Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 18:07:20 +0200, Jack Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good Morning to All was written in 1893. In 1935 the Hill sisters sued for copyright (42 years after the fact and it is not even clear that they wrote the new words to the song (Happy Birthday to You). The last Hill sister died in 1946. Whose creativity is being stunted when we use this song? Time Warner's? Their creative act seems to be buying something already made and cahing in on it (and lobbying to extend the copyright laws so they can cash in more). Happy Birthday to You will be covered by copyrigh5t laws until 2030 (unless Time Warner/MS/other big uncreative companies can get the copyright laws extended again. That's bullshit, and it is not doing anything to help creativity. You're opposed to the length of the copyright. Pat was opposed to the idea of copyright. Vast difference. I can only agree with you that the current length of copyright (70 years after author's death) is much too long. I'd like to see that changed. - Andreas -- URL:http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
Pete Prodoehl wrote: What a question! The incentive for truly creative people to create things is that they can't *not* create things! I create things because I enjoy creating things. It connects me with others. I get a good sense of satisfaction from the things I create. I can attempt to have control over the creation process. It keeps me sane. Why do I write, draw, record audio, and shoot video? The incentive is not the almighty dollar, that's for sure... As cliché as the I do it for myself thing might sound, it's pretty much true. (Also, I think you may be confusing good with popular) Pete -- http://tinkernet.org/ videoblog for the future... Good, then in a world without copyright, what I'll do is I'll just watch for what you're creating and as soon as I see something I like, I'll call it my own and commercialize it. Work for hire is bad enough, a world without copyright is anarchy, and the people who would be getting screwed the most would be the ones creating works. What you're missing is that copyright is necessary to give people the incentive to keep creating, because I guarantee the first time I took what you did and made a fortune on it that was rightfully yours, your motivation to be creative would certainly be impaired. Ask some people who have had famous works taken away from them under work for hire clauses and see how they feel about trying to make a living as a creative person. That's not to say copyright is a perfect system. There are many issues with it right now that need to be resolved so that the public's freedom's are protected. It's certainly better than the alternative though. Clint -- Clint Sharp New Media Guy Technologist ClintSharp.com Contact Info: http://clintsharp.com/contact/ We are the media. YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
Clint Sharp wrote: Pete Prodoehl wrote: What a question! The incentive for truly creative people to create things is that they can't *not* create things! I create things because I enjoy creating things. It connects me with others. I get a good sense of satisfaction from the things I create. I can attempt to have control over the creation process. It keeps me sane. Why do I write, draw, record audio, and shoot video? The incentive is not the almighty dollar, that's for sure... As cliché as the I do it for myself thing might sound, it's pretty much true. (Also, I think you may be confusing good with popular) Pete -- http://tinkernet.org/ videoblog for the future... Good, then in a world without copyright, what I'll do is I'll just watch for what you're creating and as soon as I see something I like, I'll call it my own and commercialize it. Work for hire is bad enough, a world without copyright is anarchy, and the people who would be getting screwed the most would be the ones creating works. What you're missing is that copyright is necessary to give people the incentive to keep creating, because I guarantee the first time I took what you did and made a fortune on it that was rightfully yours, your motivation to be creative would certainly be impaired. Ask some people who have had famous works taken away from them under work for hire clauses and see how they feel about trying to make a living as a creative person. That's not to say copyright is a perfect system. There are many issues with it right now that need to be resolved so that the public's freedom's are protected. It's certainly better than the alternative though. Clint, I never said I was against copyright. Isn't the idea of copyright to provide rights to the person/organization that creates something? What I want is *control* over my rights. Currently I believe a Creative Commons license provides this. (I hope that's true.) Also, here is the question I responded to (which was not included in your response.) Andreas Haugstrup wrote: What's the incentive for creating works if you can't make money the one time in your life you create something really good? My main point was that, I don't it down and think about how I'm going to make money before I create something, that is not my primary motivation, and I hope it never is. BTW, I think I do make a living as a creative person, but maybe our definitions of creative differ quite a bit. Pete -- http://tinkernet.org/ videoblog for the future... SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
