Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Ronen
On 11/21/05, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: you must mean the "copyrighter" - the author often has little say in matters once a piece is published Copyright holder, yes ;) How naive of me. Brad Webb wrote: The secondary part, not sure about.. the non-profit side of things

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Markus Sandy
you must mean the "copyrighter" - the author often has little say in matters once a piece is published Brad Webb wrote: The secondary part, not sure about.. the non-profit side of things. However, the payment to the writer -- the only thing required to distribute a cover -- is correct.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Pete Prodoehl
Ronen wrote: > Am I incorrect that a 'cover' version of a song requires that a deal must be > arranged with the performer, but that a fixed percentage exists to be paid > to the writer? And that if we're dealing with non-profit distribution, the > only issue is arranging a deal with the performer w

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Brad Webb
The secondary part, not sure about.. the non-profit side of things. However, the payment to the writer -- the only thing required to distribute a cover -- is correct. Obviously, a deal/agreement has to be made with any performer. Ronen wrote: > Am I incorrect that a 'cover' version of a song r

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Ronen
Am I incorrect that a 'cover' version of a song requires that a deal must be arranged with the performer, but that a fixed percentage exists to be paid to the writer?  And that if we're dealing with non-profit distribution, the only issue is arranging a deal with the performer who performed the

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Pete Prodoehl
Steve Garfield wrote: > Over on the podcasting side of things Adam Curry has completley stopped > using any music that he doesn't have the rights to and has removed old > podcasts with copyrighted music from his archives. > > http://music.podshow.com is one of the places I get music from. And I

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Steve Garfield
Over on the podcasting side of things Adam Curry has completley stopped using any music that he doesn't have the rights to and has removed old podcasts with copyrighted music from his archives. http://music.podshow.com is one of the places I get music from. It promotes independent artists AND t

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Ronen
It's safer to use music you have permissions to.   But Usually people let it slide.  Kevin Smith's vlog uses a ton of copyrighted music, and do many other people's, and no one's raising any eyebrows.  Just don't try to sell it, or put the vlog in iTunes' listings. The answer is basically "

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-21 Thread Thomas G Henry
im not totally sure but i think u need a "mechanical license" for sampling... and are allowed fewer than 7 notes if you are covering... something like that... check out BMI, ASCAP, Harry Fox, SESAC they'll ask u how many reproductions u plan to make. ur traffic would be an idea i guess...

Re: [videoblogging] Re: mainstream music in videos

2005-11-20 Thread Ted Tagami
Great link Share... Thank you! It's always nice to be able to have good music in your videosOn 11/20/05, Share < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, it's not exactly 'mainstream' per se..but you can get a lot of great music at: www.podsafemusicnetwork.com my band, bubble is up there and so ar