Lighten up people!
 

Shane and Rob,

You both have excellent posts on this thread and I agree with 99.9% of them.

Using copyrighted music to enhance a demo reel is in no way a test of a person's character or their ethics. This whole concept of judging someone's morals is pretty extreme and just a little paranoid, especially since using the music in this capacity does not involve malice.

Now...if this person was stating or implying that the musical work was his or her's, and it wasn't, then I would tend to agree with the thievery conspiracy theory.

I've used copyrighted music in my reels in the past, I guess that makes me a thief and a liar with no morals or ethics. Simply put, someone who is not to be trusted. I wonder how I passed the many background checks that I have had to endure over the years? Just lucky, I guess.

Dylan, with all due respect, you do a wonderful job on this forum, but, the parallels that you drew as comparisons were way off base.

You wrote:
____________________________________________________
<<<Who you are as a person is defined by the choices you make in life. It's the little things that add up.
Whats the big deal about driving 65 in a school zone?
Or having an extra beer or two before driving home?
Or buying answers to a test so you don't have to study as hard?

None of them are really a big deal, but it says a little something extra about you.>>>
____________________________________________________

65 in a school zone------people (children) die.

Extra beer or two------people (usually innocent) die.

Buying answers to a test----cheating, and if that person was a medical student or studying something else that involves people's safety, then------people die.

You're right about your examples, they really are not a big deal...they are HUGE deals and if someone subscribes to any of your examples, it doesn't say a little something about them, it speaks VOLUMES!

I don't think that I would put some poor shmoe that used "You Light Up My Life" in their demo reel in the same category as someone who has total disregard for other people's safety.

So everyone, step back, take a deep breath and chill. There are far more important and serious things in life than using copyrighted music in a personal reel!

Pardon my rant, but I take exception to someone directly or indirectly slamming MY character and ethics in such an arbitrary manner.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to confession and then turn myself in to the proper Authorities!

RB

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright act (title 17, U.S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years. This doctrine has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.


Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:




the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;




the nature of the copyrighted work;




amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and


the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.



The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.


The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”


Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.


The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.


When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of “fair use” would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.

my 2 cents
 

The biggest question i have to ask prospective crew is " So what did YOU do?".

In the 80's I was in charge of a number of motion picture model shops (that was BC.....before computers) and would have to hire modelmakers.

Since models on feature films are usually quite large and complex, 10, 20, or more modelmakers and technicians would work on the model.

During interviews I would look at portfolios with numerous pictures of someones past projects.

After 10 or 20 interviews you would see the same finished model (usually from the most recently released film) with just a different person standing in front of it with their arms crossed and a self approving smile on there face.

One person might have done the painting, one person might have done the
foam carving, or lights, or mechanics. What did they do?

I guess in those cases I wanted to see a finished product but I had to let the prospective employee tell me what they did. Of course it was easier to know if they were telling the truth because I knew most of the model makers in town at that time, so I knew who did what.

So........another question. Was it unethical to put a photo of the completed model in their portfolio if they didn't do all the work? Also was it legal to take a photo of the model, since most motion pictures have very stringent rules against photographing sets or portions of the production. I have alot of photos from my smaller budget films but have virtually no photos of the work I did onstudio features. In fact you could be fired if you even had a camera in the shop. Only the production still photographer was allowed to take photos. Good luck trying to get copies.

Of course..... how do you show people what you have done if you can't take photos or video.

I have DP'd a number of independent films lately where I am still waiting for my "reel, copy' credit". I can put them on my resume but if I have to wait for the productions permission to use it on my reel, I'll never be able to show anything.

Lot's of questions...... different answers foreveryone.

OH MY GOD!!!

David you had my dream job!! Well not really, my job would have been making the models. When I was a little kid (way before computers) that's all I wanted to do - build models and layouts. Of course in the end I chose to get an education in something worthwhile, something that would allow me to live above the poverty level.

I became a music performance major...

Ah, youth...

Have computers completely replaced what you do, or are there still a few holdouts left? I went to see Sky Captain and was impressed by what they did, but it simply didn't have the magic for me that it would have had there been models. Maybe nobody else pays attention to that stuff...

I can still remember going to see Star Wars and being in awe of that first scene when the battlecruiser comes from overhead...

