"Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Probably not but, if we only kept the useful and pleasant threads going, imagine how empty the discussion boards would be!

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Exactly. Any film buff is going to have movies they want to see that have never been released on VHS, LD or DVD and yet I'm suppose to hold out for a pristine looking print of something no one but a small group will want to see.

Silent films are hard enough to sell and just because it's Hitchcock doesn't mean people are going to pay high prices for it. Do people think there's a big demand for a $40 version of YOUNG AND INNOCENT? Is there anyone really holding out for a 2-disc SE of EASY VIRTUE? It's not like we're talking VERTIGO or PSYCHO here. And please, no one say all movies should be treated the same. It's a great thought but it's a fantasy. Not every movie is going to be remastered and released to DVD or Blu-Ray so if you want to see a film you have to see it anyway you can.

I've got over one thousand PD movies sitting here and I've probably got 1000+ silent shorts here that will never get released. Perhaps never is too strong of a word but it hasn't happened in the past 30 years so why should I expect or hold out for it happening in 2008?

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Well, companies in the UK had no problem with doing full restorations or at least high quality remasters. I just shelled out for the R2 Universal box set of Laurel & Hardy films and Carlton's good The African Queen DVD. One can go onto Amazon.com and obtain bootleg DVDs of the L&H features that Lionsgate has not released.

Lionsgate seems to have the DVD rights to the rest of the StudioCanal films, but Criterion can get the ones owned by Granada/Carlton (like The 39 Steps and The Lady Vanishes). They could probably put out an Eclipse set of those films. I think it would consist of Sabotage, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Secret Agent, and Young & Innocent. Lionsgate has enough StudioCanal films to make two more 5-disc sets like their first collection. It doesn't really matter whether or not they're great films, though. The name recognition is there. Why do you think Warner and Universal bothered to put out Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Stage Fright, Topaz, and Saboteur? If price is the issue... would you still side with the crappy PD label versions if the official DVDs were out with a higher price? That's basically the reasoning behind theft.

I think non-profit bootlegs are sometimes needed in very rare cases, but not when every film in question is available in mostly pristine quality in R2. Except for Easy Virtue, all one has to do is import in order to have a steady line of high quality DVDs from Hitchcock's first film to his last.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

The point Brian was making is that those R2 discs are not meant to be sold here. You are not suppose to own a region free player in this country. There's reasons for a regional code and there are reasons why they are used. If the right owners of MURDER agree for a Spanish company to release it in Spain, as a PAL R2 release, those rights are not for it to be released or seen in America.

Thankfully most right owners don't go after this type of thing but I believe Miramax went after a few stores in America that were selling R2 discs of movies they owned for R1 release. There have been a couple Jess Franco titles that were released in R2 and the R1 owners put a stop to their sale.

Hacking into a DVD player to make it region free is illegal. It's just as illegal as the dozen $1 DVDs of THE SKIN GAME out there. You can't be against one and for the other IMO.


But they also own countless L&H films, which haven't been released. They own all sorts of Arkoff titles, which have gone unreleased the last two years. In both cases they (Lionsgate) started a collection and apparently stopped because they weren't happy with sales. From what I've been told the Hitchcock set didn't sell very well or at least not up to what the studio wanted. Like you, I bought that R2 L&H set three years ago because I was tired of waiting.

I own hundreds of R2 titles and what have they done? They've taken money away from the studios in America. I own 15-20 Paramount titles that they haven't released here because I was tired of waiting. If Paramount gets around to releasing these then I still won't buy them since I already own them. That means Paramount loses money. I'm sure Miramax lost money on their KILL BILL release because people bought the uncut Japanese disc. I guess it's the same for Criterion who is losing money by someone buying the $1 version of THE LADY VANISHES.


It would actually depend on the film. With these early Hitchcock titles I'd stick with the PD versions. They simply aren't that great of films so I wouldn't pay too much for them unless they were packaged together at a cheap price. I'm a die-hard Lugosi fan and own all his PD titles but even though I love them, I wouldn't pay $15-$20 for them.

I'm a movie fan first and anyone who digs into "non-mainstream" stuff are going no where if they wait for remastered versions of these films or if they wait for a DVD release. I sold off my VHS collection when I first bought a DVD player and it was a mistake because hundreds of titles I owned are still not on DVD. A studio can't release everything they own as it would be impossible so if you want to see a film you will have to do whatever it takes to see them.

I now own 22 of those "50 Movie Packs" from Mill Creek. It would be impossible for me to pay $10-$15 for a single movie on these. I wouldn't have bought them at $10 but I would watch them for $0.10, which is the price they come to. I'm not sure how many people would be willing to watch all 50 movies on each of these sets but if you are, then you can't pay top dollar for them nor would you be willing to.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

You are not "supposed" to own a region-free player in that DVD manufacturers have decided that they don't want you to and have made it difficult to do so by selling players and discs that have been regionally encoded. It's an understandable decision from an economic point of view, but that doesn't mean it carries any legal weight.

