DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Wedding / Event Videography Techniques (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/)
-   -   Not Posting Clips For a While (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/55799-not-posting-clips-while.html)

Chris M. Watson December 9th, 2005 12:33 PM

Not Posting Clips For a While
 
Hey Guys,

I have to be honest. I thought that I was doing a cool thing by introducing myself and sharing not only one clip but three of them. The idea was to spark a discussion about how our clients weddings and song choices can afford us an opportunity to break out of the box. How we can bend (and even break) a few rules as long as we keep the destination in sight. I would have loved to have had a debate or discussion on that.

Instead what resulted was a debate (fought many times over) about use of copyrighted music. It was also implied that I was flagrant, arrogant and unprofessional for using copyrighted materials. This turn of events came as a surprise to me since I've seen many clips posted by videographers who also use copyrighted works and the issue never came up. In fact Glen posted a clip of his own around the same time where a poster from my thread calling me unprofessional turns around and praises his clip (which was awesome by the way) without mentioning his use of the "Kill Bill" soundtrack. I'm just asking for a little consistency here.

I want to thank Glen for inviting me on this forum and I look forward to helping out whenever I can on various issues. As for clip posting, I was planning on going "silent" after this anyway. The responses to my introductory post only confirms to me that's the right decision to make. Between this board and another one I frequent, there's about 5 clips out there and I think that's enough exposure for now. I just had a run of unique weddings and wanted to share. If I feel the urge to share again, I'll just read my introductory thread again and that should solve things :). Not mad, just disappointed.

Chris Watson

Rick Steele December 9th, 2005 12:48 PM

Quote:

Not mad, just disappointed.
No - don't stop. Blame me for bringing it up (although I wasn't pronouncing judgement - just curious about the criteria for awards).

Again Chris, you've got lot's of experience to share - please keep doing it.

Steve House December 9th, 2005 12:51 PM

I have to ask, how would you feel if I downloaded your clip, loaded it into an NLE and stripped off your name and added my own, then sent it out as a part of my reel to seek work? Would that be acceptable to you if I did a very very good job of it?

We should be sharing information about how to become better creative professionals, not how to be better at doing something we shouldn't do in the first place.

Michael Dempsey December 9th, 2005 12:51 PM

Don't Ask Don't Tell
 
In order to avoid these uncomfortable situations I think we should adopt the US military's stance on homosexuals and that being Don't Ask Don't Tell.

We'll all assume that each clip has the proper copyrights and let it go at that.......

A.J. Briones December 9th, 2005 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I have to ask, how would you feel if I downloaded your clip, loaded it into an NLE and stripped off your name and added my own, then sent it out as a part of my reel to seek work? Would that be acceptable to you if I did a very very good job of it?

We should be sharing information about how to become better creative professionals, not how to be better at doing something we shouldn't do in the first place.

right. and your comparison makes sense because chris posted an mp3 on this forum and told us he wrote and produced the song.

Steve House December 9th, 2005 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A.J. Briones
right. and your comparison makes sense because chris posted an mp3 on this forum and told us he wrote and produced the song.

And I really do appreciate the quality of his work and his sharing it with us. From an artistic view it his clips are outstanding and very instructive. I just wish he hadn't tainted it by listening to the temptations of the dark side andf had used his own music instead of someone else's.

Chris M. Watson December 9th, 2005 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I have to ask, how would you feel if I downloaded your clip, loaded it into an NLE and stripped off your name and added my own, then sent it out as a part of my reel to seek work? Would that be acceptable to you if I did a very very good job of it?

We should be sharing information about how to become better creative professionals, not how to be better at doing something we shouldn't do in the first place.

Well as the victim of said theft, nobody knows better than I how hurtful it is to see someone posting your work as their own. There is a crucial difference and this is where your analogy breaks down. Nobody in their right mind would think I sang or composed those songs in my videos. As I said earlier, I would love to have a system like the Aussies have where for $400 a year you can legally use licensed music in your videos for domestic use. That's a fair and reasonable way of doing it. Right now you have to go through a process that is set up for movie studios and tv shows and not for the independent boutique producer.

I encourage you to start a thread of your own about this issue. I would gladly take part in it as well as others who have no doubt contributed to other copyright debates. Hijacking a thread is considered rude and a subject as important as this deserves its own topic anyway.

CW

PS: The way I dealt with said thief was I posted his URL on VU, encouraged people to visit his site, and told them to download any clips they see on there multiple times. That was fun.

Glen Elliott December 9th, 2005 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A.J. Briones
right. and your comparison makes sense because chris posted an mp3 on this forum and told us he wrote and produced the song.

I'd have to agree that it's not an accurate analogy. Steve also stated that, "I always thought the law was the law and obedience was mandatory, a test of responsible citizenship, zero options, and not merely a suggestion."
If you truly live by this than you never go over the posted speed limit on the highway even if your late to work. In the theme of an analogy that is something most people do as well. Does it make it legal, no....safe, absolutely not. However taking on a rather aggressive opinion about the issue doesn't solve anything. Videographers know the laws just like the motorists on the highway. If they decide to break them it's on them and not really necessary for you to provide an inclusive brow-beating.

