Copyrighted Music – Staying Ethical, Honest and Legal

[beowulf 1]

Thank you


That was played at the Addison, TX Octoberfest. We played it on a Blu Ray disc player and a 32 inch HDTV. It really caught peoples attention.

I edited the video first and then did the music for the video. Because this was supposed to be playing continuesly at the booth I wanted to make it longer. I am glad I cut it off. editing the music took a lot longer then I expected and was much harder then editing the video. I didn't have a lot of time to work on it.

Surprisingly one of my team mates wanted to know who the artist was that did the music!

I think dropzones should put together a few of their own sound tracks and use them for tandems and maybe create a new one once a month. Eventually they would have a nice collection of sound tracks to choose from.


btw I only had about a weeks notice to put this together. With work and skydiving I really didn't have a lot of time.

[michalm21 2]

I work in the licensing industry so I'm getting a kick out of this thread... no, really, I do
As much as I'd like riaa (and etc) to disappear from the face of the earth, DSE is right. We can't do squat with music, only listen.

[jumpwally 0]

interesting !! What music and what movie ?

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[jumpwally 0]

Any one know how You Tube's copyright auto detection work ? Thanks

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[padu 0]

Some matching software.

MySpace has the same thing but they are more aggressive. They don't let you post the video neither replace (or eliminate) the audio track... and they threat to cancel your membership...

Una volta che avrete imparato a Volare, camminerete sulla terra guardando il cielo perchè è là che siete stati ed è là che vorrete tornare.

[yarak 0]

turn the sound off on a skydiving video and watch it.
Then turn the video off and only listen to the sound.
Then tell me which one was more important. Still think audio is %70 of the piece? I cant believe anyone would think so for a skydiving video. If yo want to listen to a minute of wind noise then be my guest. Or would you rather quietly watch the skydive?

secondly, your comparison to using my rig and wearing it out is nowhere near the same thing as using someones music on a video. That comparison is more absurd then my disneyland comparison. I wont even waste my time explaining why.
I'm not arguing what the law is. THE law is the law. But your explanations and defenses of it sound asinine and snobish.
Now you are saying that record lables and artist dont wont thier songs on youtube because "overplay" will devalue thier song? WOW! Something else that devalues a song is NO ONE BUYING IT! I cant believe you would say that youtube videos are devaluing the music by giving it too much exposure. So what can we do as individuals to make sure that the cry babies in this industry stay perfectly happy. Should we buy the songs or not? Or should we buy them but not listen to them? Or should we buy them but only listen to them when no one else can hear it then advertise for the artist and label by word of mouth by telling people how good a song is, but you have to buy it to hear it...sorry its the law. Is this really the direction we want it to go? I dont think these statements are neccessarily off topic. Just because I disagree with a moderators opinion and justifications, doesnt mean i'm off topic. The title of this thread is about ethics, honesty, and legality. These statements are based off my opinions not the law. However, the law is based off opinions. Unfortuneatly its based off the opinions of the people with the biggest lobby force and the most money. No matter how ridiculous it might be.
SOmeone mentioned to me this weekend that as times change that copyright laws need to adapt and change with them. I couldnt agree more. I think its stubborn and childish for the music industry to try to hold out on these laws while communication and technolgy evolve so rapidly. Maybe they should be willing to change thier opinion to suit the needs of the masses. Whats wrong with the idea of a affordable limited use liscense for popular music? Or better yet a alteration of the public domain laws. I just dont see whats wrong or damgaing about using a song on a personal video that is making no money. Then for tandem videos a limited use license.

Here is a question for someone who knows. What kind of license does a DJ have for playing music at parties?
Are the nazi music police going to start busting kids in a parking lot for playing thier music so that other kids can hear it. Afterall they only purchased a license to listen to the music, not to let others hear it. God forbid we dont want those songs devalued by playing them too much in public.

I will tell you what will devalue music........answers and attitudes like this.
"You are free to make your own music " Maybe everyone will, then there wont be a need for labels or anyone that makes a living in the music industry. Then how important will these people think they are?

Was this post off the topic of "copyrighted music- staying ethical, honest, and legal" I dont think so....I would call it a honest opinion of the ethics that drive copyright legalities.
Now i'm off to download some crappy expensive royalty free junk and make some killer loops on my keyboard.

I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll burn your fucking packing tent down.