In the U.S. at least, there are laws which forbid the distribution/sale of copyrighted works without the permission of the copyright holder. There are no laws against watching movies imported from another country. The movie studios obviously don't want you to do so, and they make it difficult for you through regional coding, but that doesn't make it illegal to do so.

In fact, the governments of several countries (Australia in particular, and I believe New Zealand is looking into it as well) have suggested that regional coding itself may be a violation of WTO trade agreements.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

I'm pleased to read this. I own the U.K. releases of DS9 and VOY, and I live in the USA. Two seasons of U.K. VOY cost me $5.00 more than one season of VOY distributed in the U.S. Besides, in some cases you get more for your buck with the U.K. releases, and the packaging--an important selling point with me--is often much more durable. I couldn't believe it when I discovered that the special feature on the Defiant (DS9) wasn't included on the American release, but was included on the British release. And the special features included in VOY for some sets were more extensive than those included in the U.S. release.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

I don't think you can compare the two.

When you buy a DVD from another region, someone who should is getting the money. But, when you buy a bootleg, someone who shouldn't is getting the money.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Try telling that to the U.S. copyright holders.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

What gives the U.S. copyright holders any greater a claim to the money than the U.K. copyright holders, or the Japanese copyright holders, or the Australian copyright holders, or the Chinese copyright holders?

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Um...the fact that they are in the U.S. and have legal rights to the sale of a particular title in the U.S.? Just as the U.K. copyright holder would have sole claim to a title sold in the U.K. or Japan or Australia, etc. Regardless of the region, importing a disc from another region is violating someone's distribution and copyright.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be xenophobic by singling out the U.S. copyright holders

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Sorry, but I'm with Jon on this one.

I am morally opposed to bootleg DVDs because they are not authorized by the owner of the work in question, and said owner receives no compensation from their sale.

Imported DVDs are a different story entirely. If the U.K. copyright holder has gone through the proper channels to obtain the rights to release a film on DVD in the U.K., then I don't see any problem with purchasing that DVD from the U.K. As long as he has properly procured the rights to the product, why should I be concerned about where the seller is located geographically?

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

But in this case, there are no U.S. copyright holders doing anything with it. If someone buys the R2 copies of the Hitchcock set, other than the PD companies (and not counting the ones Criterion released), who is being hurt by it?

It is one thing if there is a US version, but I don't think that is being argued.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Well I'm sure it's a fine legal point, but if product X is sold in country Y to someone in country Z, it's not clear to me which country that sale took place in. Certainly if I travel to England and buy a disc (which I'd never do due to Pal speedup), and then bring it back to the U.S., I've bought it in England legitimately. Now, is my mail-ordering it from England really any different?

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

If nobody is being hurt by it, why have region coding at all? Why not just release everything as Region 0?

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

From a consumer point of view there is not a difference. The seller, however, is violating the licensing by knowingly shipping it out of the region.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

It hurts people who don't own a region free player or who refuse to buy one due to the PAL speed up.

Why? Because if 100,000 people in America buy that R2 L&H collection then they don't need to buy the R1 discs from Lionsgate. If 100,000 people don't buy it then it leads to poor sales, which will mean no more releases. Buying the R2 set takes money from the owners here and it means those who aren't region free can't get them.


Perhaps but in same cases a certain title might be in the public domain in England while being owned by someone in America. I can only mainly speak for certain horror titles but some companies, when they buy the rights to the film, can't include an English track or English subtitles because the company wants to sell those rights to someone in R1 land to release. There are countless German discs, which feature no subs for this very reason. The copyright holder would mach rather sell their title to two different companies in two different countries because it gets the product out there more.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

I don't believe there is such a thing as "someone who isn't region free." It isn't some intrinsic, unchangeable characteristic like gender or skin color--anyone who wants to can purchase a region free player just as easily as anyone else. They are not difficult to come by. I picked one up from the local Best Buy for only $40 just a couple of weeks ago.

But even if someone is stuck with a Region 1 player, I'd argue that he's hurt not by my (or anyone else's) purchase of imported DVDs, but by region encoding itself, without which he'd be able to purchase the R2 release just as easily as the R1 release that would have been.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Carl, not everyone out there is as smart as us in knowing about region free. Walk into Best Buy one day and ask your casual shopper if they are region free and I doubt they'll know what you're talking about. Yes, I picked one up for $23 at Wal-Mart but I still had to know where to find the hack and go through all of that. The stores can't advertise that something is region free so someone will have to do their homework to find things.

I agree that there shouldn't be any region coding but I doubt this will change anytime soon. Even if it did, there are still those who refuse to buy PAL discs.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Sure, but that doesn't mean that it's somehow "wrong" for me to purchase imported DVDs or that it "hurts" others in any real way.

