On The Legality of Public Viewing? 74
bobej1977 asks: "I'm looking into opening a technology-centric cafe/bar, and am wondering about the legality of showing different types of media in the cafe. Specifically, I'm interested in using a PVR to build a library of popular television shows (Futurama, Simpsons, Enterprise, etc) and making it available to patrons of the cafe. Many establishments show live sports events or even popular shows but where exactly is the legal-line that a business shouldn't cross? While I'm at it, what about showing DVDs in the cafe? While I'm sure that doing so is prohibited, would it be tolerated since I wouldn't be charging to watch them? The precedent I'm thinking of is that some electronics or video rental stores that show movies, in the store. If not, what kind of arrangements could be made to get permission, if I'd like to have a LOTR-a-thon?"
Several things. (Score:5, Informative)
1. You're asking a legal question. You want legal advice. Ask Slashdot is a lousy place to get your legal advice. I wouldn't trust anything anyone here (including what I write below) says about this as a reliable indicator that you wouldn't get sued.
2. You would be charging for the content, even if you weren't doing so explicitly. That charge is folded into the cost of the drinks/coffee/muffins/whatever that you'd be serving. After all, you're not showing the content out of the kindness of your heart; you're showing it in hopes that it'll draw people into your shop.
You might think that if you're not kicking people out for not buying stuff, you're not charging; but in at least one circumstance, the U.S. courts have disagreed. In the U.S., business establishments that play background music (e.g. those Linkin Park/Lynyrd Skynyrd/Leonard Cohen songs you hear in the background when you go to your favorite club/bar/coffeehouse) are required to pay money [ascap.com] for doing so to ASCAP [ascap.com]. Most people don't realize this, but it's true. This is not incredibly aggressively enforced, but it is enforced. My favorite undergrad bar was shut down permanently because it wasn't making regular payments to ASCAP for the taped music it played before bands and in-between sets, and couldn't afford the fines and lump-sum payment once the court found against them.
Now, the music biz has all kinds of weird licensing restrictions and legislation, and I have no idea whether or not playing video content in your shop would be similar to playing music in your shop, in terms of your licensing obligations (once again, you need to talk to a real lawyer). But the fact that it is this way for music should make you look into this in more detail.
Motion Picture Licensing Corporation (Score:5, Informative)
You need to talk to MPLC:
Happy karma.From www.mplc.com... (Score:4, Informative)
The guys you go to if you want to purchase a one
year "subscription" umbrella license to show
just about anything you'd ever want to play in a public place:
MPLC members have maximum flexibility in programming home videocassettes and videodiscs by being able to obtain them from any source and show them legally.
Any Source?
BITCHIN. You could keep kazaa open in the back
room and download crap all day for public viewing!
Um... well... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You're not even allowed to record tv commercial (Score:3, Informative)
You're not even allowed to record tv commercials to keep in library for your own personal enjoyment. If you can't do that, then there is no way that you are going to be able to do what you want for free.
I was going to correct you, but then I reviewed Sony v Universal [virtualrecordings.com] and found that it looks like you are right. In that decision, the Supreme Court specifically looks at the distinction between "Time-Shifting" (recording to watch once and then reusing the tape) and "Librarying" (recording to watch multiple times). Apparently the distinction is important because "Time-Shifting" would be a fair use, but the Court appeared to consider "Librarying" not to be.
I wish it was politically feasable to bring back 14 year copyrights.
You're wrong (Score:3, Informative)