[DSE 5]

Quote

Here is a question for someone who knows. What kind of license does a DJ have for playing music at parties?
Are the nazi music police going to start busting kids in a parking lot for playing thier music so that other kids can hear it. Afterall they only purchased a license to listen to the music, not to let others hear it. God forbid we dont want those songs devalued by playing them too much in public.

I will tell you what will devalue music........answers and attitudes like this.

You simply continue to show your profound ignorance in this (and other) replies.
ASCAP/BMI license DJ's to play music at parties, bars, restaurants, nightclubs, etc. Has NOTHING to do with replicating music and putting it on YouTube or other UCG sites. ZERO relevance.
Groups of kids don't need a license to play music loudly in a parking lot, even if it's a one-off street party.
Replicating the music/copying it and putting it on a website or on your tandem video is *a copy* of the work that you are licensed to listen to. In making a copy, you remove the original artist's right to control copies, ergo "copy right."
No one has the right to use your work without your permission, why do you think you have the right to use someone else' work without their permission?
Videographers scream bloody frickin' murder when someone uses their pic or vid for free in an advertisement, but they think they have the right to use the creative works of others?
That's utter bullshit. Plain n' simple.

As far as copyright law, I agree. It needs to change. it needs to be more flexible, needs to reflect the changing methods of media delivery and personal access. I don't believe the commercial applications of copyrighted works need to change, but the small use/personal use and limited time value uses need to change, and they will. In time. FWIW, I'm part of that movement along with many other artists and users of copyrighted materials.
Then there are the jackasses that expect law that has taken 400 years to develop to change overnight.
With 'Net 2, it'll be easier, more sensible. But that day is a ways off from now.
Although you apparently don't "get it," the responses you're reading are responsible (from almost everyone here) and the kind of well-thought responses that help the industry want to change. The "fuck you, I should be able to use what I want" or responses that don't bear any understanding of the laws currently on the books don't help anyone want to change anything, simply because those demanding change are precisely the people that don't have a clue regarding their current rights and accesses. Spend some time learning to understand sync licenses, performance licenses, master, compulsory, broadcast, small distribution....

[PharmerPhil 0]

Quote

ASCAP/BMI license DJ's to play music at parties, bars, restaurants, nightclubs, etc. Has NOTHING to do with replicating music and putting it on YouTube or other UCG sites. ZERO relevance.

On a somewhat related issue,...

The DJ at, say, a wedding, presumably has a license to play music at that wedding. The videographer at that wedding usually has no such license, and if his/her video includes music played by said DJ, he/she IS in violation of copyright laws. It is kind of a tough spot for the videographer who is expected to "capture" the event, but most of the event involves the playing of copyrighted material.

[ozzy13 0]

That's just silly. I can see how that is but just silly!! What DSE said is the problem. The laws take longer to right then the times are moving. With all the technology out there how could they keep up.

I have learned a lot reading all this and had No clue before reading it :)

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[DSE 5]

Quote

Quote

ASCAP/BMI license DJ's to play music at parties, bars, restaurants, nightclubs, etc. Has NOTHING to do with replicating music and putting it on YouTube or other UCG sites. ZERO relevance.

On a somewhat related issue,...

The DJ at, say, a wedding, presumably has a license to play music at that wedding. The videographer at that wedding usually has no such license, and if his/her video includes music played by said DJ, he/she IS in violation of copyright laws. It is kind of a tough spot for the videographer who is expected to "capture" the event, but most of the event involves the playing of copyrighted material.

Actually, there is a fairly easy way around that particular speed bump...just gotta have a clever editing style/technique....

[bergh 0]

What about cover bands, that do shows for money but play other people music thus using other people IP for the own gain ?

Just asking out of interest as I have a friend who is in a band that only play covers.

_______________________________________
You are unique, just like everybody else ...

[yarak 0]

actually quite funny...my profound ignorance is exactly why I asked if and what lisence a DJ needs to play the music. I wasnt trying to be a smart ass or make a point. It was a serious question.

