Gees, Pete... take a chill pill. Kitka
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Pete Prodoehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Kitka wrote: > > Thanks Paul, I agree with you too. In the media world, there IS such > > a thing as a "cease and desist". I was talking with someone from the > > CBC the other day (more about this subject at a later date) and he > > told me about how someone was compiling a Top 100 songs list for a > > major network.... he said that they got a cease and desist order from > > Leonard Cohen (or some boring musician like that) and they couldn't > > use him in the FLATTERING Top 100 show they were making. > > Makes perfect sense to me. If Leonard Cohen wants to control how his > work is used, he should have that choice. Whether the show was > flattering or critical doesn't matter. Others may see this differently, > but it's ultimately about artists being able to control how their work > is used. > > > Similarly, videobloggers aren't going to instantly get sued for using > > copywritten music/content... they will get a cease and desist order > > and if they do not comply, they will then be fined or get a court order. > > I think it is incorrect to say 'copywritten' as a work you create has > your copyright assigned to it. How you choose that work to be used is > different from this. The music I can get from Magnatune still has a > copyright held by the artist, but the *license* allows me to use it in > certain ways. > > > That said, stop worrying so much about it. As long as we all know the > > consequences, we can remove certain files from the Internet if they > > are problematic. I mean, it's not like you can just call up U2 and > > ask if you can use their music! > > Well, some of us are big believers in things like Creative Commons, > which allow an artist to easily specify how their work can be used. U2 > is a lost cause, they don't even have the rights to their music. (Look > up Negativland for more on that one!) The hope is that from this point > on, artists will realize they *can* have control of their art, and how > it is used, and in 10 years, or 20, or whatever, the world of "what you > can legally/safely use" is quite different. It's already happening, but > we can help make it happen. > > > Personally, I wouldn't use copyrighted material if I were making money > > off of it, but if it's all in good fun, I think it's fair to use it. > > (I don't see many people complaining about the use of the Brokeback > > Mountain song with all the homages like "Brokeback to the Future", etc.!) > > Again, it *is* ok to use "copyrighted" material, as long as you have the > rights to do so. Getting those right can sometimes prove difficult. (See > above.) Of course there is the issue of "what is commercial" as well. > Are you making money from ads on your site? Affiliate programs? PayPal > donation links? Who decides what "making money" consists of? (The courts?) > > As for complaining about people using the music from Brokeback mountain > without permission (unless it's "fair use" ala parody, etc.) just point > me at them, and I'll complain! ;) > > The reason I think all of this stuff is important is that I want to see > videoblogging grow and grow, and pretty much explode, and I want to see > it done without violating the rights of artists. I want to see it done > in a way that steps around all that is wrong with the RIAA and MPAA and > those that would see us crushed beneath their wheels > > (Whew, rant mode off...) > > > Pete > > -- > http://tinkernet.org/ > videoblog for the future... > 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/
