Video editors do you use copy righted music from commercial artist

[yarak 0]

Hey like I said, when I looked into it I never got good clear answers or consistent answers. It souded "grey" to me. I didnt mean to insult you guys. I hope to God that some one doesnt ever think that me putting a song that I bought, on one individuals video is worth messing with. Afterall my video and services is what is being sold, not the music in the background.
I believe lawyers could nit pick this stuff til the sun went down.
I got the impression that no one thought skydiving videos was a big enough market to even draw any attention. Although with youtube maybe it will.

What about this though what if the tandem student put there own music on their own video. Then technically they didnt purchase this from you. Then since its their own video for thier own personal use there wouldnt be a violation right?
Or how bout this you dont charge them for editing you only charged them your service of filming the jump. You edited it for free and used music that was purchased legally for thier personal use. This way you didnt sell them anything with music in it.
There has to be many ways to get around this. So many different ways to structure a defense. I think thats where the "Grey" and the loopholes enter the equation. Hopefully no skydiver ever has to answer for something so petty and stupid.
Sorry again for insulting you guys with my apathetic approach. I know you guys love to tell peope how wrong they are. I was just telling some of the run around I heard when I looked into it 3 years ago. I even stated my memory was vague of the details. Lets just all hope that no one ever takes this miniscule market of skydiving serious enough to pursue something like that. And if they do maybe we can structure some good "grey" area. Hell, not everyone can make their own music.

gotta go now, I'm putting some Bette Midler music on a video.

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

[stratostar 5]

Quote

so petty and stupid.

If you were trying hard to make the money to fuel your tour bus as todays price running you 1500 or so for a full tank, you might think other wise.

Now if you were a freefall photographer, say like lazlo and some scumbags like skyride stoled your image and didn't pay you for them, you might think other wise when your hungry.

Hey gotta go I'm dubbing some vids with Tony Orlando & Dawn & Marie/Donnie Osmond sound tracks.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[DSE 3]

Quote

There has to be many ways to get around this. So many different ways to structure a defense. I think thats where the "Grey" and the loopholes enter the equation. Hopefully no skydiver ever has to answer for something so petty and stupid.

There is no way around it, other than handing a student a video with zero music on it and saying "put your own on there" or using royalty free.
In putting copyrighted music on a tandem vid, you are committing three separate violations, two of which are criminal and civil and one that is civil-only. Doesn't matter who bought the music. Nothing "grey" about that. There is no argument that can be made, and particularly in your case...you say you looked into it 3 years ago, so you've known for at least 3 years that this is a legal landmine for you.
The wedding/event industry is scrambling like mad to work this out for themselves. If you're in the Orlando area during the week of August 11-14, come sit in on a panel or two.

Of course someone is taking this "miniscule market of skydiving" seriously. Maybe not right now, but as Nick pointed out...there is a lot of cash involved. Were there no YouTube and other UGC sites out there, it would never be an issue.
One person does a jump. They get a VHS that they share with maybe a dozen friends. Actionable, but hardly worth anything, and likely falls under DeMinimis. Then they get a DVD. Same scenario, maybe they share with a dozen friends, except now they get to take the DVD to work and play on a computer, so add another say...dozen people that got to enjoy the video. Actionable, but hardly worth prosecuting, and arguably falls into DeMinimis.
Then comes Youtube.
Tandems and 'buddy' videos get a lot of views, AND are easy to find with music spiders. Kinda like how your cell can identify a song just by hearing a few notes? So can web spiders. They just gotta be looking. If a publisher wants to prosecute...it's easy as pie these days.
You don't need to make your own music. There are so many free resources, it's inexcusable to use illegal music outside of being a jerk about it. When the first skydiver gets nailed, so will many others as part of the fallout. Do you expect USPA to bail your ass out? They won't.

If you feel it's no big deal, keep at it. We're all used to the risks involved with skydiving, but it's the risk you don't see coming that could really hurt.

[DSE 3]

Quote

[ I'm dubbing some vids with Tony Orlando & Dawn & Marie/Donnie Osmond sound tracks.

I just lost my lunch.

[yarak 0]

no I certainly dont expect USPA to do anything.
I see your point about youtube. Thats one thing thats different then when i looked into it. Youtube wasnt such a monster then. Like I said, I hope it doesnt even come to that. Still seems DeMinimus too me. No ones making money from it being there. Just looks like a bunch of personal videos anyway, which wouldnt be illegal. Hard to prove otherwise also. I think prosecuting that would be difficult.
But at the same time better safe than sorry. Might as well use royalty free music huh?

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

[yarak 0]

If lazlo is starving and is dependent upon the couple of hundred dollars those pics are worth, then I would say he needs to get another job

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

[DSE 3]

The thread is drifting to a discussion of the merits of copyright, what is right and what is wrong. Please take those posts to the Speaker's Corner.

[TheCaptain 2]

Quote

Quote

The Captain is an attorney involved in a precedent-setting copyright case in the US.

