pd movies

Open, general discussion of classic sound-era films, personalities and history.
moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

pd movies

Unread post by moviefan » Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:05 pm

do these movies exist if so how can i get a copy on dvd-r?
freckles-1935 pd
little iodine-pd
ginger 1935pd this one is availble but in poor quality from a gritty print.
does a clean watchable print exist?
all are pd movies now.
ginger is always for sale on ebay from the same gritty print.
i want copies bad of freckles 1935,little iodine.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.
Last edited by moviefan on Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:53 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Mike Gebert
Site Admin
Posts: 6130
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:23 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Unread post by Mike Gebert » Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:54 pm

You can certainly ask about the survival of something but we do not permit requests for potentially illegal copies of copyrighted films here. Please see this for further information.
“I'm in favor of plagiarism. If we are to create a new Renaissance, the government should encourage plagiarism. When convinced that someone is a true plagiarist, we should immediately award them the Legion of Honor.” —Jean Renoir

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:11 pm

fyi these are all pd movies.

User avatar
FrankFay
Posts: 3263
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:48 am
Location: Albany NY
Contact:

Unread post by FrankFay » Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:28 am

Don't think that if a movie is Public Domain you can do anything you like with it. "Little Iodine" may be a public domain movie, but I think that the cartoon character may be still copyright protected.
Eric Stott

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:48 pm

just want a copy of that movie. u cant find anything if you dont ask.
its not illegal.it sucks ill never get to see iodine or freckles 35.c'mon share

josemas
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Unread post by josemas » Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:50 am

Sorry to inform you that your information that any of these films are PD is mistaken.

FRECKLES copyright was renewed 19 Feb 1963 Renewal # R311066

GINGER copyright was renewed 6 Jun 1963 Renewal #R317336

LITTLE IODINE copyright was renewed 24 Jan 1974 Renewal #R568607

So the earliest any of these will go PD will be at the end of 2030.

Joe Moore

User avatar
milefilms
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:35 am
Location: HP, NJ
Contact:

Unread post by milefilms » Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

josemas wrote:Sorry to inform you that your information that any of these films are PD is mistaken.

FRECKLES copyright was renewed 19 Feb 1963 Renewal # R311066

GINGER copyright was renewed 6 Jun 1963 Renewal #R317336

LITTLE IODINE copyright was renewed 24 Jan 1974 Renewal #R568607

So the earliest any of these will go PD will be at the end of 2030.

Joe Moore
Dear Joe,

Do you know who renewed these?
Dennis Doros
Milestone F&V

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:48 pm

if they renewed them why dont they release them or at least air them on tv?
people are selling ginger on ebay from a grainy poor storage copy.
little iodine is owned by pickford foundation.
freckles was lost how could they renew if the movie is or not lost?

josemas
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Unread post by josemas » Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:10 am

milefilms wrote:
Dear Joe,

Do you know who renewed these?
Dennis,

Sorry I can't say who renewed the copyrights on these films as I'm going from the info in the Film Superlist which doesn't list the name of the person or company renewing a copyright (only the dates of renewal and renewal number).
I can tell you that RKO Radio Pictures filed the original copyright for FRECKLES. The Fox Film Corp. filed the initial copyright on GINGER and LITTLE IODINE had its original copyright filed by Comet productions.
Since LITTLE IODINE was adapted from a King Features comic strip there is a good chance the the rights to this film have reverted to King Features-Hearst (or who ever owns them now-a-days) as many of the other King Features movie adaptations only had limited licensing agreements (such as the Universal FLASH GORDON serials and the Columbia BLONDIE series).

Joe Moore

User avatar
rudyfan
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:48 am
Location: San Fwancisco
Contact:

Unread post by rudyfan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:22 am

milefilms wrote:
josemas wrote:Sorry to inform you that your information that any of these films are PD is mistaken.

FRECKLES copyright was renewed 19 Feb 1963 Renewal # R311066

GINGER copyright was renewed 6 Jun 1963 Renewal #R317336

LITTLE IODINE copyright was renewed 24 Jan 1974 Renewal #R568607

So the earliest any of these will go PD will be at the end of 2030.

Joe Moore
Dear Joe,

Do you know who renewed these?
Well, with the Renewal Numbers, you can order copies of the renewals/registration record from the Copyright Office for a fee (I think $25 a pop, might be higher as PTO fees just went up and Copyright Office fees may have as well).

They (the records) are searchable in person in the card catalogues (pre-1978 registrations). If you know someone in the DC area, they could go do a search for you, gratis one hopes. The Copyright Office will search as well, I think the fee is $25 an hour and there may be a minimum charge for the search. There are also several firms in the DC area that will do a search for you, also for a fee. Since the renewal numbers are in hand, should not cost much.

Post 1978 registrations are searchable online at the website.
http://www.rudolph-valentino.com" target="_blank" target="_blank
http://nitanaldi.com" target="_blank" target="_blank
http://www.dorothy-gish.com" target="_blank" target="_blank

josemas
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Unread post by josemas » Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:28 am

moviefan wrote:if they renewed them why dont they release them or at least air them on tv?
This is a question asked by lots of us fans of these old films. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of these films that aren't being either aired on televison or released on DVD. Apparently the big corporations that own the rights to these films don't feel there is much of a market for them and so, even though they own them, they do little or nothing with them.

moviefan wrote: people are selling ginger on ebay from a grainy poor storage copy.
little iodine is owned by pickford foundation.
Well if they are selling copies of GINGER on eBay then they are selling bootlegs. I see bootlegs being marketed all the time. It's not legal but it still occurs.
As to LITTLE IODINE see my above answer to Dennis. If the rights have reverted to King Features, as I suspect, they would probably be very open to licensing the film for DVD release, as they have already done with several of the other film properties they presently own.

moviefan wrote: freckles was lost how could they renew if the movie is or not lost?
Many "lost" films have had their copyrights renewed. A company doesn't have to show that they still possess a print of a film to renew the copyright on it. It's just not a requirement.
As to whether FRECKLES is actually considered a "lost" film I'm not sure. Paging Jon Mirsalis.