At 11:59 AM 8/8/2005, Clint Sharp wrote: Pete Prodoehl wrote: What a question! The incentive for truly creative people to create things is that they can't *not* create things! Exactly Pete. And it the beauty is it *doesn't* have *anything whatsoever* to do with $$$. I create things because I enjoy creating things. It connects me with others. I get a good sense of satisfaction from the things I create. I can attempt to have control over the creation process. It keeps me sane. Why do I write, draw, record audio, and shoot video? The incentive is not the almighty dollar, that's for sure... As cliché as the I do it for myself thing might sound, it's pretty much true. Right again Pete. :-) Why do you think I do my podcast Clint? Because I ENJOY IT. Why do I write my little online soap opera I have Clint? Because I ENJOY IT. Why do you think I run a video blog of stupid people Clint? Because I ENJOY IT SEE THE HUMOR IN THE STUPIDITY OF OTHERS (when there is humor to see of course :-) ). Neither of these things are done for the specific purpose of makin' a sh*tload of $$$. (Also, I think you may be confusing good with popular) Naah Pete. I think he's just confusing doing stuff out of enjoyment with doing stuff for a living. Good, then in a world without copyright, what I'll do is I'll just watch for what you're creating and as soon as I see something I like, I'll call it my own and commercialize it. Work for hire is bad enough, a world without copyright is anarchy, and the people who would be getting screwed the most would be the ones creating works. It's a good point to make in the case of the artists vs. the record labels. But do you honestly believe it would be anarchist if someone thinks that a simple song such as HAPPY BIRTHDAY should be made public domain? C'mon Clint.. What you're missing is that copyright is necessary to give people the incentive to keep creating, because I guarantee the first time I took what you did and made a fortune on it that was rightfully yours, your motivation to be creative would certainly be impaired. Ask some people who have had famous works taken away from them under work for hire clauses and see how they feel about trying to make a living as a creative person. Only difference is Clint, we're not talking about just any ordinary piece of work here. We're talking about a song that's just as universal (if not more so) around the world as Jingle Bells. Big difference dude. That's not to say copyright is a perfect system. You're right. It's not. There are many issues with it right now that need to be resolved so that the public's freedom's are protected. It's certainly better than the alternative though. And just what would that be in your mind Clint? Anarchy? C'mon. You're not giving the American people enough credit. Sure, a middle ground needs to be reached. But either way you look at it, the path is just as long and wide. Just a few things to think about. :-) Cheers for now everyone :-) Pat Cook Denver, Colorado AS PAT'S WORLD TURNS - http://aspatsworldturns.blogspot.com/ PAT'S REAL DEAL BLOG - http://patsrealdeal.blogspot.com/ PAT'S PODCAST - http://patspodcast.blogspot.com/ PAT'S VIDEO BLOG - http://patsvideoblog.blogspot.com/ DUMBASS IDIOTS VIDEO BLOG - http://dumbassidiots.blogspot.com/ AGAINST THE STORM (Online Soap Opera) - http://againstthestorm.blogspot.com/ RSS Feeds Available On Each Page YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
Yes, but if you sing a variant on Happy Birthday-- ANY variant-- in which you change the lyrics (except for celebrant's name) and/or tune, then you have a good fight available. Why? Because Good Morning to You, which is a nearly identical tune to Happy Birthday, is public domain (it is, in fact, what the Hill sisters based their version of the song on). It is the same, except that in Happy Birthday, the first note of each line is two eights instead of a quarter note (i.e., it is two beats instead of one). For instance, Happy Birthday to you, you live in a zoo ought to be defensible in court. After all, it is parody, among other reasons. But I'm not a lawyer and if you get sued for it, your defense had better not be But mortaine said it was okay! Although does anyone want to do a parody-birthday song collaborative project? THAT would be a fun Videoblogging promo and would have the added benefit of giving back to the world (people could email it to their favorite birthday person) and risk us all getting sued by Time/Warner and getting tons and tons of publicity for vlogging as a result. --Stephanie On 8/6/05, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's the story of the happy birthday song: http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.htm -- Stephanie Bryant [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mortaine.com YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 05:01:53 +0200, Pat Cook (Jeeper One TV) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Leave it fuckin' AOL to take something like Happy Birthday and copyright it for fuckin' profit (Sorry, I don't buy the so-called private charity bullshit). :-( :-( :-( Would you relax. AOL didn't