secondly, like I said I'm not trying to argue the law. I know the law is the law. And i'm not trying to say "fuck you" in anyway. I'm simply trying to find out if anything is being done about it, what propositions have been put out there (if any), and start a heated debate with DSE because its fun. There are lots of things about the law that dont make sense, yet its still the law. In the laws eyes it might be different but we alll know that kids blaring music in a parking lot makes no more difference than a low quality version of a incomplete song on youtube. The only difference is one is very annoying. I guess it really comes down to the definition of a "copy". I personally dont think that a incomplete low quality youtube version qualifies as a true "copy". Its not like anyone is going to steal the song from a youtube video when you can buy the real thing for a buck from Itunes. Basically I dont see how it really takes away an artists right to control copies. It might be the law right now but that is a stupid argument. Who records music from youtube videos? Like i said all it really does is give the song more exposure. Its a far cry from bootlegging copies and selling them on the corner.
Once again it seems a really petty way to use copyright laws.
I'm glad you agree they need to change and think they will. Thats pretty much the only point I was trying to make. I'm not arguing what the law is I'm simply debating as to why anyone would want to use the law to go after some average joe with a 1 minute video on youtube. The scope of this issue has outgrown the parameters and reasonableness of the existing laws.

good point about the wedding video. Another knit picky insignificant case of "copy" right.

WHat about this? If they crack down on all these youtube "pirates" How will it apply to pirate type animals like parrots?
example: say a parrot sings a bon jovi song, and someone records it and puts it on youtube. Is the parrot at fault for knowingly singing the song on video? Or is the person that videoed it at fault? then what if someone stole the footage and put it on youtube. Are you still at fault because you recorded it, even though you didnt post it on youtube? In the end will bon jovi or the label sue you and take ownership of the parrot?

real question here
HOw about if say a TV show has a guest on with a singing parrot. Do they have to get permission from the artist to sing that song like a person would? What would happen if the parrot changed its mind and sang another song instead? Would the parrot be put down?

What about the guy that post the youtube email here? No one answered that. Is he illegal for making a copy and reposting it?

I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll burn your fucking packing tent down.

[DSE 5]

Bands that play only cover tunes *should* be covered by an add-on from the night club's ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC license. If they play concerts, aka "tribute" bands, they're required to purchase their own ASCAP, SESAC, or BMI license.
BMI and ASCAP have undercover agents that regularly patrol the bars to be sure the nightclub/bar/restaurant is licensed by one or the other (or sometimes both) agencies. Artists get to choose which PRA they use, in my case...I'm a member of both, depending on the song and where I suspect it will be used.
Yarak, I'm happy to have a discussion or debate with you when it's an intelligent discussion...
Consider this a warning regarding animals...

[TEXX56 0]

Quote

Here is the video I through together.

http://vimeo.com/1988068

nice video and if you didn't know acid pro 7 is out
but using programs like acid pro are a good way to not get sued and you make your own music. also im glad i read this thread because before i thought if you just put the "song name-artist" (or vise-verse) you couldn't get sued for copy right.
edit: oh wow just realized this is from 2 years ago.

[DSE 5]

Part of the thread is two years old, but it's also a regularly recurring thread/theme.

Yes, ACID 7, Garageband, SoundTrack, SONAR are all great tools for avoiding copyright issues. I needed a filler piece for a spec project yesterday, and only had Garageband available. Used it, the director was really pleased with the feel of the piece and asked me to flesh it out more for actual use. He doesn't know how I created it, and wouldn't care anyway.
Always great to hear about folks using loops!

[TEXX56 0]

and i just also realized that i was looking at the time you joined the site
and ive also started to use turntables and though im just a beginner if i record it with acid pro and layer things correctly its actually sounds good enough to use on videos

[DSE 5]

Quote

and i just also realized that i was looking at the time you joined the site
and ive also started to use turntables and though im just a beginner if i record it with acid pro and layer things correctly its actually sounds good enough to use on videos

Sweet! I'd love to hear some of your work. Post t somewhere?

[Icon134 0]

Since I know some might be interested... I put together my year end audio footage using ACID music studio and a some Loops downloaded from Sony.

I've uploaded my two parts (two different songs) to my smugmug page...

http://scottgunshell.smugmug.com/gallery/6568056_5mkzk#418569904_XgsWH

One of them is more "serious fun" (Part 1) and the other is a "how not to fly camera" (set to a fun piano blues progression)

I actually had a lot of fun making the music for the videos... and I enjoy the fact that it is legal... when I dropped off the footage to the editor for this years dz year end video he actually asked where I got the second music set... (and I told him all about my fun...
All in all the music could be better but I don't think it's too bad for my first attempt at creating my own music...

Scott

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[DSE 5]

Quote

All in all the music could be better but I don't think it's too bad for my first attempt at creating my own music...

Scott

Very nice work, IMO. Nice flow, and unlike some ACID-generated music...it doesn't get boring due to lack of change ups.