Matt

Ok, more to the point of the thread. I think much of it comes down to professionalism. These rules/laws have always been somewhat selectively enforced - before digital media even more so. Much gets overlooked when done by professionals, for honest professional reasons and in a professional manner. Of course what do you when your trying to be a professional?

Taking the music video editing example (I think that's what started this thread). You could do a couple different things. You could cut a reel, show it to everyone you know and post it on your personal website and a bunch of file sharing networks to show off. This would be unprofessional and if it doesn't get you in trouble, will certainly put you in an unfavorable light among those you are probably hoping to impress.

Or, you could cut the video, keep it on a dvd and only show it to prospective employers during your interview (or send it in if that's a requirement, with a letter explaining why you chose what you chose and a disclaimer at points in the video or cut outs in the audio). This, to my mind and to the minds of the folks I spoke with, would be professional and would not get you looked down upon. Except perhaps by an ethics professor....

Matt

random thoughts
 

Yea, I was a modelmaker first then a shop supervisor. Computers have affected the industry. You never see "true" matte painters anymore. "What??? Paint in reverse on glass????" The last truly great film I worked on was James and the Giant Peach. I built armatures for the stop-motion charactors. Great film. Models, real stop-motion, real motion control, real film...... ahhhh the good old days.

About the ethics debate.....

IMHO......

Ethics are personal, morals are societal. Unfortunatly society's morals have taken a nosedive in the past 20 years. We're more tolerant of those who err on the side of moral relapse. Everyone is a victim. Nothing is anyone's fault. Kid's in schools are taught "there is no right or wrong, as long as you feel good about your decision".

Schools aren't allowed to disipline. Parents are afraid to disipline. They try to be friends with the kids as opposed to role models and disiplinarians.

I have a 6 y/o boy who, as I was looking out the side window of the truck while driving, grabs my face, pulls it so I am looking forward and states,"Dad,you're supposed to focus on the road when I'm in the car".

Talk about ethics...................

I saw that movie. James and the Giant Peach was my favorite book as a child - memories of my mom.

I also agree that ethics and morals have declined. But the pendulum can swing the other way as well. Reasonable balance is all I'm advocating. Morals or ethics applied with out critical thinking behind them are almost as useless as not having any ethics at all. What can I say, I was taught by Jesuits...

I agree. When I first moved to Montana it was legal to drink (driver have an open container in the front seat) and drive. It was illegal to be drunk (over the legal limit) and drive. The Montana law was ethically wrong by my standards. I guess some people only have an issue only if a death is involved, I view things differently.

I am afraid it is. Just as a driver drinking while he drives may have been legal, it was ethically wrong.

Fair enough Jeff, I respect your principals and your strength of character. Why don't we just agree to disagree about this issue for now and be pals. Hell, if you're ever up in the NYC area, I'll buy you a drink and promise not to drive either drunk OR with an open container. (That's an easy promise to keep!)

Best,

Matt

Or to show him your reel.

LMAO. I don't have a reel... I'm actually working on my first short now. It's not really a short. I just bought a light kit and have been trying to learn how to use it - thought I'd try to light like film noir. Well next think you know I'm filming stuff and figure I might as well make a scene so I can practice cutting it. A few days later and now I'm scoring it....

It's stupid, but it is fun.

Matt

Ok, well, when you DO have a reel, either a) don't use music you don't have permission for or b) stay away from Jeff and Dylan, as they will beat you severely with the arm they've just ripped off of you.

Come on now, we can all play nice. If everyone thought the same way the world would be a terribly boring place.

When I say I'm scoring it I mean just that. I've brought the DV into Cubase SX and now I'm writing the music. Just finished the intro at about 4:00AM This morning I cleaned up the DV audio and now I have to write a little walking music...

Nothing fancy you understand I'm just having some fun. When I'm done, I'll post it.

We can play nice...maybe?
 

Well Jeff...that's your opinion and we all know what they say about opinions.

I'll take the Pepsi Challenge with anyone on this board when it comes to character, ethics, (work or otherwise) and morals, anytime.

I'm just not that uptight or anal when it comes to judging people. And once again, you are using an analogy where people's safety and well being are at stake, how can you even bring up drinking and driving with using music for your reel in the same breath? It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Anyway, this is just like discussing religion and politics, there are no clear cut winners. The bottom line is that we all have to live with ourselves and what we are. The only judge that matters is the BIG GUY when the time comes.

RB