the posters ever legally sold, and if any theaters paid for posters to use at the theater, that was basically a rental fee and at no point was ownership transferred. If you could put a case together proving other wise, I would absolutely love to shove it as far up Fox's hole as possible.


Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2155 on: March 27, 2012, 09:56:46 AM »
I've read the pleadings in Disney's lawsuit against MovieGoods. MovieGoods claimed it was lawfully selling original posters per the first sale doctrine. Disney never contested that MovieGoods had the right to sell original posters per the first sale doctrine. Disney only contested the sale of reproductions. They settled the case. MovieGoods agreed not to sell unlicensed repros of Disney's posters but the settlement did not limit the sale of original posters.

That case is significant because it's perhaps the only reported case where a studio directly asserted its rights with respect to movie posters. (Fox was also a plaintiff in that lawsuit).
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 10:12:20 AM by Dread_Pirate_Mel »

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2156 on: March 27, 2012, 10:05:34 AM »
Aren't the pre-1990 posters technically owned by National Screen Service, a now defunct company?

Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2157 on: March 27, 2012, 10:18:56 AM »
Aren't the pre-1990 posters technically owned by National Screen Service, a now defunct company?

Yes NSS originally owned the posters but per the first sale doctrine any ownership rights extinguished once they were sold by theater employees or poster distributors to collectors or dealers.

Offline ddilts399

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2115
    • .5% of my collection online
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2158 on: March 27, 2012, 10:23:58 AM »
I've read the pleadings in Disney's lawsuit against MovieGoods. MovieGoods claimed it was lawfully selling original posters per the first sale doctrine. Disney never contested that MovieGoods had the right to sell original posters per the first sale doctrine. Disney only contested the sale of reproductions. They settled the case. MovieGoods agreed not to sell unlicensed repros of Disney's posters but the settlement did not limit the sale of original posters.

That case is significant because it's perhaps the only reported case where a studio directly asserted its rights with respect to movie posters. (Fox was also a plaintiff in that lawsuit).

This is interesting, I never followed up to see the case outcome. The problem I forsee if at some point if pushed you have to reveal a source who had authorization to sell.

Would a receipt from a seller and a referal to:

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. CV09-4968 SJO

be enough to get them to layoff.

Offline ddilts399

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2115
    • .5% of my collection online
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2159 on: March 27, 2012, 10:24:48 AM »
I am going to send a mail to fox's ip team to see what they have to say  :)

Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2160 on: March 27, 2012, 10:37:50 AM »
Dale because you a dealer your legal concerns are different from those of a downstream collector who is several times removed from the original transfer of the posters. Clearly collectors can sue a dealer who knowingly misrepresents a poster as an original when that dealer knows it is a reprint or bootleg.

Offline ddilts399

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2115
    • .5% of my collection online
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2161 on: March 27, 2012, 10:42:09 AM »
I agree Mel, I have been laying low on Fox for years now and only putting up one or 2 after a film releases, then they hit me on Titanic last month which is a co-production with Paramount and I believe they only have influence in the foreign market in I remember correctly?. Infuriating to say the least.


Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2162 on: March 27, 2012, 10:45:51 AM »
I don't see how the first sale doctrine applies here.

Based on my reading of the law, it would only apply to lawfully owned and obtained copyrighted material by the first party. In other words, if someone purchase a painting, picture, book, record, tape, cd, dvd, software, etc., the copyright holder can not restrict the lawful owner from transferring their ownership rights (permanently or temporarily) to another individual.

The problem is, these posters were never legally owned by the person or persons that initially gave them away. If the NSS "loaned" the posters to a movie theater, and someone there gave away the poster instead of returning it, that's basically theft. Selling it to another individual does not negate that fact. Fruit from the poisonous tree in a sense. The same rationale would apply to posters given to someone by an employee of NSS who wasn't authorized by the company to transfer ownership.