Who took the photo of William Shatner in his avatar? And what's the copyright status of the youtube video his sig links to? No offense Cap, just stirrin' the pot.
Would genuinely be interested in hearing more about the case Spot mentions.

I am not sure who he is referring to because it is not me. I am a CAD programmer

Kirk
He's dead Jim

[DSE 3]

Now I'm embarrassed. I confused "TheCaptain" with "TheCapt."
Sorry for my confusion.
more on his story

[skydived19006 4]

I do believe that it's only a matter of time until one of us is made an example of. I do not have any desire to "be the one!"

I just ordered a royalty free collection from http://www.harkproductions.com/music/mastermix.html
I don't like this music as much as the illegal operation I'm now running, but it's fine, and our video customers will be happy with it. I paid for this collection what one video costs my customer, and hopefully what I already have out there will not come back to bite me in the ass!

So now we play the waiting game. Who will be the one to be made an example of, and when?

1, 2, 3, Not it!
Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[stratostar 5]

Again if it was your works being taken without your permission or pay for it that you might feel different about this issue.

Do I think Tom Petty really cares if his free falling songs is being used on a millon tandem videos, my guess is no, however his record company is a whole different story and I would venture to say they do care and would think nothing of suing the piss out of a DZ and video flyer.

Have I done this in the past, sure we all did for many years, still don't make it right as far as the law sees it, NO!

I don't do tandem videos any more, if I did I would use my licensed music.

If I make a video for my own use and not for sale to public or upload to public, I will use any and all music I own on CD's I paid for (right or wrong under law), because I see it as I paid them for cd and my little home movie is not for sale, it's only or my personal enjoyment and maybe to be shown to friends in my home.

I have a number of shorts I would love to share with the world via youtube or such, but I don't because I don't want the hassle of being one of those people who think just because everyone else is doing it, it must be ok.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[NickDG 23]

When Carl Boenish released his El Cap movie in 1978 he was smart enough to use music that was long in the public domain. That film made the rounds of DZs the world over and is what really kick started the sport of B.A.S.E.

Today when I show that film to newbie B.A.S.E. jumpers a lot of them say, "That's really cool music, who it it?"

I just sigh and say, "That's Ludwig van Beethoven, you moron . . ."

NickD

[PhreeZone 15]

Beethoven's sheet music might be in the public domain but the recorded performance is not. In this case the artist that record it and the label that published it could still claim copyright claims. Public Domain claims are almost usless if it is published since while the music is public domain the recorded performance is not. Public domain has something like 70 years after the last artists death before it is truely in the public domain.

In Carl's case he would have needed to get copyrights from the label that published the albumn that he for the Beethoven from. On his side is that for most purposes it would be hard to tell the London symphony's verion was different then the Boston Pops but technically he would have needed to get permission from the artist that recorded it to use it.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[DSE 3]

Quote

Again



If I make a video for my own use and not for sale to public or upload to public, I will use any and all music I own on CD's I paid for (right or wrong under law), because I see it as I paid them for cd and my little home movie is not for sale, it's only or my personal enjoyment and maybe to be shown to friends in my home.
.

This sort of use is entirely legal. It's when it is replicated in a form that allows more than one person to enjoy it for personal use. ie; family home videos? No legal issue there. Make 50 copies for the family reunion? Illegal, but not a big deal. Put it on YouTube for everyone? High risk...

[jimmytavino 16]

thank you all for a very educational thread...

for a long time we dubbed videos onto VHS
and mixed some some tunes, (originally on a cassette tape )
and then from CD's and all was well with the world....

the new tandem enthusiasts were happy. the dzo was happy and the hard working videographers could finish a weekend with a strong sense of satisfaction...
never really knew we were flirting with copyright infringement....but it seems now, that that is so...
Ignorance is NO defense... and dancing away from scrutiny once, does not assure permanent immunity

A couple of things have kept me from staying on pace with current recording and dubbing techniques. i haven't done a tandem or Aff video now, in the better part of 3 seasons...
( a few reasons).. and judging by the ethical and legal questions now here discussed,,, it could be some time before i get back into..
" videos for hire"...

As mentioned in this thread,, is it Ok to use such pre recorded music for dvd's created as a personal keepsake of a skydive, or for dvd's created to share with others, as a souvenir
or gift.???
Are Consumer level " home movies", as encouraged by every camcorder maker out there, exempt , when using such music???, or culpable???
where is the line drawn,,, between creativity, and infringement.
Can't skydiving videos of a non tandem non student jump, be considered as home movies??/
and so would mixing in music, in that scenario, be an issue???

jmy

a 3914
4 stack 930
nscr 1817

[The111 0]

Quote

Now I'm embarrassed. I confused "TheCaptain" with "TheCapt."
Sorry for my confusion.
more on his story

You weren't the only one confused, even DZ.com is! Look at TheCapt's profile and under recent threads started is says he started this one! Must be a programming glitch having to do with their names beginning the same way.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Icon134 0]

Quote

In Carl's case he would have needed to get copyrights from the label that published the albumn that he for the Beethoven from. On his side is that for most purposes it would be hard to tell the London symphony's verion was different then the Boston Pops but technically he would have needed to get permission from the artist that recorded it to use it.

