Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

cahutchins t1_ixkcoe9 wrote

Dogma is not available on any streaming platforms, you can't even buy a streaming copy on Amazon. Even the blu-ray release is out of print and can only be bought for a premium on the secondary market.

The reason is that Harvey Weinstein personally owns the distribution rights to the movie, allowed all of the distribution deals to lapse, and hasn't accepted Kevin Smith's offers to buy back the rights.

So I would say that it is entirely ethical to pirate this movie by any means necessary.

428

FlokiTrainer t1_ixkqm6m wrote

I just saw Clerks III recently with a Q&A with Kevin Smith after the screening. When asked about Dogma, Smith basically said Weinstein is being a dick about the rights to maintain a sliver of his old life in Hollywood. Go watch it on YouTube for free. Even Kevin Smith okays pirating it.

151

Particular_Track_365 t1_ixlq2n6 wrote

I watched Dogma on opening weekend.

19

darkendvoid t1_ixmn98p wrote

It's been a long time since I've read up on DMCA but isn't there an exemption clause about media that's never been distributed in the US or is no longer available for purchase on any medium?

I thought I remember that's how the old fan sub groups stayed out of legal trouble until localized copies were made available for purchase.

6

WA_craft_beer t1_ixncu3k wrote

I bought a Blu-ray copy for $80 a while back. Totally worth it.

1

Spawn256 t1_ixnmdj8 wrote

Thank you for explaining what's going on.

1

tsilihin666 t1_ixkmvom wrote

It’s wild. They used to play this movie on repeat on Comedy Central for years and then it was just gone. Such a ubiquitous movie to vanish like that. Licensing is a bitch.

266

newbrevity t1_ixktd7b wrote

Fuck Harvey Weinstein

181

its8up t1_ixku31k wrote

No way I could ever want any acting role bad enough to do that.

59

schkmenebene t1_ixl972z wrote

That's just because you haven't been asked to play in a movie for a couple months and make money off that for the rest of your life.

It's probably very easy to trick these people and get them on the hook, then it's all about bait and pull from there. That clip posted here a week ago or so with David Chapelle talking about Hollywood was pretty terrifying.

18

nothardly78 t1_ixmxyur wrote

Hey, there will be no fucking Harvey Weinstein. How we got in this mess to begin with!

2

ligmuhtaint t1_ixmynqc wrote

Now CC is the Southpark channel with a few things thrown in there. I miss Jon stewart 😔

7

tsilihin666 t1_ixn0vev wrote

Cable stations in general are just garbage now. Losing market share to streaming so they do whatever they can to keep eyes on the screen. For the most part I say good riddance but I definitely miss the hay day of channels like Comedy Central. Used to be legendary.

6

ligmuhtaint t1_ixn3gy8 wrote

They had a banging line up in the 90s up to around 2010.

7

NakedScrub t1_ixn76hr wrote

Check out the comedy central channel on Pluto. It's free and better IMO.

2

arctander t1_ixkswdy wrote

I am genuinely curious as to how The Internet Archive can have this clearly copyrighted material stored and served without any rights - and they know it "Rights yikes" is on the page.

Are they simply waiting for a DMCA notice?

Then there's this note "Uploaded as it may never get an official re-release" which simply isn't any kind of legal reason under US copyright law.

Anyway, not trying to start a fight, but I don't understand how The IA can host this. I figure that if I did, I'd get crushed by an attorney somewhere.

29

sedition- t1_ixkuluz wrote

You'd probably lose your mind if you actually looked into what IA hosts without issues, I'm talking entire video game console libraries.

47

[deleted] t1_ixmkfq5 wrote

Just search "goodset" and you'll be entertained for the rest of your life.

5

salartarium t1_ixl6hkq wrote

The Internet Archive is like YouTube when it comes to this stuff. Some random internet user uploaded the video and filled out the page. It stays up until they receive a DCMA notice and because the uploader checked the box that they had the rights, the IA is not responsible for having believed them.

They just aren't as aggressive as google and don't have automated bots to search for copyrighted content as they don't care about relations with big media companies.

