Albereth
Honorary Master
The complaint if you will was about trading legally vs trading illigally and I think I have prooved so far that you guys like most consumers are not aware of all the facts. The fact that you are still arguing the point on weather paralell for rental is legal or not proves my point. If it was legal and Mr Video has been in existance for what 15years? why did they only start doing it within the last year? Where thir 230 stores being threatened by the supperior service provided by their competitors?
This is a completely different arguement. Parallel importing isn't illegal. What is illegal is to try and claim that these goods are identical to those brought in through 'official' channels. Take a look at the Hi-Fi Corporation. Its whole model is built on parallel imports and it provides its own guarantees and service.
But, as I have discussed elsewhere, the material on a DVD is not 'purchased'. You acquire a license to view the material under certain restrictions. Typically, you are not permitted to broadcast or screen publically. And our Copyright Act allows individuals to import items even if the rights to copyright have been ceded to a local agent providing that it is for personal use.
Okay, you then need to add First Sale rights into the mix. Bascially, the item is mine to dispose of as I will. Me selling my DVD to you doesn't violate the rights of the copyright holder. But some copyright holders like the money so they challenge this principle because if there is no second hand market but there is still a demand, they get to make all the profit.
Mr Video may be in contravention of copyright law if there is a prohibition on the renting of the material. That has nothing to do with where or how they sourced the material. Someone mentioned MS so to bring them into the loop. MS had to warn people about the licensing conditions of their operating system and had to provide a mechanism for returning the OS if you did not agree to be bound by it. Show me a single DVD that has this stipulation clearly marked on a surrounding wrapper. The fact that you may only see the warning after you have played the disk leaves a lot of people on very shaky ground.
You have also mentioned that it is Universal that is pursuing Mr Video and not SK or NM. This is going to end up being really interesting as Universal will be trying to impose Californian law on South Africa and would have to show what damages it suffered. As they don't provide directly into the SA market their losses are nil. They may have to claim that they suffered indirect losses as SK and NM ordered less product but then SK and NM will have to be party to the whole saga and they'll have to jusify how a decline in sales isn't as a result of a number of factors in the market including decreased disposal income due to interest rate, fuel, and food increases. Or that there is a shift to people actually importing their own copies from overseas.
Last edited: