Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[OrionSkywalker]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I bought Fantasia via a now-defunct Disney on-line service linked to Disney Movie Rewards, and the movie unexpectedly appeared in my DMA when I signed up for that, even though you can't buy Fantasia anymore through DMA -- I think that's the same thing happening with some people having early Marvel films and some not. Depends on how you bought them and when. Kicking myself for not doing the same thing with Pinocchio, Dumbo and Bambi.

Don't forget Snow White! Disney Movies Online or DMO was Disney's 1st attempt at an online locker system. I was just about to enable the digital for alot of mine at the time that they announced that they were shuttering the service. They ended up refunding all purchases. The kicker is that DMA used the same infrastructure, so when it launched, all previous purchases were reinstated! Completely different from the marvel situation. There is a way the above poster can get Thor into his DMA. I believe he has to delete the old sd copy of the movie from his computer and then redownload it which will be in HD and will port to DMA and thus Vudu and Google as well. Would love to see a screen shot of your fantasia in Vudu!!

[GuruAskew]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1428221946.575457.jpg
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1428221957.959758.jpg
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1428221970.384728.jpg

More proof that the original film is the odd man out rights-wise.

So in summation:

1: The fact that Fox owns the rights was widely reported when Disney bought LucasFilm as opposed to an unsourced rumor from nearly 20 years ago.

2: The original film is the only movie of the 6 that has a 20th Century Fox copyright notice on the trailer.

3: The original film is the only movie of the 6 that lists 20th Century Fox as distributor/studio as opposed to LucasFilm.

4: The original film is the only movie of the 6 that is not eligible for the Disney Movies Anywhere feature.

If Disney owns all 6 films outright then how do you account for these things?

[svenge]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

If Disney owns all 6 films outright then how do you account for these things?

Protip: Ownership of a film and subsequent distribution rights are completely different legal concepts. Just because the ownership of a film changes hands doesn't negate the pre-existing contractual obligations attached to its distribution.

Since the distribution rights for ANH are still held by Fox at this point, wouldn't it make sense that it wouldn't have the same streaming services available for it than the other films whose distribution rights aren't encumbered as such?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

DVD anamorphic OT. But I would prefer a Blu-ray of it.
The current "special edition state" sucks.





I know what you two are talking about, and it's only 720p

Empire Strikes Back Grindhouse is 1080p

[Panama Jack]

Trailer and the movie pages aren't up any more. Anyone capture the trailer?

[GumballRally]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

DVD anamorphic OT. But I would prefer a Blu-ray of it.
The current "special edition state" sucks.





I know what you two are talking about, and it's only 720p

I'd take the OT dvds..sigh *tears*

[stvn1974]

I watched my widescreen VHS copies of the UOT for years then I got the nonanamorphic UOT DVDs off of ebay and just the other day I "found" the despecialized versions. I will always take lower resolution UOT over cleaned up 120K versions of the special editions.

[trainreck]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

This is a goofy question just for a little bit of fun, so don't take it too seriously but I'd still like some answers

What would you prefer if you could only have one?

Brand new modern 4K scans of the originals in their current special edition state on Blu-Ray with bellow average packaging?

or

the theatrical editions of the OT cleaned up and in anamorphic widescreen only on DVD with top of the line packaging?

I added in the packaging part because that is so important to many of you on this site...

I would take theatrical DVDs. I don't care how many K they scan it at, I don't want to hear that song at Jabba's palace in ROTJ. Cool packaging is always a plus.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

This is a goofy question just for a little bit of fun, so don't take it too seriously but I'd still like some answers

What would you prefer if you could only have one?

Brand new modern 4K scans of the originals in their current special edition state on Blu-Ray with bellow average packaging?

or

the theatrical editions of the OT cleaned up and in anamorphic widescreen only on DVD with top of the line packaging?

I added in the packaging part because that is so important to many of you on this site...

I'd take the cleaned up, anamorphic theatrical editions on DVD over 4K Blu-rays of the ever-evolving "special editions". Those special editions will never be definitive, since they're always different on each new format. Anyone who grew up with Star Wars before the '97 editions will appreciate seeing them in their purest form again, but still in decent quality in an official release.

[Joshitaka]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

The copyright notice you're referring to is merely about the title and logo. Which you keep ignoring.

Fox doesn't own the Star Wars name or the trademarked logo. But the actual footage you watch when you're watching the movie itself is owned by Fox outright.

Copyright does not protect "titles" or "logos." Those two things are only legally protected by trademark (logos, names, images, symbols, sounds).

Any copyrights related to star wars can only be in relation to matters described in the bit of information that I have copied and pasted below from the site copyright.gov:

What does copyright protect?
Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "What Works Are Protected."


Incidentally, I've done an exhaustive search through the library of congress' copyright database. I've found four entries for Star Wars (episode IV), claimed in 1977, 1978, 1997, and 2006. Claims for 1978 and 1997 were made because of the addition of subtitles and added visuals, respectively. The claimant (owner) for both is 20th century fox. A claim in 2006 (the most recent) was made regarding "all other cinematographic material," meaning dvd extras (essentially). That claim is owned by Lucasfilm. These claims are made to ensure protection for all materials and adjustments added that were not previously a part of the work.