There are a lot of consumers who are not very computer-savvy and are therefore unable purchase DVDs from online shops like Amazon. They will miss out on a lot of titles of the kind that aren't typically available at brick-and-mortar shops like Best Buy or Wal-Mart. If I and others had purchased more of these kinds of films from B&M shops, they'd similarly be more inclined to carry them, so my online purchases "hurt" consumers who aren't computer-savvy every bit as much as my imported purchases hurt consumers who aren't region-free, but I certainly don't feel any moral qualms about ordering DVDs on-line just because other consumers haven't done their homework.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

It is not illegal to import a DVD from another country if the purpose of that importation is for personal use. It is generally not permitted to import for the purposes of commercial re-sale. As such, personal importation is not violating someone's distribution and copyright as it's legal to do so.


Because region coding has less to do with distributor's rights and more to do with the studios seeking to prevent people from importing DVDs from the US where those same films are screening in cinemas or have yet to be released in their territories. It is anti-competitive conduct that has been seen as such by several foreign governments. At least one, Australia, has legislated to allow consumers to by-pass regional coding restrictions in DVD players in order that those consumers may exercise their legal right to import DVDs from the US (or anywhere else) for their own personal use.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

The fact remains that such importing/exporting is contrary to the wishes of the copyright holder(s). If they wanted their discs available and playable everywhere, they could very easily release them as Region 0. As far as I know, nobody is forcing companies to region code their discs.

I don't personally have a problem with such importation but I do recognize that it is frowned upon by those who control the rights, just like bootlegging is.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Is that really the case?

I know that I always replace whatever R2 discs I have if the film is released in R1. I only have one multiregion DVD player, while I have three regular DVD players. I don't want to be stuck on just one TV to watch an R2 DVD, I'd rather have it available on them all. And yes, there is the PAL speed up issue, as well multi region players not always being the best as far as quality of image goes.

If I get an R2 DVD, it is just to tide me over until it gets an R1 release.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Coming from Australia, every DVD player I have ever owned (firstly a Philips in '98, a couple of Pioneers, a Sony, and some others that I cannot recall the brand), have been region free, out of the sealed box.

God knows that if Australia was only able to play region 4 DVDs, we'd be stuck with Disturbia, Transformers, and Superbad, with little else.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

That's all well and good, but there's no legal recourse available to them if someone decides to import a DVD from another country for their own personal use. I'm not going to stop exercising my legal rights simply because I think Sony or Universal may not like it. This practice is not, and should not, be compared to bootlegging. They are entirely different and to imply that people who import legitimate discs are in some way comparable to bootleggers is rather insulting, to say the least.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Way to stick it to the man!
When we talk about importing and exporting DVD's from other regions, what are we talking about? The unauthorized distribution of copywritten material in a manner that goes against the wishes and intentions of the copyright holder. Hmm...why does that sound SO familiar??? Oh yeah: because that's what bootlegging is!

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

The studio/owner can't go after the person buying the disc but I think they can go after the store doing the selling. There's a very well known American site that sells R2 stuff and they have gotten threatening letters from the likes of Disney and Miramax.

I don't think anyone is giving people moral issues about importing but I think the studios wouldn't agree with you buying from R2 land. As I said in my first post, if I want to see a film I'm going to see it no matter how I have to do it. If Paramount never wants to release another classic titles then it's fine with me. I'll find another way to see it.


I guess it all depends on the person but I've got a SE of DR. TERROR'S HOUSE OF HORRORS so i wouldn't upgrade if Paramount ever released it. I spent $200+ on that L&H set so I wouldn't upgrade them either. I'm not one who typically upgrades so I'm not a good person to go with. Once I own a film I usually own it for good unless something too great comes out to pass up (like the re-released 2-disc titles from Warner).

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

Whether they frown upon it or not is of no consequence to me. I'm sure that the owners of many films would frown upon me watching them upside-down, under water, or in a noisy room with all the lights on, but frankly, I couldn't care less about whether or not they approve of my viewing habits, as long as it's a DVD I've legitimately obtained through legal means.

They may wish whatever they like, but just because they suggest I watch it in a dark room with surround sound doesn't mean I have to do it (most of my DVD-watching is done in my bedroom through my television's speakers), any more than their setting a few bits on the disc means I can only watch my own DVDs while residing in a certain part of the world.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

I recently bought an LCD TV and it reads PAL signals. From what I gather, though they do not advertise it, most, if not all lcd will read PAL signal so if you have LCD, you may just need a DVD player that is Region Free, the conversion of signals would be unnecessary.


Now, I posted this elsewhere, I only have one item on both US and UK DVD the old full screen British TV series Carry On Laughing and the UK DVD is narrower and I can say that other OAR fullscreen DVDs I have watched on this TV are as narrow as this. I have not gone through everything just yet though. Members of this forum have indicated that overscan is viewable and the UK one has more of it but people at the Doctor Who Restoration forum indicated that the picture was being stretched a bit for the US release, I asked there because Doctor Who US DVDs are most likely affected by whatever happens.

Re: "Ultimate Hitchcock Collection" Public Domain release

But George did not say he was unable to convert the PAL signal to NTSC. He said that he was unwilling to put up with the video and audio being sped up by 4%.