Copyright <again>

[DSE 3]

This subject is a popular argument no matter whether you're in SC or anywhere else...but it still is very relevant to the videographer in skydiving.
Please note this jury-trial decision of just a few hours ago if you're still convinced that you can't be nailed as a DZO or videographer....
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/o-tenenbaum-riaa-wins-675000-or-22500-per-song.ars

Follows the previous case. There are now two precedents from two different angles... proving it's worth it to go after small time infringements.
Consider royalty-free....because this issue isn't going away. A judgement like this one is easily more than enough to bury a DZ.

[champu 1]

I'm really not sure how different an angle this case was from the Thomas-Rasset trial. That said...

Forgetting peer-to-peer for a moment, have there been any cases of the RIAA going after violations of synchronization licenses (specifically, lack thereof) in no-profit situations? Youtube and the other major players will generally pull videos if they get a complaint from the copyright owner of the audio track, but what about other websites? Is the volume not high enough to trigger a response?

I assume there have been cases of the RIAA defending sync-rights in for-profit situations somewhere along the line. yes? (my guess is the term "sync-rights" wouldn't exist if that were not the case.)

And here's a hypothetical... suppose you allowed a student to bring a CD with the music they wanted to go along with their skydive. If you shot the video and dubbed the music (for which, let's assume, the student has a legitimate private use license) to it, didn't retain a copy of the music, and the student never published the video/music anywhere publicly, do you think you would have a case that this falls under fair use?

Presumably I can make a skydiving video synced to copyrighted music if I don't release it publicly / publicly exhibit it. What if a friend comes over and uses my music and my video to make a video for me that, again, I don't release publicly. What if I buy him a beer for his efforts? What if I give him a dollar?

[DSE 3]

What if, what if, what if....?
This was the game that Tenenbaum played, too (read his depositions from 2008).

Bottom line is, there is NO WAY anyone can legally create a skydiving tandem, four-way, whatever video using copyrighted music works distributed on a DVD.
Now...if you want to make a list of songs that have been licensed for personal use to YouTube and try to run that gauntlet, go for it. But understand that YouTube has already said they will not attempt to protect you should the licensee determine your video is not of a personal nature. It would be very difficult for a video that opens with "Welcome to Skydive XXXX" to argue that the video is personal vs a commercial work. Neither you, nor the student (who merely has a license to listen to the music) has a legal right to sync video to that music. No, I don't think you'd have a case that would fall under Fair Use, because the student didn't create the video, it's not for education, parody, social commentary. Could it fall under DeMinimis? Absolutely. Possibly. Probably. Until Petty's or Van Halen's publisher realizes that there are 100,000 DVDs out there over the years with "FreeFallin'" or "Jump" on them.
The question is, do you really want to be the DZ that becomes the case study for this sort of action?
Tenenbaum thought he could beat the system....Just as Thomas-Rasset did. She was defended (very well, BTW) by a skydiver and was hit harder at her retrial.

I suspect one of the reasons we're not seeing these cases by the boatloads right now are:
-Waiting for more common applicable precedent to occur
-Software being used to identify illegal usage is still in development
-RIAA would rather not sue if it can be avoided.
-Artists would rather not sue if it can be avoided.

I am aware of peripheral details of a skydiving video being notified/charged with infringement, yes. Unfortunately, I don't have enough detail to intelligently comment on it.

Either way....I sure wouldn't want to be the DZ that is used as the precedent, because there is no way in hell they'll win. P2P vs sync licenses is a much harder argument for the RIAA; there is only one actual law violated. Sync...there are at least three.
FWIW, our DZ doesn't use any copyrighted works at all, and hasn't for three years.

[georgerussia 0]

Just a few comments:

Quote

Please note this jury-trial decision of just a few hours ago if you're still convinced that you can't be nailed as a DZO or videographer....
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/o-tenenbaum-riaa-wins-675000-or-22500-per-song.ars

The decision is not final yet; a very interesting question which is about to decide is whether the statutory damage award violates due process. If you follow the changed defense strategy, seems like the goal was to get such a verdict and to challenge it based on too high statutory damages.

Quote

Follows the previous case. There are now two precedents from two different angles... proving it's worth it to go after small time infringements.

It depends on what you consider "worth". So far all they did is heavily alienated general public (i.e. consumers!) towards RIAA - it's very hard now to find a person who would have any sympathy to them. This increases a chance of changing the existing legislation (which is now way too far to RIAA side). Despite the hundred thousand dollar verdicts, none of defendants will ever pay it. They'll just file for bankruptcy, so even from financial side all those cases are clear loss for RIAA.