32

MattsAwesomeStuff t1_ixl8ukn wrote

> I am genuinely curious as to how The Internet Archive can have this clearly copyrighted material stored and served without any rights

Copyrights are actually the exception. It says "You get to be the only one who controls this, for an amount of time, before it belongs to everyone." It's just that that limit is like 75 years after the death of the creator.

One of the provisions of fair use has to do with the commercial impact of the copyright violation. I.E. How damaging you're being by distributing it.

If someone will not sell or make available the work, then it's pretty easy to argue that there is no lost commercial value. This is also true of out of print books, classic video games, etc.

The whole point of copyright law was to encourage the creation of new works, by which all of society benefits. Society benefits a lot more from the availability of "lost" works than from protecting people who are withholding it.

On a tangent, it's a bit of a joke that copyright (which used to be like, 5-10 years) existed to give a creator an encouragement to create creative works by allowing a window of time to profit from them. But, to not make it indefinite, so that creators, like Youtubers, have to constantly create new content in order to profit from it. The whole point was "More people will write books, perform plays, create maps, etc. Society is way better off." Exactly how encouraged is a creator, to create new works... 75 years after they're dead?

10

arctander t1_ixlj6s2 wrote

This is an eloquent take on the fourth test of fair use under US Copyright law, namely "Effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." Under this economic interpretation Disney's Song of the South ought to be available, and it is. Disney has refused to re-release this film and it remains under copyright until 2041.

The Sony Bono Copyright Extension Act was clearly overreaching and should be repealed, but there's no political will to do so. My question was really about the apparent impunity under which IA operates.

I appreciate the good conversation, thank you.

5

ramilehti t1_ixlq5pn wrote

The author's life + 75 years is an absurdly long time period. It is solely used by corporations to hoard culture. To milk every last cent out of them.

Author's life + 20 years would be acceptable in my opinion. That would ensure that the author's offspring are adults and can take care of themselves. If the copyright is owned by a corporation then 20 years.

But I agree the corporations that own most of the culture there is would never allow this. So it must be done against their will.

5

MattsAwesomeStuff t1_ixm4d8y wrote

> Author's life + 20 years would be acceptable in my opinion. That would ensure that the author's offspring are adults and can take care of themselves.

But that's not the purpose of copyrights.

The purpose is to encourage the creation of creative works for society.

You cannot encourage new creative works from a corpse.

You have to think "At what point does the lack of a copyright future, prevent this person from creating it in the first place?"

And the answer is probably 5-10 years. You've milked it all but dry after 5-10 years.

How much money does a movie make 5-10 years after it's published? A trickle. Not enough for a studio to say "Well if it's only 5 years, we're not making the movie in the first place."

Musicians wouldn't retire or stop making albums (or good albums) so readily if they can't rely on evergreen sales of stuff they did 20, 30, 40 years ago.

Etc.

The purpose isn't "Your children should keep earning money from this."

Once upon a time there were no copyrights at all. You created something because you wanted to create it. People still made stuff.

3

MattsAwesomeStuff t1_ixm5xfh wrote

> This is an eloquent take on the fourth test of fair use under US Copyright law, namely "Effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." Under this economic interpretation Disney's Song of the South ought to be available, and it is. Disney has refused to re-release this film and it remains under copyright until 2041.

Indeed, and that interpretation has controversy.

It's not that the copyright is invalid, but, with the goal of maintaining public access to creative works, it's not hard to make a case that you have not harmed the market for the good, if they intend not to sell it.

A more peculiar case is, remember in the 90s when Disney would stagger the release of their movies on VHS? If you didn't buy it, it might not be available for another 5 years or whatnot. How's copyright supposed to handle that?

The same way copyright handles everything: Whoever spends the most on lawyers wins :p

1

trackofalljades t1_ixlnvkb wrote

Kevin Smith advocates pirating the movie, and the Weinstein Company hasn’t been actively taking it down. It’s that simple.

10

OysterTongs t1_ixmq881 wrote

>Are they simply waiting for a DMCA notice?

Yes. They take everything then take it down if you ask them.

