Quoting Woola:

Quote:
We have removed illegal Profiles before. Many time, bootlegs and screeners.

Skip

What makes this illegal?

And how is this different from the pizza hut dvds?

Quoting goblinsdoitall

Quote:
As I already said:
I really wouldn't want to see screeners flooding the database. And while STOGAM might well we professionally distributed (which is correct for several bootleeged DVDs too (see here)), it definitely isn't professionally captured to DVD.

I'm curious how you come to this conclusion.

Quoting goblinsdoitall:

Quote:
Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:
Quoting goblinsdoitall

Quote:
it definitely isn't professionally captured to DVD.

I'm curious how you come to this conclusion.

Because it's said so on the cover of the DVD.
The description "Screener" for me only applies when the original material wasn't used for the capturing to DVD, this might be OK for old movies, where the original material doesn't exist anymore, but for official newer DVDs I'd simply expect the usage of the original material and not the capturing of an online stream (or whatever else).
EDIT: Provided, of course, that you were allowed to produce this DVD.

But the term "screener", in this case, is most likely a requirement from Paramount in order for them to be able to distribute the DVD.

In addition, I get screeners quite often for reviewing purposes and I assure you many, if not most, of them are the exact same as the final release. Screener does not necessarily mean that the original material wasn't use, by any stretch of the imagination.

Regarding the part I bolded, they (the company putting out the DVD) would have the rights to produce this DVD, providing they do not sell it and follow stipulations (IE putting "screener, not for sale or rental" on the disc and/or cover. This is far from unheard of, as I mentioned earlier in the thread I know someone who has a similar agreement with a studio. He can produce and/or show his feature all he wants, but he can't make a profit for it. If he decides to make a DVD, it doesn't make it less professional (as far as production) if he puts the disclaimer on the front. It's simply a way for him to cover his tail to avoid a lawsuit, due to the agreement with the studio.

To further add to the mix, when Trinity picked up Hunting Humans (after the MTI lost the contract), a good amount, if not all, of the discs were packaged with a screener DVD. It actually says at points in the movie "Screener Copy". Should that DVD be removed from the Database?

I think people are getting caught up on the word "screener" on the cover. Sure, a screener generally means a copy for review (or, at worst, bootleg), but in this situation it looks to be a requirement by the studio.

Aaahhhh, I see where you are coming from. For me, when I hear the term 'screener', I automatically think of review copy. Some automatically think bootleg.

For the record, I don't think the typical screener should be allowed in the database (I keep all mine local), either, but I honestly believe this is a legitimate release, just has some legal technicalities accompanying it.

Agreed on SRP. 

So the Hunting Humans example I provided should be removed? Because you can still purchase it at some stores.

No.

How can they bootleg their own movie?

Does The Hire have Screener on it. Answer NO. This one does, and ummm do you know that Paramount is OK, you work for them, wejo. I do happen to be aware of some of the intricacies involved due to my acquaintance with James Cawley of the New Voyages.

Skip

Quoting JamesFerguson:

Quote:
I was at a psychic shop the other day and we got in touch with the ghost of Gene Roddenberry.  Not only is he totally OK with this DVD being in the database, but he really liked the new Star Trek movie.

 

Say hello to Scotty for me.