And the battle is still going.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[DSE 3]

THIS thread is for discussion of illegal use of music in tandem videos. A very narrow range of discussion for videographers on dropzones.
Please keep the rhetoric and opinions of the RIAA motivation in the Speaker Corner where it belongs.
If this thread strays from the tandem video discussion, there will be no choice but to lock it down.

[Bill_K 0]

DSE,

Are there places where a DZ can buy bulk licenses of music that can legally be used? I.e. so as to have variety, enough to be interesting without having to repeat a lot, etc. Our DZO is asking and wanting to do the legal right thing in this regard.

Thx,
BK

[DSE 3]

you can:
Use Royalty Free
Use Acid/Garage Band/Soundtrack/SmartSound libraries to create your own
Use Sony CineScore....
Use Creative Commons licenses.

There is no way at this point in time (other than some ridiculously limited selections via Zoom and similar sites) to use "on the radio/popular songs" and be copyright-cleared.

[parachutist 1]

Quote

DSE,

Are there places where a DZ can buy bulk licenses of music that can legally be used? I.e. so as to have variety, enough to be interesting without having to repeat a lot, etc. Our DZO is asking and wanting to do the legal right thing in this regard.

Thx,
BK

Bill,

Here's one source I used for royalty-free music:
http://www.wavtracks.com/

Quite a few other collections are available online if you do a search, and they're pretty affordable. You can hear some of these songs in tandem videos by checking out our recent YouTube uploads if you'd like:
http://www.youtube.com/user/UtahSkydive

[beowulf 1]

I am a big fan of Sony Cinescore. Very easy to use and lots of themes to choose from.

[Graiki 0]

Hi guys....

look this;

www.jamendo.com

Free music

blue skies.

[Icon134 0]

Quote

I am a big fan of Sony Cinescore. Very easy to use and lots of themes to choose from.

I ususally use Cinescore for 4-way videos... and have been using Acid Music studio for fun jumper videos that I've been making because I have more creative control with Acid loops and can have a lot more fun...

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

[beowulf 1]

Not all of the music on that website is entirely free to be used for commercial use. Make sure you read through and understand the licensing. Just because it's free to download doesn't mean it's free to be used in your videos.

[beowulf 1]

Yeah I know what you mean. I have both Cinescore and Acid Music Studio. Cinescore saves a lot of time.

[Bill_K 0]

Quote

Yeah I know what you mean. I have both Cinescore and Acid Music Studio. Cinescore saves a lot of time.

How do you guys incorporate Cinescore into your work flows? Are you going in and creating a bunch of music before hand or? I.e. where does it fall in your work flow of getting something created and out the door. Yes I'm asking more from a tandem video perspective where time a little more critical than say a 4 way/fun jump video that I can work on at home later.

[beowulf 1]

In Sony Vegas Pro 8 with Cinescore installed I can select the section of video or the entire video and have Cinescore generate the soundtrack for it based on a theme I select. That is the quick and easy method. Cinescore also allows for some customization of the sound track. But that depends on how much time you want to spend on it.

You can download and try out Cinescore for 30 days free. Go to www.SonyCreativeSoftware.com

[Bill_K 0]

Does that work with the non-pro version of Sony Vegas too? I actually downloaded and purchased Cinescore and have been playing with it and when I have plenty of time to sit and mess with it, it's great. But for quick turn around stuff, I find other work flows are faster for now. I wonder if I just need to check a box somewhere so that it will work with the version of Vegas that I have....

[beowulf 1]

I only have Pro 8, so I don't know about the other versions. I am pretty sure it does integrate with Vegas Movie Studio.

[Icon134 0]

Quote

In Sony Vegas Pro 8 with Cinescore installed I can select the section of video or the entire video and have Cinescore generate the soundtrack for it based on a theme I select. That is the quick and easy method. Cinescore also allows for some customization of the sound track. But that depends on how much time you want to spend on it.

more or less what he said... I create the video sequence then using the Cinescore plugin in Vegas I create the music tracks based on the length of the clips...

I can't access the 4-way video folders from the office but they aren't difficult to find on my website... http://www.scottgunstills.com/ (look in the "Skydiving 2009>Grippers>Grippers Videos>" Category and although there are a few that don't have Music but a number of them do...)

my method to create my own mixes using Acid Music Studio tends to vary a bit depending on what I'm creating...

for one of my year end videos from last year (the first section I created the music first and did the video editing such that it fit to the music...) the second section I had an idea for what I wanted from a video standpoint and had some idea for the style of music but created the video first and made the music to fit the video... which is what I typically do now when creating videos for up jumpers.

such as this one http://www.scottgunstills.com/gallery/8999959_4jSv5/1/#598772870_niRVS-A-LB

And yes the Cinescore plugin works with Sony Vegas Moive Studio as well

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

[flr169 0]

nice vid Scott

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting - "fcuk me what a ride!"

