|
Matt Wall-Smith, you just spelled out as a
political agenda my feelings exactly! Let's start a hopper of proposed
legislation to keep vlogging free! Expanding "fair use" include using
music you purchased as background for personal non-commercial vlogs should be
considered "fair use"!
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:58
AM
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Various
types of permission forms
The fact is that we have always determined our own 'fair
use' as consumers.
While I despise the illegal sharing of content for
commercial gain or the
unauthorized use of music as underscore in
commercial product I think that
as consumers we should ensure that fair use
legislation is revised so that
its made workable. Obviously running in fear
of litigation is not going to
help the industry music industry help itself
and stop this ridiculous
estrangement of its best customers. If I buy a CD
then I should be able to
use the contents of that CD for the production of
personal media. A
Videoblog is not necessarily personal media but a lot of
the time it
definitely is. If I am posting Video's to the net of my baby
girl so that
the grandparents can see her grow then I should be able to
play a CD track
(that I own) behind it just as I would in my lounge room. I
see the act as
political, as activism, and I really think that a standard
workable in
networked world needs to be asserted by the consumer as an
alternative to
the insane atmosphere that is being propagated by the 'never
fair' industry.
But yeah I do it knowing I could be sued. I don't ever
think that somehow I
am 'below' the reach of this insanity. But that
doesn't mean I am going to
take it lying down in compliance.
Yep my
blog is a publication, just like my zine was, just like Fear of a
Black
Planet was, just like that photocopy I might give to my students, or
the
sound I might post as an example, or the use of remediated video in
a
lecture, or the compilations I use to dub on my tape deck and hand out
to
friends, or the cover I play at a local pub.......
You get the
point.
On 6/9/05 8:29 PM, "Adrian Miles"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> around the 5/9/05 Randolfe
Wicker mentioned about Re: [videoblogging]
> Various types of permission
forms that:
>> Actually a lot of vloggers use music they don't have a
license for
>> in their vlogs. The fact is that no one bothers
"suing them"
>> because their using the music has virtually no real
impact.
>>
>
> this is nonsense. I can't say that
strongly enough. Get slashdotted
> and your music will matter. Get shown
via *any* commercial media and
> your music will matter. People once
said this about anything on the
> web, it is not the case now. Just
because big media haven't caught
> on, doesn't mean that when they do,
they won't play serious catch up.
>
>> Yes, vlogging could be
considered to be one step up from home
>> movies. With vlogging
you can share what might otherwise be home
>> movies with friends,
even the whole world if the whole world was
>> interested enough to
drop by and watch them.
>
> absolutely not. a home movie is
played to your immediate
> family/friends in home. It is not
broadcast/distributed. A blog is a
> publication.
>
> In
video sales if you buy a home VHS tape and show it to a school
> group,
you've broken the law. The home VHS is for home use only. The
> copy you
buy for schools is for showing to a group and (usually)
> costs approx.
10 x the domestic cost. Such things exist and are
> standard practice.
that this might be breached every now and then,
> just like photocopying
a whole book because you can't get your own
> copy, doesn't make it
legal. Minor moments don't matter, when it
> becomes a standard
practice, it does.
>
>>
>> Technically, you might be
right insofar as "legalities" are
>> concerned. However, like
those labels that they used to have on
>> cigarette packages which
said it was illegal "not" to break them, a
>> lot of laws are really
ignored.
>
> which is what napster thought. Which is what lots of
low budget film
> makers thought until their film can't be legally shown
anywhere.
> There *are* stories of people who have film screened, only
to receive
> letter from legal firm requesting tens of thousands of
dollars since
> that is how much the rights to the lyrics/music
costs.
>
> I really think videobloggers are naive if they think
these rules
> don't apply to them. Without clearance your material
cannot be shown
> in awards/festivals and cannot be broadcast. Basically
you don't want
> to be the person that is the first one pursued for
this, because the
> industry will not play nicely.
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