copyright it. Copyright is automatic. You seem to prefer the opposite system. A system where copyright would be lost when a work becomes really popular (e.g. when Happy Birthday becomes a cultural icon). That would hurt creativity even more. What's the incentive for creating works if you can't make money the one time in your life you create something really good? This just goes to prove the point I made towards the end of my latest podcast (Episode 21 which DOES NOT have any known copyrighted material). I said in the podcast that before long companies and/or individuals with large sums of $$$ will find a way to copyright every word in the English language for some sort of profit, leaving only DEAD AIR for the rest of us Average Pats. I couldn't find this podcast (your blog only goes until #20), but if you're including music in your podcast the material is copyrighted (unless the composer and the performers have signed the work over to the public domain). Creative Commons work is still copyrighted, thank God. Unless *you* signed the podcast over to the public domain and as far as I can tell you haven't, then your podcast itself is copyrighted. By you. - Andreas -- URL:http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 14:56:13 +0200, Pete Prodoehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you ever *bought* music, and by bought, I mean bought the full rights to any music to do as you please? Most times you are licensing it. CD's you buy at the store? You don't own those, you don't have the right to do whatever you want with it. You're just paying for the rights to do with it what the record companies will allow you to do with it. You're glancing over some important parts of copyrights here. When you buy a cd at the store you're buying a 'copy' of the work. That copy is yours to keep - what you can do with it is not limited by what the record companies feel is right. What you can do is limited by copyright law. Record companies could of course limit you, but not without having you sign a contract along each purchase. You have quite a few rights. With Freeplay on the other hand you don't buy a 'copy' of the work. You buy a license to use this work for a given period of time and for a specific purpose. Here you have only the rights granted to you in the license agreement. This is the exact reason I'm still buying physical cd's and not buying from the iTunes Music Store. At the music store I don't buy a copy of the songs. I buy a license to listen to them. It's a more liberal license than Freeplay, but it's still too restrictive for me. I'm not allowed to sell my iTunes bought music like I can sell my used cds for example. We can take an art poster analogy. When you go to a store to buy an art poster you buy a copy of thet work. This is the same as buying a physical cd. If it was a licensing deal you would only buy the right to display that poster in your home (probably 'for personal use in a non-commercial manner'). You couldn't even sell the poster to your buddy for two bucks. You'd have to destroy the poster and tell your buddy to go down to the store to get his own licensing deal. Online music businesses need to change before they'll see any of my business. - Andreas -- URL:http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
where does it end? will i eventually have to pay every time i remember a song? generally the only things i have to pay for repeatedly are my mistakes ;-) hmmm, maybe that means the buying commercial music is a mistake, hmmm yesterday, I was unpacking some boxes and I ran into a classic CD. I thought "Hey! I'd like to listen to this." Then it hit me: Why bother? The same amount of time would be better spent finding something new on the archive. we are the media markus Pete Prodoehl wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Pat Cook (Jeeper One TV)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I ranted on this on my podcast earlier today (which BTW will NOT have the open close I normally attach to each show) and an idea hit me that if they were to charge a ONE-TIME flat fee $5 (or whatever the minilum value of a Money Order is nowadays) per track download REGARDLESS OF USE, they'd make a fuckin' mint. I mean, think of it this way, how many times do you have to pay for a gallon of milk at the grocery store before they actually consider it yours to leave with? Answer - ONCE - At the checkout counter. When is the next time you pay for milk? Answer - WHEN YOU GET ANOTHER GALLON. I've NEVER seen ANY business charge me for something more than once. But the milk is a physical thing. You consume it, and it's gone. Music used as branding in a piece of media that can be played over, and over, and over and seen/heard by millions of people is different than a gallon of milk a few people will drink. Have you ever *bought* music, and by bought, I mean bought the full rights to any music to do as you please? Most times you are licensing it. CD's you buy at the store? You don't own those, you don't have the right to do whatever you want with it. You're just paying for the rights to do with it what the record companies will allow you to do with it. You've never paid for anything more than once? What about seeing a movie in a theater more than once, or a band perform more than once. I