Joe Moore

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:44 pm

:lol:
Last edited by moviefan on Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Harlett O'Dowd
Posts: 2113
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:57 am

Unread post by Harlett O'Dowd » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:07 pm

moviefan wrote:some movies bootleg is the only way to get them. so the heck with the studio if they are gonna be that way.
Any more laws that you break on a regular basis you would like to share with us?

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:26 pm

everybody has jane withers movies.
even some stars sell copies of their movies since studios wont release them.it makes them mad too.

User avatar
Frederica
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Kowea Town, Los Angeles

Unread post by Frederica » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:05 pm

moviefan wrote:everybody has jane withers movies.
even some stars sell copies of their movies since studios wont release them.it makes them mad too.
That would still be theft.

Fred
Fred
"Screw the men. I've got the horse."
Helen B. (Penny) Chenery
http://www.nitanaldi.com" target="_blank"
http://www.facebook.com/NitaNaldiSilentVamp" target="_blank"

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:11 pm

one former child actress told me she didnt care if they got mad.
she said she would tell them thats tough you wont do nothing with them so i am.nothing ever was said by the studio to her so she kept on releasing them. its not illegal cause she bought the only prints.

User avatar
Frederica
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Kowea Town, Los Angeles

Unread post by Frederica » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:18 pm

moviefan wrote:one former child actress told me she didnt care if they got mad.
she said she would tell them thats tough you wont do nothing with them so i am.nothing ever was said by the studio to her so she kept on releasing them. its not illegal cause she bought the only prints.
Oh, now, I think you know better than that.

Fred
Fred
"Screw the men. I've got the horse."
Helen B. (Penny) Chenery
http://www.nitanaldi.com" target="_blank"
http://www.facebook.com/NitaNaldiSilentVamp" target="_blank"

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:42 pm

.even another one i talked to said screw the studios.cause they are too stupid.

User avatar
Frederica
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Kowea Town, Los Angeles

Unread post by Frederica » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:58 pm

moviefan wrote:.even another one i talked to said screw the studios.cause they are too stupid.
Gracious. Who were these lovely actresses?

Fred
Fred
"Screw the men. I've got the horse."
Helen B. (Penny) Chenery
http://www.nitanaldi.com" target="_blank"
http://www.facebook.com/NitaNaldiSilentVamp" target="_blank"

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:59 pm

dont wanna say.

User avatar
Frederica
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Kowea Town, Los Angeles

Unread post by Frederica » Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:03 pm

moviefan wrote:dont wanna say.
I can't think why.

Fred
Fred
"Screw the men. I've got the horse."
Helen B. (Penny) Chenery
http://www.nitanaldi.com" target="_blank"
http://www.facebook.com/NitaNaldiSilentVamp" target="_blank"

Marr&Colton
Posts: 764
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:17 pm

Unread post by Marr&Colton » Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:58 pm

This is nonsense reasoning!

Emotional reasons mean nothing in copyright law--or to enforcement authorities. NO movie is worth getting in legal/criminal trouble over.

I see sellers on eBay claim their bootlegs are public domain all the time--with no proof.

A good list of public domain movies can be found at either of these two sites:
www.buyoutfootage.com
www.reelmediainternational.com


The list on the PD movie entry on Wikipedia is NOT ACCURATE.

FYI--I have done searches on the Library of Congress Database, and there are scurrilous "renewals" posted for well-known and currently public domain titles. Apparently it was possible to just arbitrarily submit a renewal without proof of ownership. Kind of like the people who registered internet domain names to resell to those that they referred to back when the internet was new.

moviefan
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:58 pm

Unread post by moviefan » Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:56 pm

what does this mean?
Angels holiday / By Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. R357024.
Relevance:
Type of Work: Recorded Document
Document Number: V3489D364
Date of Recordation: 2002-11-14
Entire Copyright Document: V3489 D364-369 P1-72
Registration Number Not Verified: R357024.
Title: Angels holiday / By Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. R357024
it does if i wanna see it.

josemas
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Unread post by josemas » Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:34 am

Marr&Colton wrote:
FYI--I have done searches on the Library of Congress Database, and there are scurrilous "renewals" posted for well-known and currently public domain titles. Apparently it was possible to just arbitrarily submit a renewal without proof of ownership.
Raymond Rohauer was rumored to have done this on a number of film titles that he hoped to someday gain the rights to (although for most he never did).

Joe Moore

josemas
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Unread post by josemas » Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:41 am

moviefan wrote:what does this mean?
Angels holiday / By Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. R357024.
Relevance:
Type of Work: Recorded Document
Document Number: V3489D364
Date of Recordation: 2002-11-14
Entire Copyright Document: V3489 D364-369 P1-72
Registration Number Not Verified: R357024.
Title: Angels holiday / By Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. R357024
it does if i wanna see it.
R357024 is the copyright renewal number. All the renewal numbers that I've ever seen all start with an "R". The film was actually renewed on March 4, 1965.
I'm not sure what all of the other dates and numbers you list refer to.

Joe Moore

Post Reply