If this is true, does that mean people who buy the DVDs can get in trouble, too?
I’m not sure about that. the US is to my knowledge the only country where “companies” such as CultCine etc operate under the gray area left by the Berne Act. increasingly however, DVDs of movies get released in that gray area where I clearly ask myself “isn’t that available on a regular retail DVD?”.
not sure if you can get in trouble buying the stuff (as non-US customer)… that’s a good question.
I’d really like to know, because I didn’t even know what the Berne act was until I found cultcine, so I thought it was legitimate.
I’m pretty sure there’s nothing wrong with buying them. but if you’re from a country where the same movie is available on a “real” DVD, the other might legally be considered a bootleg - and why not buy the real one then in the first place
I don’t think there is a gray area left under the Berne act.
I have probably mentioned it several times before but the USA at first didn’t apply the Berne act into works that had already been released when they joined (1989) but apparently because of the international pressure they gave up and Clinton signed the URAA in 1994 (which I think came in effect in 1996) which clearly states that all foreign works that had entered the public domain in the USA before, got their copyright automatically back (and there doesn’t have to be anything in the Copyright Office, so if you can’t find the movie there doesn’t prove anything at all) just as long as they were still copyrighted in their country of origin at the time.
This does include movies which were never released in the USA, or which had somehow failed the copyright process there or even forgot to renew the copyright.
But isn’t the Mercenary and the Big Gundown for example definitely owned by somebody in the USA anyways. (Mercenary by MGM or whoever it is now? and the Big Gundown is by Sony/Columbia… sure their version is the shorter one but if they or someone else don’t own the longer one then the original Italian owner has the US rights for that now)
There is one part in the Berne/URAA which probably applies to some situations as it says that works that previously were public domain but got their copyrights restored can be sold until the copyright owner gives a “notice of intent to enforce the copyright” (or something like that) to the Copyright Office. When that has been done, the sellers of these works have 12 months to stop their business with these works or face the consequences. So basically as far as I have understood they could sell the works as longs as the copyright owner doesn’t make that notice (the work is still copyrighted though). And only one notice is needed even if they decide to act upon it 10 or 20 or something years later.
And as I have said before, the first Trinity movie actually has this notice of intent at the copyright office and it has been there since 1996 if I remember correctly.
But it still doesn’t help those who sell works that have always been copyrighted in the USA. And even if the longer version of Big Gundown isn’t copyrighted, the shorter version English soundtrack definitely is so it can’t be used legally without buying rights for it. Right? 
yeah I think you’re right there. if I said gray area, I meant what you said in other words, basically a lot of people think the Berne Act is a license to bootleg, which it isn’t, and lots of stuff is being sold quoting that piece of law even though upon closer inspection almost half of the titles would probably not make the cut, or even more… it’s a gray area type of thing in as sofar as it is usually not easy to find out whether a title qualifies or not, and even if there are rights holders, usually they don’t do much about it, except if they have a release in the US as well, which would make the publication of such DVD-Rs moot in the first place
Oh yeah, I understand now what you meant and you’re of course right. 
Sundance is correct in his posting. This whole interpretation of the Berne Act is a sham, and the Berne Act does not apply to these films. I did a lot of research on the subject several months ago and even went as far as looking up the copyrights on titles that are commonly released as public domain on those cheap $1 bargain DVDS. Turns out they are all copyrighted, if the government records I viewed were correct.
Pistolero08- no you will not get in trouble. But please, do not buy these discs… if you absolutely cannot get them from the real companies that deserve the money, then please go outher routes instead of supporting a shady business
And even aside from a release like The Mercenary or The Big Gundown- Cultcine has a bootleg of Death Rides A Horse for sale… and as we all know, MGM has that release out in the UK. I sincerely doubt that MGM’s rights on DRAH do not apply here in the US…
but also Sebastian is right in his posting that most of the copyrighters aren’t going to pursue any action, but i think at this point the legality issue has been covered enough…
My main issue here is someone selling bootleg DVDRs as some kind of remastered version they had a hand in creating, and selling them at high prices. In addition to the stuff I’ve already said about no packaging or labels, these are DVD5s- they are not even burning onto DVD9s- which means the video has been compressed and the video quality is not as good as the original releases they are copying. On top of this, they are converting the video from PAL to NTSC, which further detracts from the quality of the video… and by this I’m not referring to just the framerate or whether PAL is inherently better than NTSC. Performing a NTSC conversion on a consumer PAL DVD results in lower video quality as the original video must be re-encoded and altered.
So the customers are paying nearly the same price for an unpackaged product, with a substantially lower quality of video, none of the extras or menus included in the original discs…
Anyway that’s all I will say about this subject for now as I don’t want to continue ranting about it, just wanted to add those 2 bits, as I see them being fairly important pieces of information that most people will not be aware of when it comes to the quality of product
Oh, do rant on my friend
Well ok, I did forget one thing 
Screenshots don’t mean jack when it comes to the ultimate quality of video… the screenshots do not show artifacts created from motion in the video- and this will be the main thing you notice when you watched a compressed movie and movies converted from PAL to NTSC
It would seem that trading these fan dubs amongst ourselves would be the best way to remedy this problem.
that’s what they are for… no one’s trying to make money off of the beautiful hard work of a company like Koch, who shows a true appreciation for the films we love… well… except for Cultcine 
I’m very naive about this whole subject but if its of any worth, I have some info about one film released by CultCine:
China 9, Liberty 37, though it has been released in the US, I believe is public domain but is still sold by Warner who have refused to remaster the film, actually refused. Hellman and Criterion are trying t acquire its rights but Warner won’t give it up. And Hellman bought CultCine’s disc. Approved by the director.
For what it’s forth. :-\
Well I dunno, that’s another one that’s received a fandub, so I have my doubts…
when it comes to whether or not they are dubbing the films themselves, its really not something that can ever be proved by just talking about it
If it was something that really bothered me enough, I could order their disc and give you a definite answer based on a comparison, because after spending many hours you are very familiar with small little details in the sound and syncing
But I have a hard time believing that the people behind Cultcine do not have access to the same fan dubs that we do, and that they would re-do a dub themselves which takes many hours of work when the work has already been done by someone else
And korano I’m sorry for replying a bit off of what you were saying… i do not have a problem with making custom versions of hard to get films available. I only have a problem with their methods and presentation
I do not feel they are genuinely interested in contributing to the underground film community. Cultcine has only a few posts on here, and only to advertise their business. Obviously they are not paying attention, as they have not responded yet
And as most here are aware, the fans all trade and share amongst themselves for the spirit of loving the films, we do not charge each other… we all do it because we love it… I don’t see Cultcine contributing to anything except themselves
koch media releasing every spaghetti western there is would also remedy the problem. and they’re on their way with some help by Wild East, Dorado Films, etc…
Has it been confirmed if the Koch release will have English audio?
[quote=“korano, post:74, topic:1678”]I’m very naive about this whole subject but if its of any worth, I have some info about one film released by CultCine:
China 9, Liberty 37, though it has been released in the US, I believe is public domain but is still sold by Warner who have refused to remaster the film, actually refused. Hellman and Criterion are trying t acquire its rights but Warner won’t give it up. And Hellman bought CultCine’s disc. Approved by the director.
For what it’s forth. :-[/quote]
WTF? They seriously claim something like that? TCM has been showing China 9, Liberty 37 in remastered anamorphic print, there has been a rip of that print available for almost a year! I have this official remastered print on DVD-R, it’s not even hard to find. Obviously Cultcine is talking BS again. My friendly advice would be to fuck Cultcine and their ‘director approved’ releases.
Someone get Monte Hellman on the line 