understand your point, but how would you feel if you sold me unlimited rights to one of your podcasts and I then made millions of dollars off of it? Pete Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- font face=arial size=-1a href="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12haror52/M=362131.6882499.7825260.1510227/D=groups/S=1705554021:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123340199/A=2889191/R=0/SIG=10r90krvo/*http://www.thebeehive.org">"http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12haror52/M=362131.6882499.7825260.1510227/D=groups/S=1705554021:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123340199/A=2889191/R=0/SIG=10r90krvo/*http://www.thebeehive.org "Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job) Welcome to the Sweet Life -brought to you by One Economy/a./font ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- My name is Markus Sandy and I am app.etitio.us http://apperceptions.org http://spinflow.org http://spinsummer2005.blogspot.com http://spinsummer2005meetup.blogspot.com http://vloggercuewest.blogspot.com aim/ichat: [EMAIL PROTECTED] msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] skype: msandy SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
yesterday, I was unpacking some boxes and I ran into a classic CD. I thought Hey! I'd like to listen to this. Then it hit me: Why bother? The same amount of time would be better spent finding something new on the archive. then i guess it wasn;t such a classic CD!! i know what you're getting at markus, but some stuff deserves repeated listening/watching, i've watched some vlogs more than once, and i think some of them have left such a lasting impression that i hope i will return to them in the future. For me, great works in any medium can give you a feeling or an experience that is completely unique, and that is worth going through again. One major risk with the amount (explosion?) of stuff being created at the moment is that it all becomes too disposable, and we rush on to the next thing, never giving things enought time to grow on us.. never letting stuff breathe, d SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
Lessig recently cited an experiment, i think in Wired mag, on how they tried to legally publish on the net he and friends singing 'Happy Birthday' to another friend. Quick conclusion- it cost almost $1,000 *if* they were granted permission... which they were at first but then they were denied the license agreement in the end. happy birthday fuck you! sull- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -The hybrid or the meeting of two media is a moment of truth and revelation from which new form is born- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://vlogdir.com - The Videoblog Directoryhttp://interdigitate.com - on again off again vlog YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
Hi everyone: At 10:42 AM 8/6/2005, you wrote: Lessig recently cited an experiment, i think in Wired mag, on how they tried to legally publish on the net he and friends singing 'Happy Birthday' to another friend. Quick conclusion- it cost almost $1,000 *if* they were granted permission... which they were at first but then they were denied the license agreement in the end. happy birthday fuck you! Yeah no sh*t. Who in the world has copyright over that title. :-( Cheers for now :-) Pat YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 04:06:42 +0200, Pat Cook (Jeeper One TV) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah no sh*t. Who in the world has copyright over that title. :-( AOL/Time Warner does: URL: http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.htm It's big bucks: According to David Sengstack, president of Summy-Birchard, Happy Birthday to You brings in about $2 million in royalties annually, with the proceeds split between Summy-Birchard and the Hill Foundation. (Both Hill sisters died unmarried and childless, so the Hill Foundation's share of the royalties have presumably been going to charity or to nephew Archibald Hill ever since Patty Hill passed away in 1946.) - Andreas -- URL:http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Taking my videos down (Freeplay Music discussion)
happy birthday fuck you! Yeah no sh*t. Who in the world has copyright over that title. :-( Here's the story of the happy birthday song: http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.htm Apparently it now brings in about 2 Million in annual royalties which are split between AOL Time/Warner and a private charity established by the descendants of the song's creators. -josh On 8/6/05, Pat Cook (Jeeper One TV) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone: At 10:42 AM 8/6/2005, you wrote: Lessig recently cited an experiment, i think in Wired mag, on how they tried to legally publish on the net he and friends singing 'Happy Birthday' to another friend. Quick conclusion- it cost almost $1,000 *if* they were granted permission... which they were at first but then they were denied the license agreement in the end. happy birthday fuck you! Yeah no sh*t. Who in the world has copyright over that title. :-( Cheers for now :-) Pat YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group videoblogging on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