Not if it was say a piano sonata and he say played it himself and/or had a friend play it for a few bucks (or a beer) and he made a recording...

probably not what was done but hey it's always a possiblility...

From what I understand... the issue is not with the artists but with the industry that initially funds the artists and subsiquently makes money by giving money to someone else more talented then they are... (although I suppose there is some talent in "discovering" the right people. )

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

[NickDG 23]

I believe what happened in Carl's case is he used recorded music that was so old the copyrights on the particular recorded performance had expired.

But, I want to expand on the USPA getting sued idea. I play (and very badly) the bass guitar. And if you're in a band that plays cover songs in a bar or club, to make it legal the owner of the establishment has to have a license from one of the two agencies that offer them. And plenty of owners have been sued for not paying up.

What I think could eventually happen is not so much USPA would have to monetarily put out, but a judge could force them to tell its members (us) to cease and desist the practice of using protected music or lose our memberships.

Carl also used, mostly in his skydiving movies, original music by a fellow named Mike Curb. You may not know the name, but you know the music. Mike did almost all the music for the early porno industry in Southern California.

And there's another angle to all this. We are kind of shooting ourselves in the foot for not allowing "sky music" to become a niche. Does anyone here remember the original music Roger Nelson used on some of his Freak Brothers vids? "Hey, Freak Brother" was a hunk of funk and those tunes hold up to this day.

NickD

[DSE 3]

Mike Curb is a legend in the industry, having scored porn, written for the Osmonds, and starting Curb Records/Entertainment. I've had the pleasure of sitting on a couple panels with him, and was stunned when he told me he'd done a 'a couple of jumps back in the day.'
I was a producer with Curb back in the 80's, producing glam-rock content.
Curb is of the same mind about event music; it must be paid for, because it's music someone else paid for/invested in, and it makes our videos "look" better.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

What I think could eventually happen is not so much USPA would have to monetarily put out, but a judge could force them to tell its members (us) to cease and desist the practice of using protected music or lose our memberships.

Without getting too legally technical, I don't think there would be a legal basis for a judge to do either thing, since the USPA as an entity is not violating any copyrights or causing any copyrights to be violated, despite the fact that some people who violate copyrights in skydiving videos happen to be USPA members. Such a court order can really only be directed at the copyright violators themselves.

Quote

Mike did almost all the music for the early porno industry in Southern California.

Oh, that music! Hey, cool!

[stratostar 5]

Well I did make about 50 copies for the family of my baby's movies and I handed them out as a gift to family members. Now I spent money to make them and I made no money nor took any money for the videos.

If the Johnny Cash Estate or publishers some how find my home movie about my baby boy and want to sue me because I used a Cash track, let um try it, I won't even hire a lawyer, I'll show up and tell the judge it's a home movie and I paid for the box set of Cash recordings, this is not for sale to the public and has not been sold.

My guess is it would be thrown out even if i made a 100 copies for family & friends.

Now the youtube thing, while I thing it sucks there is a high risk, this is the reason you can't see the four baby movies I have made full of copy righted music. I'm surprised to see so many videos on U-tube with copy righted music and video clips that are clearly not the domain of the uploader, dispite the warning about uploading such violations.

I have been waiting for someone to get their tit in the ringer for doing it and I guess it's only a matter of time, same as DZ's who still are using commercial music in tandem-AFF videos.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[PharmerPhil 0]

Quote

Well I did make about 50 copies for the family of my baby's movies and I handed them out as a gift to family members. Now I spent money to make them and I made no money nor took any money for the videos.

...My guess is it would be thrown out even if i made a 100 copies for family & friends.

Don't be so sure. The fact that you made no money on it doesn't mean you didn't illegally distribute copyrighted works to others.

Let's say I go to the hardware store and steal a lamp and give it to a friend for free. Do you really think that the fact that I didn't make any money on it is a defense against stealing?

While you may not be the ideal candidate for an example lawsuit, if the RIAA wants to sick their lawyers on you, I severely doubt it will be "thrown out" because the people you distribute the illegal copies to were your friends, or that it was your baby in the image, or that you didn't make any money off of it, or that you were foolish enough to not hire a lawyer.

[azureriders 0]

Quote

I am not sure who he is referring to because it is not me. I am a CAD programmer

Really, then do you have a couple gigabytes of AutoLisp programs laying around that I can have, you know, those free non copyrighted ones.

Leaving the legal ethics out of this, ethics in general should be enough to cause most of us to head our ways. After all, most of us here are videographers and would not like, nor stand for, someone stealing our work. As for myself, a videographer and more importantly a home designer and draftsman, piracy threatens my financial well being in a serious way.

[stratostar 5]

If they need to dig the bottom of the barrel to bust me for my baby videos I made and gave to my mom and dad, grandmas, aunts, and close friends, fuck um bring it on, I'll see them in court.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[DSE 3]

hey guys...fun discussion, but let's keep the discussion to skydiving vids, how you're managing the copyright issue (or not) etc.