Legalities of use of music in wedding videos - Page 5 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > Taking Care of Business

Taking Care of Business
The pen and paper aspects of DV -- put it in writing!


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 5th, 2005, 08:26 AM   #61
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Venice, FL
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez
So Someone has to convince BMI,and ASCAAP... to convince ITs SIGNATORY ARTISTS, that a viable income stream can be had by licensing their music in this manner.
SOmeone has to convince ME that there is a viable income stream. I would venture to say that any town has 20-100 times as many dentists as wedding videographers. I chose dentists since someone mentioned it above as a recent target of BMI. That tiny little piece of business for BMI/ASCAP will probably get them $50 a month ($600) a year from every dentist, which is the most they could hope for from a typical wedding videographer. SO they would get 1% the revenue stream they would get from dentists if they take on this new business model. And dentists are a barely noticable blip in their (ASCAP/BMI) income.

What are there, maybe 2,000 wedding videogs in the USA? We can safely ignore hs/college students and most of the newbies who never do more than a half-dozen weddings. Maybe 25% of the pros would actually pay a license fee, if that many. (500x$600 each = $300k/year) So why would they fool with setting up a whole new business model that will likely never pay for the overhead costs of running it? Artists would never see a penny.
__________________
You are either growing or dying.
Bob Costa is offline  
Old August 5th, 2005, 10:27 AM   #62
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: St.Louis, USA
Posts: 145
license cost

The song Paris Mambo for a salsa video.
You have to provide the following info:

How many years you wanted it for?
In what medium you are going to do the final product(DVD,website,film..etc)?
What is the cost of the project? -- I think they will quote you based on the project cost.
The company name and website of the company? Your website if its self properitery

For me it cost $500 for a 1 year license for streaming through the website and 100 DVDs. I payed my attorney $500. But its worth it. Becuase
they wont give responses for individuals. Probably the attorney will have some
links to get through the barriers they have been working so long and they know people. Basically they act as an agent.
Harikrishnan Ponnurangam is offline  
Old August 8th, 2005, 01:44 PM   #63
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles (recently from San Francisco)
Posts: 954
I don't know how I missed this thread. Some very good discussion.

A couple of points (in no particular order) . . .

1. The fact that a wedding video isn't intended for public performance does not make it non-infringing to use a commercial CD for the soundtrack. Public performance is one of the reserved rights of copyright owners. However, the right to make copies and prepare derivative works are two others and both are implicated by a wedding video.

2. I've said a number of times of times that my personal (not-to-be-relied-upon) opinion is that CDs-in-wedding-videos should probably come within fair use. I'm not aware, however, of any decisions which have test it, and I don't know anyone who wants to volunteer to be a test case.

3. Copyight, like patent, grants absolute control over the protected material, subject to any statutory exceptions. This means that the right owner cannot be compelled to permit use of the protected material.

4. There are, however, statutory exceptions, i.e. compulsory licenses of various kinds in the U.S. Copyright Act. There is no reason why a compulsory could or should not be created that would allow wedding and small-event videographers to use commercial recordings; it is solely a question of the Congressional will to do so.

5. ASCAP and BMI administer public performance rights, only, i.e. the copyright owners have not authorized either agency to license synchronization/mechanical rights or the right to make copies. I've spoken with BMI's counsel in the past about working something out for wedding videographers -- there was no interest whatsoever. BMI feels (wrongly, in my opinion) that there isn't enough money to be made from such licensing.

6. WEVA would be the ideal organization to lobby for a change in the law, i.e. the addition of a new compulsory license. Many of you guys are WEVA members -- I'm not. Talk to your organization. This kind of compulsory license shouldn't be particularly controversial and could be readily accomplished (along the Australian model, for example).
Paul Tauger is offline  
Old August 8th, 2005, 02:08 PM   #64
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 65
Can someone give me a specific case where a video grapher was sued for using copyrighted in a WEDDING VIDEO?
__________________
Dan McCain
Owner/Operator Mini35 Package
Atlanta, GA
www.danmccainproductions.com
Dan McCain is offline  
Old August 8th, 2005, 07:44 PM   #65
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Tauger
I've spoken with BMI's counsel in the past about working something out for wedding videographers -- there was no interest whatsoever. BMI feels (wrongly, in my opinion) that there isn't enough money to be made from such licensing.
Then on the same token, they must believe there isn't enough money to be had in persuing small business videographers for copyright infringement. So I guess with that mentality by the industry, it's going to continue to be a "don't ask, don't tell" arrangement. Too bad.
Brent Warwick is offline  
Old August 8th, 2005, 07:49 PM   #66
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
Thanks for contribution Paul, always good to have the 'legal ear' on the topic.
Richard Alvarez is offline  
Old August 9th, 2005, 12:37 PM   #67
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles (recently from San Francisco)
Posts: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Warwick
Then on the same token, they must believe there isn't enough money to be had in persuing small business videographers for copyright infringement. So I guess with that mentality by the industry, it's going to continue to be a "don't ask, don't tell" arrangement. Too bad.
Unfortunately, it's apples and oranges.

BMI/ASCAP license public performance rights. They don't enforce other specieis of copyright infringement. Their disinterest in licensing to wedding/small event videographers doesn't mean that copyright owners won't, for their owner reasons, decide to pursue videographers.
Paul Tauger is offline  
Old September 5th, 2005, 08:46 PM   #68
Tourist
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Santa Monica, California
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Tauger
I don't know how I missed this thread. Some very good discussion.

2. I've said a number of times of times that my personal (not-to-be-relied-upon) opinion is that CDs-in-wedding-videos should probably come within fair use. I'm not aware, however, of any decisions which have test it, and I don't know anyone who wants to volunteer to be a test case.

6. WEVA would be the ideal organization to lobby for a change in the law, i.e. the addition of a new compulsory license. Many of you guys are WEVA members -- I'm not. Talk to your organization. This kind of compulsory license shouldn't be particularly controversial and could be readily accomplished (along the Australian model, for example).
Bring it on! I am a small time wedding and event videgrapher...I will volunteer to be a test case. :) I have even spoken to my pastor about this - he talked about the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law.

And coming back from WEVA Expo in Vegas a month ago ~ WEVA has no interest in pursuing this. Everyone I talked to said they have tried, etc.

"Some may say that I'm a dreamer..." (Did I just infringe something?)
Emily Auer is offline  
Old September 6th, 2005, 12:08 AM   #69
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 8,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Auer
I have even spoken to my pastor about this - he talked about the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law.

I'll give your pastor a four word lesson in religion and the law for you. Here it goes:
"Thou Shalt Not Steal"
__________________
Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC?
Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com
Dylan Couper is offline  
Old September 6th, 2005, 12:34 AM   #70
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 817
I am with Dylan on this.

I know many people see it as a victimless crime, but it really isn't. The value of someone's song is diminished by overuse. I have said this in previous threads on this topic, but if a song gets used in everybody's wedding video for free, no one is going to want to pay to put it in a movie or TV show. So by you taking the songwriter's (and performer's) property you are potentially robbing them of revenue. Certainly one video wouldn't hurt, one might say, but certainly losing one can of tuna wouldn't Whole Foods, and I'm not going to steal that either.
__________________
Barry Gribble
Integral Arts, IMDB
Barry Gribble is offline  
Closed Thread

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > Taking Care of Business

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network