RE: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize

Griest, Bryan (
Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:12:15 -0800

Just to make myself understood on this particular point, I wholeheartedly
agree with Gary. I am not advocating for the public performance of "Eyes",
but only for my institution's downloading of it to retain "ownership" of the
work itself, solely for the purpose of allowing citizens/patrons of ours to
see it for themselves. That these two ideas probably contradict each other
*in this instance* has not escaped my notice . . .
Bryan Griest
Glendale Public Library

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Gary Handman
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 10:58 AM
Subject: RE: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize

I allso have problems with public showing of ANY film or video without
securing rights (regardless of the current distribution status of the work)

I have NO problem whatsoever with preserving my collections within the
broadest provisions of current copyright law.

At 10:38 AM 1/27/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>I think Jessica is right here. Though I wish this were available for
>purchase, I have real problems with this going on.
>Michael Brewer
>Slavic Studies, German Studies & Media Arts Librarian
>University of Arizona Library A210
>1510 E. University
>P.O. Box 210055
>Tucson, AZ 85721
>Voice: 520.307.2771
>Fax: 520.621.9733
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jessica Rosner []
>Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:30 AM
>To: videolib
>Subject: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize
>Just a few thoughts on the idea of downloading & showing this.
>Is EYES ON THE PRIZE in a superspecial category of cultural significance
>that it merits this or would the same apply so something in a very similar
>circumstance the HOLLYWOOD- THE PIONEERS series ? Who gets to decide which
>films are so important that copyright does not apply ? Also the idea of
>public showings would indicate that the organizers believe any film should
>be allowed to be shown to an audience irrespective of copyright.
>What I found MOST interesting was the web sites claim that showing this
>was NOT an act of civil disobedience but essentially a public right.
>If they are so convinced that copyright law is in essence morally wrong to
>prevent EYES ON THE PRIZE from being in print and available for public
>showings ,THAN WHY ISN"T DOWNLOADING it an act of Civil Disobedience ? It
>is clearly an illegal act but if their belief is that the law is WRONG than
>surely they should be willing to acknowledge and accept the consequences of
>such an act (i.e. the possibility of legal action) I find this a HUGE cop
>out. Kind of ironic given that the film in question is about be willing to
>take physical risks for their beliefs and these people don't even want to
>acknowledge legal risks.
>Given the multitude of rights complications on EYES ON THE PRIZE ( singling
>out singing Happy Birthday was red herring in terms of the rights issues)
>it is kind of easy to go after it and suggest a protest. However if this
>group is so convinced that copyright should NOT prevent important films
>being available for both public & private use they ought to be willing to
>show SONG OF THE SOUTH or perhaps downloading & showing Charles Burnett's
>wonderful KILLER OF SHEEP. The first is being kept permanently off the
>market by Disney, the second involves a lot of expensive & uncleared music.
>If they are so sure of legal & moral correctness of their position at least
>test it with good old Disney or be willing to screw an independent film
>The idea sounds nice but who gets to decide what is and is not worthy of
>copyright protection and under what circumstances ?
>Proud Resident of a BLUE STATE
>Jessica Rosner
>Kino International
>333 W 39th St. 503
>NY NY 10018
>Videolib mailing list
>Videolib mailing list

Gary Handman
Media Resources Center
Moffitt Library
UC Berkeley


"Movies are poems, a holy bible, the great mother of us."
--Ted Berrigan

Videolib mailing list

Videolib mailing list