Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve House
Until they are changed, there is simply no excuse or justification for not complying with them. The fact that it is more difficult to operate your business without breaking them is insufficient justification.
|
You know, there is something to be said for the idea that non-compliance of an absurd law often forces the issue. Not saying that's how I approach life, but it's interesting to think about how history has proven this over and over again.
I also think you're greatly mistaken when you assume that it's simply 'more difficult' to operate a wedding videography business when you don't use the music the couple wants. You've proven your lack of experience and knowledge of our industry over and over again, and you've just done it again. I'll say it once more .. if you're going to tell couples that you have to use stock music instead of the first dance song they spent several weeks/months selecting .. you're going to go out of business. That's a bit different than 'more difficult'.
I think the primary argument here is that anyone can go out and film some footage and go back to their house and set that footage to a song and watch it on their TV and no one is going to care about that one bit. The difference is that not everyone has the ability or the equipment or the experience and they choose to pay someone to do it for them. The fact that this suddenly equates to law-breaking is absurd. You can do it yourself but it's illegal to pay someone to do it? Absurd.
The law needs to be amended and it's not going to happen even if everyone suddenly switches over to stock music. If anything, if that magically happened, there probably wouldn't be any reason to change the law anymore, right? Thus non-compliance could eventually force the issue.
May 11th, 2009, 08:40 PM