[ChangoLanzao 0]

This is an extreme case that isn't settled yet. I don't think it really applies to what DZ's are doing with tandem videos. Not to say that I think it's legal in general to sync music without a license, but I think that in the hypothetical case that champu mentioned above, a strong case could be made that it is "fair use". I have the feeling that the RIAA would not be too anxious to prosecute a case in front of a jury that involved a clear argument for fair use.

[Skwrl 56]

This is one of those situations in which wishing something were true - even having a good reason why it should be true - does not make it so.

Using a significant portion of a copyrighted song in a tandem video is highly unlikely to constitute "fair use". People have a lot of misperceptions about what fair use is in the United States, unfortunately. For those interested in learning about what "fair use" really is, you may want to check out this article: http://www.publaw.com/work.html.

If you take a look at how fair use has been interepreted, you'll see that it's a little squishy at the edges, but tandem videos are nowhere near the edge...

Is it likely that the RIAA or any other person who has an interest in the copyright would sue a DZ or video guy over that sort of infringement? No, probably not. But whackier things have happened. If a DZ did get sued, fair use would likely get blown out of the water. (Add to that a complication that the DZ's lawyer would have to face: the burden of proving fair use is on the defendant. That means that the copyright holder doesn't has to prove that your use isn't fair use; you would have to prove that it is fair use. That sounds like a minor distinction, but it can have a huge practical impact.)

Here's a rough analogy: Imagine a speed limit is posted as 55 mph. You're driving 80 mph on that road. Now, you may say, "well, Hell, I'm not going to get caught." That's a risk assessment that you can make if you want. But you shouldn't kid yourself by saying, "well, the speed limit is 80 mph...", because it's pretty clearly not.

(I'm not saying this is a good and wise result or that I'm happy about this or anything like that - I'm simply saying what the actual state of the law is. People often confuse what the law is with what they feel the law should be.)

Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography

Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

[ChangoLanzao 0]

I was referring to the very specific hypothetical case that champu pointed out above:

Quote

And here's a hypothetical... suppose you allowed a student to bring a CD with the music they wanted to go along with their skydive. If you shot the video and dubbed the music (for which, let's assume, the student has a legitimate private use license) to it, didn't retain a copy of the music, and the student never published the video/music anywhere publicly, do you think you would have a case that this falls under fair use?

ETA: Please don't get me wrong. I am not saying that this is a prudent thing for a DZ or a vidiot to do.

I think this should be a "fair use." I'm not a lawyer and I don't know if this has ever actually been tested, but I am pretty confident that a jury of my peers, given the opportunity to deliberate on it, would agree that it is fair use. It's just my opinion and I do not think that I am in the minority on this.

Anyway, the case that DSE mentioned to get this thread going has nothing to do with sync rights. It is an extreme case in which the defendant had a history of being sued for distributing music over the internet. Also, the judge prevented the jury from even considering fair use (among a host of other topics). The case is not resolved yet, but it is serving the purpose of putting fear and loathing in many people's hearts ;-)

[pilotdave 0]

For those using cinescore... are you using the default themes that came with it, or did you buy any more? I'm just playing with the demo... I think I'll go for it. But I'm just curious if it comes with enough variety that works well for skydiving videos. Any of the themes available for sale have a lot of good stuff for skydiving videos?

I haven't looked at acid... I assume that's too much trouble for quick edits. Especially for the musically challenged. Sound about right?

Dave

[DSE 3]

Tenenbaum isn't an extreme case from my view point, and it's relevant because proving illegal use comes before chasing illegal use with add-ons. Skwrl may disagree (He's an attorney).
Tenenbaum shows it's not only illegal to use P2P, but to replicate or provide opportunity to replicate music, which is exactly what a DZ is doing when creating a DVD containing copyrighted music (sync license issue aside).
In other words, the repercussions for a DZ stand to be as great or greater than simple P2P, because more violations are involved.

How you see skydiving videos as a "clear case for Fair Use" would be an interesting discussion. The WEVA community has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and hours trying to find that argument for wedding videos (identical in form to skydiving videos) and concluded they cannot make such an argument. As a result, they have signed discount agreements with ZOOM and other licensing groups that offer no differences than what has already been mentioned countless times here on this board.
Skydiving videos (aside from illegal replication, illegal redistribution, and illegal sync licensing) will not likely fall under Fair Use no matter how much any of us wish it might.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

How you see skydiving videos as a "clear case for Fair Use" would be an interesting discussion.

That's not what I said.

I wasn't referring to skydiving videos in general. I was referring to the specific hypothetical case that champu mantioned. If a person legally purchases music, he has the right to listen to it while he watches his tandem video. Right?

So ... what's the difference in terms of damages to the music author if the legally purchased music is sync'ed on the DVD? Nothing. That's all I am saying.