In these exciting times for film fans, readily-available high quality digital recording equipment has allowed small companies and enterprising individuals to release their products legitimately on DVD±R - which should certainly be encouraged.  As the films in question are often obscure, demand is likely to be low; large-scale production runs of pressed versions would therefore not be economically viable and DVD±R provides the ideal, affordable solution.  However, it might be helpful to clarify the distinction between legal DVD±Rs and 'bootleg' or 'pirate' versions of films.  

A 'bootleg' or 'pirate' version is an unauthorised duplicate or reproduction of a copyrighted product (usually released on DVD±R, which of course does not mean that everything on DVD±R must be illegal).

A DVD±R release of any title IS legal when:

(a) The seller is - or has been granted licence by - the rights-holder (this is usually stated on the packaging) or

(b) The film is in the Public Domain.*

Internet freedom has rendered a BBFC or other certificate obsolete and its absence from a disc's packaging is not proof of illegality; this is also true in respect of barcodes, which are only required for items which are to be sold in shops.  (It is of course usually better to avoid certificated versions of films, as in the UK and elsewhere they have often been cut to obtain a commercially-attractive lower rating - which is unjustifiable, because censorship is fundamentally immoral.)

A DVD±R release is NOT legal merely because the seller states that:

(a)  'Rights have not been given or implied' (copyright subsists nevertheless);

(b)  'Copyright has not been stated in the film' (copyright is created automatically);

(c)  'The film is not currently in distribution' (this does not alter its copyright status);

(d)  'The item is being sold strictly on a collector to collector basis' (unauthorised copying remains illegal);

(e)  'The film has been taken from a foreign source' (copyright law still applies).

(f)   'The item complies with eBay's strict ruling on copyright'  (the law has not been made by eBay).

Claims that 'The film is more than fifty years old and therefore in the Public Domain' are often nonsense: in many cases, copyright has been renewed or otherwise extended.  While more films are in the Public Domain than is generally realised, it is also evident from many websites including eBay that far more are claimed to be than actually are!  Common sense should prevail when a film has been released by a major studio (including some older ones, e.g. Republic, Rank, Ealing etc.).  -Does anyone honestly believe that Sony, Warner, Universal et al have kindly donated distribution rights for classic (or even minor) titles from their catalogue to amateur vendors for fun and easy profit?  Similarly, unless the rightsholder has specifically made his property available for public use, a 'restored' version of a film is automatically in copyright.
 
Lastly, the belief that DVD±R products are inevitably of poor quality is incorrect.  From a technical standpoint, DVD±R and pressed versions are of equal quality and any perceived difference indicates use of inferior source materials.  Copies of cheap internet downloads are unacceptable for serious purposes (although these proliferate via casual sellers and are generally supplied in plastic wallets, occasionally with a minimal attempt at artwork).  Reputable sellers refuse to compromise and obtain the best possible master versions from professional suppliers; it is worth noting that the DVD±R format is commonly used for TV broadcasting, where standards are very high indeed.


*Reliable information sources include UK Copyright Service, BFI, FesFilms.com and archive.org