But most importantly, the copyright claimant (owner) of the film itself, registered in 1977, is listed as Lucasfilm Ltd. Have a look for yourself. And don't be fooled by the title--which has no implication of ownership. Copyright claimant means: owner.

http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwe...05214526&SID=3

This should render the matter settled.

[GuruAskew]

You're so arrogant that you think copying and pasting an online article settles everything?

Nobody here is an entertainment lawyer but everyone can see that Fox still owns the original film per that Vudu page. And it confirms something that was recently reported as fact by a credible source.

Go to your DVD/Blu shelf and pull out an X-Men disc or a Spider-Man disc or the Batman serials from Columbia or just about any similar situations where there are similar cases where different companies own different rights. You'll see Marvel owns copyrights and trademarks for X-Men and Spider-Man and DC owns copyrights and trademarks for Batman but in all the cases I mentioned the actual films are owned by Sony or Fox.

Guys, admitting you're wrong is hard, but now is the time.

[Joshitaka]

It's not an online article. It is literally from the database of the copyright office of the library of congress.

[GuruAskew]

Your interpretation of it is wrong. Literally every adapted property shows similar trademark AND copyright notices. I edited my posts with examples above.

Go to your own collection and see for yourself. See a copyright notice in practical use before you try to pass off your inept misunderstanding as proof.

[Scarface32]

Holy Moley, you people are still arguing over this?

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

Disney doesn't do "Disney Anywhere" on titles they don't distribute. Which is why Thor isn't in my "Disney Anywhere" collection, despite it being in iTunes. Because I redeemed the code that came with the Paramount Blu-ray, before Disney started to distribute it themselves.

I added Thor and Iron Man 2 to my iTunes with the Paramount code / disc today and it is now in my Vudu via DMA. Just gotta borrow someone's Captain America disc and I'll have that too.

Originally Posted by Joshitaka

http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwe...05214526&SID=3

This linked to a Star Wars playing card copyright for me.

This Hollywood Reporter article about the Lucasfilm sale says "distribution."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr...ar-wars-527383

Working with Lucas’ lawyers at Latham & Watkins, McCarthy's team researched all copyright assignments and distribution agreements. The team eventually determined that all the important copyrights were intact and available to sell to Disney, save for distribution rights for the original Star Wars film, which 20th Century Fox maintains even after Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm closed Oct. 30.

[MechaGodzilla]

I think the mods should seriously consider creating a separate thread where people can debate the copyright thing to their hearts' content, and hopefully let this poor thread breathe.

[GuruAskew]

The "distribution rights" mentioned in that bolded passage about to owning the movie itself under any rational definition. I've said this whole thing LucasFilm owns the story. The characters. The concepts. The logo. The rights to exploit those things in any way outside of actually showing the movie itself, but when it comes to actually watching the movie Fox has it locked up tight.

The original Star Wars is a Fox title. End of story.

I have to ask: what can you do with a movie if you don't have the rights to play it in a theater, release it on a disc or a cassette or stream it to an electronic device?

The last thing this thread needs is to break down into a semantics argument. There are people who wrongly believe Disney assumed control of all 6 films when in fact only the 5 subsequent films are now Disney titles.

[Angel Eyes]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

You're so arrogant that you think copying and pasting an online article settles everything?

Nobody here is an entertainment lawyer but everyone can see that Fox still owns the original film per that Vudu page. And it confirms something that was recently reported as fact by a credible source.

Go to your DVD/Blu shelf and pull out an X-Men disc or a Spider-Man disc or the Batman serials from Columbia or just about any similar situations where there are similar cases where different companies own different rights. You'll see Marvel owns copyrights and trademarks for X-Men and Spider-Man and DC owns copyrights and trademarks for Batman but in all the cases I mentioned the actual films are owned by Sony or Fox.

Guys, admitting you're wrong is hard, but now is the time.

Its not time because they are right. Ernest is 100 percent correct.

[GuruAskew]

Except... They're not.

Another bizarre thing about this whole debate is that this thread seems to be like a mini-Twilight Zone where the only 3 or 4 people in the world who think the original Star Wars film is a Disney title are vehemently insisting its the case.

[thegoat]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

This is a goofy question just for a little bit of fun, so don't take it too seriously but I'd still like some answers

What would you prefer if you could only have one?

Brand new modern 4K scans of the originals in their current special edition state on Blu-Ray with bellow average packaging?

or

the theatrical editions of the OT cleaned up and in anamorphic widescreen only on DVD with top of the line packaging?

I added in the packaging part because that is so important to many of you on this site...

Good question! At the moment, I would say DVDs of the OT because I've watched my Blu-rays to death and it would be great to see the originals restored. If I had never purchased the 2011 set, though, I would take the 4k scans of the SEs because Star Wars in HD would be irresistible. I would always feel like I was missing out if I stuck with DVDs.