a disagreement

[Knowname]

you know I've always thought that fansubs (unlicensed anime) were legal, are they? At least outside of Japan aren't they fair use??

I used an OCRemix song for an amv, it's unlicensed. Is it considered legal??

[Kionon]

you know I've always thought that fansubs (unlicensed anime) were legal, are they? At least outside of Japan aren't they fair use??

Fair use? Maybe. Legal? No. Because they still detract noticeably from sales, especially softsub. Next time you are [insert inappropriate pirate activity here] check to see how many Japanese IPs show up. Not all of those are gaikokujin/kitajin. Most of those people are ethnic Nihonjin.

[The Wired Knight]

Dude! What the hell happened to your posts?

And no, fansubs are not legal under any respect because you are essentially uploading a full product for free that is someone else's property. AMVs can use it because they are a transformative use that does not affect the commercial aspect of the original product. Providing something free that is the same as another commercial product is a blatant violation for which fair use will not apply.

Remember, fansubs are distributing for free what people would otherwise have to pay for which hurts the copyright owner.

[Bauzi]

this is the basic arguement. my step father says there is no legal way to make amvs that can be shared to the public. and i say there is. he works for comcast in their technical support division. is he wrong or am i. keep in mind i am seventeen.

Your stepfather is somehow right. However there is a way. I got permission from an artist to use his song for an amv and I know plenty of site too with free music wich you can use for non commerce videos. These songs are not unlicensend theire licensed with a form of the Creative Commons license.

On the other side you need the anime studios to agree.

The Boom Boom Satelittes VJ Contests show that a completly legaly made AMV in the real world is possible.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Remember, fansubs are distributing for free what people would otherwise have to pay for which hurts the copyright owner.

When they show up on DVD, sure, but before then, they are (in many cases) a free-to-air product with no method of support (the legality of DVR and time shifting negate any legitimate "but what about commercials?" arguments).

[Zarxrax]

Remember, fansubs are distributing for free what people would otherwise have to pay for which hurts the copyright owner.

When they show up on DVD, sure, but before then, they are (in many cases) a free-to-air product with no method of support (the legality of DVR and time shifting negate any legitimate "but what about commercials?" arguments).

And it's still blatantly illegal. That would be like telling the RIAA that it's ok to share their songs because they are played on the radio for free.

[mirkosp]

Remember, fansubs are distributing for free what people would otherwise have to pay for which hurts the copyright owner.

When they show up on DVD, sure, but before then, they are (in many cases) a free-to-air product with no method of support (the legality of DVR and time shifting negate any legitimate "but what about commercials?" arguments).

And it's still blatantly illegal. That would be like telling the RIAA that it's ok to share their songs because they are played on the radio for free.

Except that anime still isn't on DVD when it's being shown on tv and there is no other way to watch it somewhere else in the world besides getting RAWs or fansubs, while music that is played on the radio is already out on CD and is most likely available worldwide on said support.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Remember, fansubs are distributing for free what people would otherwise have to pay for which hurts the copyright owner.

When they show up on DVD, sure, but before then, they are (in many cases) a free-to-air product with no method of support (the legality of DVR and time shifting negate any legitimate "but what about commercials?" arguments).

And it's still blatantly illegal. That would be like telling the RIAA that it's ok to share their songs because they are played on the radio for free.

Actually, IIRC, the preponderance of precedent is in favor of time shifting.

[Zarxrax]

Timeshifting something for your own personal use however, is totally different than putting something up online for thousands of people to download.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Timeshifting something for your own personal use however, is totally different than putting something up online for thousands of people to download.

It'd take a while to cite the sources (and i'm actually editing for once, so i don't want to spend the day browsing Ars) but there is precedent for a (successfully defended) business model where a "not your house" location is responsible for the actual recording for the time-shifting device at your request. Using the defense of time shifting and this content distribution model (that is actually used by many cable companies) a model of RAW acquisition upon request could be defensible with soft subs as multi-lingual accessibility services (no different than ACLU-backed translations for Spanish speakers).