1

SeanOfTheDead1313 t1_ixksv7d wrote

I knew about the bluray being oop but not about it being unavailable anywhere today. I grabbed the DVD a long time ago from Big Lots for $3 lol

21

blac_sheep90 t1_ixl0vd3 wrote

Fortunately I bought this on Blu Ray a few years back. Solid movie. Probably Smiths best work.

7

alabasterwilliams t1_ixpj9mh wrote

I would offer up Red State as Smith’s best work, but this is certainly a close second.

1

Swagdaddy697 t1_ixksk6x wrote

This is one of those movies I had to search for ages for, just to get a dvd copy. 100% worth it though

6

nimama3233 t1_ixmssjj wrote

Ever heard of the Pirate Bay?

2

Swagdaddy697 t1_ixnawul wrote

Ever heard of supporting film makers?

−6

nimama3233 t1_ixncqab wrote

The Weinstein produced film???? Fucking lmao

6

Swagdaddy697 t1_ixnocii wrote

Sure, but what about Kevin Smith? He's a fucken legend, regardless of the scum he's worked with

−2

Pres_Skroob_pw12345 t1_ixnpx10 wrote

Kevin isn't getting any money from the movie and Weinstein refuses to sell the rights. Fuck him.

6

burywmore t1_ixm5gsp wrote

So I'm at a garage sale, looking through the piles of DVDs there, and I come across Dogma. It's right there, the movie Harvey Weinstein has blocked!! I haven't seen it for years, and I know Kevin Smith has talked about losing access to this film and how it's distribution rights are messed up. It's just sitting there, in a pile of DVDs!! It's 4 bucks!!!!!! I grab it, eagerly purchase it, laughing inside on how I was getting a DVD worth at least 30$? Dare I say 40$? Could this thing be worth 100$? I made my purchase, opened eBay on my phone, and BAMN. My copy of Dogma, used, was 5.50$. plus shipping.

Eh. I like the movie. So it's still a steal, right?

5

[deleted] t1_ixlb2ze wrote

[deleted]

3

jasonlitka t1_ixlozdl wrote

I don’t think it was ever available in 4K. My Blu-Ray was 1080p.

3

drgeta84 t1_ixld7t9 wrote

TESD ARMY. rise my fellow ants. 🐜

3

iTrollbot77 t1_ixnqelf wrote

Thanks I needed that! Lost my DVD copy years ago. Haven't seen it since

3

MandomRix OP t1_ixnsboq wrote

Everyone needs a little Rufus in their lives.

2

[deleted] t1_ixm3e44 wrote

[removed]

2

casper19d t1_ixneygx wrote

I have a DVD copy still, which I have learned is super rare now...

2

philosoraptorrisk t1_ixkwned wrote

I do not understand. I have just downloaded it from THEPiRATEBAY.ORG It took me 15 minutes. (I live in a caribbean country) How can I share the movie?

1

Newerphone t1_ixmtq13 wrote

Dogma is a thanksgiving movie 🎥

1

Pancrat t1_ixmu2da wrote

I paid $25 for a DVD but ok...

1

tupe12 t1_ixmz4ro wrote

So how good is this movie?

1

MandomRix OP t1_ixn01j5 wrote

Two Buddy Christ thumbs up. 👍🏼👍🏼

5

banashake t1_ixn21s4 wrote

I was just talking to m fiance about this movie yesterday! We found it all on YT, but fan edited and without certain scenes having music. Scrolling through Reddit today and can't believe this popped up.

1

skinwalked t1_ixn4680 wrote

I loved this movie as a kid. Haven't seen it in ages

1

SkySake t1_ixna450 wrote

They should make Dogma 2 2000 years later.

0

BigEvil621 t1_ixl4sex wrote

A top ten movie all time of mine. Love it.

−1

[deleted] t1_ixl394z wrote

[deleted]

−4

Isopbc t1_ixlymy5 wrote

This was reposted because the last post - which was the same link as 3 months ago - did not have the entire movie. The final couple of minutes are just gone, for no apparent reason. Someone shouldn’t have to go into the comments to find a good link.

It’s also squished from its normal aspect ratio.

1