Forum - View topic

NEWS: Japanese request Fansub Removal

Ah, but a Con is different. The Con showings are only a couple of episodes, as compared to the whole thing. They are showed to a large group, and can create a buzz and desire to buy the series in order to know what happens. It isn't the same as dling all the fansubs and watching it and buying only if it is "pure".

Whether I watch the whole series at my house, or at a con, what's the difference?

I said watch, not download. Say you're at a friend's house, and you all watch fansubs, or you show them at an anime club or something. Technically, you're still breaking the law by watching it.

littlegreenwolf wrote:

I said watch, not download. Say you're at a friend's house, and you all watch fansubs, or you show them at an anime club or something. Technically, you're still breaking the law by watching it.

It's the distribution part that is illegal, not the actual viewing of it.

Cassandra wrote:

littlegreenwolf wrote: I said watch, not download. Say you're at a friend's house, and you all watch fansubs, or you show them at an anime club or something. Technically, you're still breaking the law by watching it. It's the distribution part that is illegal, not the actual viewing of it.

Vewing in one's private home is acceptable and allowed. However, viewing at a club which would by definition be a public showing, if a fee is charged for the viewing of said fansub, or not. that is a violation of the copyright laws.

Mohawk52 wrote:

Cassandra wrote: littlegreenwolf wrote: I said watch, not download. Say you're at a friend's house, and you all watch fansubs, or you show them at an anime club or something. Technically, you're still breaking the law by watching it. It's the distribution part that is illegal, not the actual viewing of it. Vewing in one's private home is acceptable and allowed. However, viewing at a club which would by definition be a public showing, if a fee is charged for the viewing of said fansub, or not. that is a violation of the copyright laws.

It actually depends on whether or not you get permission from the license holders. If a title is licensed...let's use Wolf's Rain as an example, you can ask the license holder (Bandai, in this case) if you can show the title. If Bandai says OK, then you're all good. If they say no, then you can't show it. If there isn't a US licensor, as far as I know, there is no real international copyright law about showing stuff. Or at least the Japanese companies don't seem to care about it.

Cassandra wrote:

It actually depends on whether or not you get permission from the license holders. If a title is licensed...let's use Wolf's Rain as an example, you can ask the license holder (Bandai, in this case) if you can show the title. If Bandai says OK, then you're all good. If they say no, then you can't show it. If there isn't a US licensor, as far as I know, there is no real international copyright law about showing stuff. Or at least the Japanese companies don't seem to care about it.

They most definately care, when they are aware as this news report atests, and that, as you describe, wouldn't be a "fansub" then, would it?

EDIT: I finally figured out what you meant by that last part I'll use the Kare Kano example:
Right Stuf licensed Kare Kano.
Otakon wanted to show it before the R2 DVDs were out.
Otakon obtained permission from Right Stuf to show a fansub (a sub made by fans) of Kare Kano.
At Otakon 2000, almost the entire series was shown fansubbed. It was still before Right Stuf got the legit versions out.

Mohawk52 wrote:

EDIT: I finally figured out what you meant by that last part I'll use the Kare Kano example: Right Stuf licensed Kare Kano. Otakon wanted to show it before the R2 DVDs were out. Otakon obtained permission from Right Stuf to show a fansub (a sub made by fans) of Kare Kano. At Otakon 2000, almost the entire series was shown fansubbed. It was still before Right Stuf got the legit versions out.

The copy wouldn't be a fansub. The subbers may be fans, but the copy (and translation) still would be official.That's the difference. What Otakon showed would of been called an ephemeral copy. Ephemeral copies are copies of a product created specifically to assist in the preformance, broadcast, and / or distribution of that product. They are more commonly called dubs or back-up copies. Otakon made a dub of Kare Kano to show.

All anime dubs and subtiled releases are ephemeral copies of their Japanese originals.

Another example / analogy: I use mp3 files for broadcasting on Toon Radio.net, not the original CDs that I bought. Since I have an ephemeral license, I can play them in any public venue (I also have a performance license), including anime cons, without having to bring my CDs with me. My mp3s are considered offical copies, that is created by the copywrite holders themselves, even though I or another fan did the actualy encodings.

No, it's still a fansub. (I believe the fansub group was called PeroPero and that was the only title they fansubbed.) Just because the licensor gave permission to use it does not make it official in any way, shape or form. If it was a copy of the R1 DVD, yes, it would be official. But it was not. (And the R1 DVD did not come out until about 2 years later.)
As for the MP3s, if you have the CDs then it is legal. However, if you do not own the CDs and just have the MP3s, that is a totally different ballpark.

When the American company buys the rights to a show, they buy the DISTRIBUTION (and usually now "broadcast") rights to the program. As such, they can distribute the show in any format they choose. They normally distribute the show in top quality DVD format (or formerly master quality VHS tapes) because if THEY tried to sell you a copy of a tv broadcast recording, no one would buy it and everyone would scream at them. But if they (who now holds the US rights to a series) allow someone else to show it, the "fansub" is now an "official" copy. Have you seen "in progress" versions companies sometimes bring to conventions? They're often no better and sometimes worse (in quality) than fansubs, but they're just a step in the process and are totally "legit".
Anyway, you're just arguing semantics now. Bottom line is that once a company buys the US rights it is THEIR choice to distribute and/or prosecute, any UNbought series is the sole choice and decision of the Japanese owners. When fansubs were traded in limited numbers across tapes, they were like doujinshi, they promoted the show and it wasn't in the companies best interests to confirm their "existence" OR chase down the people responsible. Personally I think this is still the case, but we shall see.

Otakon wanted to show the series so they asked Right Stuf for permission.
Right Stuf wanted to advertise the show a bit so they gave Otakon permission to show a fansub.

That doesn't make the tapes anymore legal than they were before the show got licensed.