So unless the poster was purchased or otherwise legally obtained from the original copyright holder (ie: the studio or NSS), any subsequent sales or transfers could still be invalidated.

Offline jayn_j

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2599
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2163 on: March 27, 2012, 11:01:38 AM »
Aren't the pre-1990 posters technically owned by National Screen Service, a now defunct company?

Well, Technicolor bought NSS and all its IP in 2000, so I would assume they own the rights.  Doubt they care.  Also, since the NSS liquidated its own warehouses and sold the bulk of what we are now trading to collectors and dealers, I would think that this would re-enforce Mel's position on first sale doctrine for the NSS material.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 11:02:05 AM by jayn_j »
-Jay-

Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2164 on: March 27, 2012, 11:06:54 AM »
The proof is in the pudding of course. Neither Disney nor Fox ever contested Moviegood's ownership or right to sell original posters and it openly continues to do so to date.

I'll download the pleadings again but I distinctly recall that Disney agreed that MovieGoods had legal ownership of its original posters per the first sale doctrine.

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2165 on: March 27, 2012, 11:58:07 AM »
Ok, well I guess if NSS actually liquidated their poster collection to individuals, that would fall under the first sale doctrine.

Regarding the enforcement of their rights, I know with trademarks, if the holder doesn't actively enforce and regulate it's usage they can actually lose the rights. This is why Google doesn't want people to verbalize their IP (ie: "go google something"). If they let people use it, especially in the common vernacular, they could lose the trademark. I don't know if copyright law has a similar caveat.

Offline CSM

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 12567
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2166 on: March 27, 2012, 12:16:59 PM »
Ok, well I guess if NSS actually liquidated their poster collection to individuals, that would fall under the first sale doctrine.


Which they did.  The majority of what currently circulates (apart from more modern posters) are from these warehouse liquidations...

Other sources are finds in old theatres and in the roofs of attics ;)
Chris

Offline ddilts399

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 2115
    • .5% of my collection online
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2167 on: March 27, 2012, 09:07:54 PM »
Well no reply today, I imagine my mail is going to go un-answered. Time to send to the geniuses who reply to mail for ebay as well!

 

Dread_Pirate_Mel

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2168 on: March 27, 2012, 09:31:45 PM »
Went back and read the Disney/20th Century Fox v. MovieGoods pleadings.

MovieGoods argued that pursuant to the first sale doctrine it had the right to sell promotional posters printed by Disney/20th Century Fox that it bought from theaters or poster distributors.  MovieGoods argued that the "first sale doctrine" did not require a monetary "sale" but rather a "transfer of title" that occurred when the studios distributed the posters to theaters.

Disney/20th Century Fox did not dispute that argument.  Disney instead went after MovieGoods' reproductions:

Under the first sale defense, Defendant [MovieGoods] must prove that (a) the copies were lawfully manufactured with Plaintiffs’ authorization; (b) Plaintiffs transferred title to the copies; (c) Defendant was the lawful owner of the copies; and (d) Defendant lawfully sold the copies.... Defendant fails on the very first element of its purported defense because the posters sold by Defendant were not lawfully manufactured with Plaintiffs’ authorization.... Defendant does not dispute that it possesses an entire department devoted to imaging with several printers capable of printing both small and large movie posters. Defendant also acknowledges that it scanned and printed movie posters. Defendant then asserts that while it printed certain posters, it did not print any of the Plaintiffs’ Works. Defendant, however, cannot put forth any evidence regarding the specific source of each of its posters and has acknowledged in deposition that it cannot determine whether or not a particular poster was printed by Defendant, thus creating an inference that Defendant manufactured the posters itself.


Ultimately the parties settled by entering into a Consent Decree that allowed MovieGoods to continue selling posters as permitted by the first sale doctrine but banning them from selling reproductions of the plaintiffs' posters.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 09:33:52 PM by Dread_Pirate_Mel »

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2169 on: March 30, 2012, 11:12:28 AM »
So I came across this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/251027895790?ssPageName=STRK:MEBOFFX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1427.l2649

A very nice condition example, but at a ridiculous price. A similar one sold at EMP for $79, and another one at HA for about $250. I tried to do a "Best Offer", and it got auto-declined. I noticed he had listed it twice before (for less!) with no takers.

So I sent the guy a message saying that I was interested, but nowhere near his asking price. I referred him to the two auctions and explained how $700 was not in line with the market value.

To which he responded:
Quote
Scroll down the page 1/3: http://www.cinemasterpieces.com/cinestarwars.htm
There are two listings on this page: $395 & $695.

This poster has a tape scar and has radio station printing: http://www.filmposters.com/movie-poster.asp?ProdID=7667
Condition is stated as fine and the price is $750.

Ended eBay Auction: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/STAR-WARS-NATIONAL-PUBLIC-RADIO-NPR-ORIG-MOVIE-POSTER-/170495415713
Assuming this in not a stock photo, it appears this one does not have the radio printing and has a similar condition. It was priced $695.


These represent a sampling more "in line" with the quality of poster we have here. There are a couple of major differences between the "very good" $79 poster and the poster for sale here: condition & printing. The poster for sale here has nothing printed in the blank space at the bottom of the page. This poster has been kept in very fine condition. It was never mounted. It has never seen the light of day. It was only recently unrolled for the first time since it was originally packaged. FYI: None of these posters were ever machine folded (as stated as a "feature" on the $79 listing).

To the new owner of the $79 poster, congratulations: for your sake, we hope it is not a fake. For the people that sold it; they did not know what they had... if it was real. In the meantime, we will continue to entertain only reasonable offers. If the poster does not sell soon for a fair value, it will go back into the collection. Maybe, after another 10 years, we will consider offering it for sale again. Legend has it that less than two dozen of these exist in such pristine condition.

It's a sad day when eBay sellers are using Cinemasterpieces retail prices to set their minimum BIN prices. And the eBay auction he cited, again a CM one, never even sold.

I responded back, letting him know that while a seller can ask anything they want for an item, that doesn't mean someone is going to actually pay that amount. I also defended EMP since he felt the need to challenge it's authenticity (ironic for a guy selling on eBay imho...). I wished him the best of luck, and told him to let me know when he changes his mind.


Offline CineMasterpieces

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 674
    • CineMasterpieces Movie Posters
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2170 on: March 30, 2012, 12:00:38 PM »

Yes, it did sell. When we sell an item directly from our website (like the poster you refer to) , we have to end the ebay listing. Most of our sales are directly from our website, not on ebay, and most of the time people pay the full asking price.

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2171 on: March 30, 2012, 12:18:37 PM »
Which is fine, and I appreciate the clarification. But there is a huge difference between a high-end (and price) retail outlet such as your website, and an auction site like eBay.

Also, the seller here didn't know that. He was simply citing your eBay auction's price (which ended without a sell on eBay) as justification for his asking price.

As you said, most of your sales come from customers who buy directly from your website - not eBay. Because people generally are willing to spend more at a "gallery" then on a second-hand market.

Bruce

  • Guest
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2172 on: March 30, 2012, 12:31:57 PM »
This once again proves that even though we sometimes get much higher prices we also regularly have real "steals" (and Dave should know, as he picks up some, as do many others who take the time to look over all our items each week, looking for those that "fall between the cracks").

Bruce

Offline enki

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 654
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2173 on: March 30, 2012, 12:53:11 PM »
Dave,

Speaking of your eBay auctions, is there a reason you haven't given positive feedback to me? I've purchased four things so far from your quarterly $0.99 auctions and have yet to get any...  :-[

Offline CineMasterpieces

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 674
    • CineMasterpieces Movie Posters
Re: Mid-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....
« Reply #2174 on: March 30, 2012, 02:11:14 PM »
We always give positive feedback after we receive it, as soon as it is left for us. It is just the way we have always done it. Just a habit I guess. :)