Also you hinted toward the fact that Event Videographers use of copywritten music is the reason (or at least a big contributing factor) for the lack of respect we get in the industry as a whole. I couldn't disagree more. I feel that is caused by:

1) Lack of education on the bride/clients part as to what modern wedding videography is

and

2) The thousands of hacks that litter the industry bringing us down as a whole. Undercharging and/or producing boring uninspired videography all the while carrying the monicer "professional" videographer.

Steve I don't want to single you out beings other contributed to the other thread who share your stance. I respect your stance on the issue- however I respectfully disagree with the analogy and some statements you made.

Pat Sherman December 9th, 2005 02:39 PM

Chris,

Keep posting the clips, I like them as do many others. It's a forum so people will always have opinions and disagreements. Even as this thread includes no video with any type of music the debate still lingers on.

While I can't say either the majority or minorty use commericial copyrighted music it's a personal decision based on experience, knowledge and well just some fun risk taking action. I take the risks, my client likes the risks and would I be willing to go to court. Well..I would have too, but that is besides the point. I still would willingly go..

I am confident in loop holes..:) Actually I am confident in my ability to articulate my actions and have no problem telling the truth. Sure, it's illegal but so are so many other things.

How about the people that insert the DVD logo on their wedding case designs. Looks official and professional.. It's illegal. Your not licensed to use the LOGO.

So I'm sure if you had a company of 1000 videographers producing 500 wedding videos a month and making a windfall of money it wouldn't be long till the issue is addressed..:)

I'm guilty as well since I have no replied to said debate..

As you can see it's clearly not you posting clips that starts debates.

Steve House December 9th, 2005 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris M Watson
Well as the victim of said theft, nobody knows better than I how hurtful it is to see someone posting your work as their own. There is a crucial difference and this is where your analogy breaks down. Nobody in their right mind would think I sang or composed those songs in my videos. As I said earlier, I would love to have a system like the Aussies have where for $400 a year you can legally use licensed music in your videos for domestic use. ...

I agree with you that the system needs changing and I would love to see a similar system to the Aussies implemented in this country. But I have to say that until the owners of copyright are our allies it will never happen. And they won't be our allies until everyone in the industry stops using their works without license. You may feel there's no harm in your using their music but I suggest that in fact it actively harms the reputation and business of every one of your fellow professionals, it directly harms those fellow professionals who choose not to be scofflaws, and it also harms the people whose work you have appropriated without permission or attribution. I don't want to be seen as making a personal attack on you because that's certainly not my intent - I was very impressed with your work and sincerely admire your talent. I'm making a blanket comment on everyone who acts similarly. But plagarism is plagarism and my comments are directed at everyone who, like you, feels its acceptable to bend the law when it serves their own interests. You, and others who choose to ignore the law, have no more right to use the music they do than did the person who stole your work and posted it as his own. The original version of the Golden Rule seems especially approriate here ... "Do not unto others as you would not have them do to you." The issue is not whether you claim authorship or not - it's that you used their labour without their permission. You rightfully expect others to play by the rules when dealing with you - that expectation creates by its existance the imperative to be equally proper and above board in your own dealings, even when you can get away with doing otherwise.

One of the great tragedies of business in our day is the notion that what is right is what you can get away with and if you haven't been sued and lost, it's okay.

Mark Von Lanken December 9th, 2005 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris M Watson
Hey Guys,

I have to be honest. I thought that I was doing a cool thing by introducing myself and sharing not only one clip but three of them. The idea was to spark a discussion about how our clients weddings and song choices can afford us an opportunity to break out of the box. How we can bend (and even break) a few rules as long as we keep the destination in sight. I would have loved to have had a debate or discussion on that.

Instead what resulted was a debate (fought many times over) about use of copyrighted music. It was also implied that I was flagrant, arrogant and unprofessional for using copyrighted materials. This turn of events came as a surprise to me since I've seen many clips posted by videographers who also use copyrighted works and the issue never came up. In fact Glen posted a clip of his own around the same time where a poster from my thread calling me unprofessional turns around and praises his clip (which was awesome by the way) without mentioning his use of the "Kill Bill" soundtrack. I'm just asking for a little consistency here.



Chris Watson

Chris,

I'm so sorry you were greeted with this type of reception. This is why I no longer post clips on DVInfo.net

I hope you stick around as your talent and knowledge can be helpful to many videographers.

Trisha & I look forward to seeing you next month down in Orlando at the 4EVER Convention.
http://4evergroup.org/conventionandtradeshow.html

Patrick Moreau December 9th, 2005 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
We should be sharing information about how to become better creative professionals, not how to be better at doing something we shouldn't do in the first place.

Steve,

As you are obviously so concerned with following all of the rules, perhaps you should reread the forum rules yourself and try and practice a little more discretion. Perhaps next time you feel the urge to discuss an issue so passionately, you could start a separate thread and refrain from using members as specific examples. I think it can safely be said that the majority of members here would prefer to have others share their work and be inspired, even if that means living without your very insightful and well-timed criticisms.


Chris,

I would like to echo what has already been said. Thanks for sharing your work and perhaps you will try again down the road. It really is a huge benefit to the majority of users.

Chris M. Watson December 9th, 2005 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
One of the great tragedies of business in our day is the notion that what is right is what you can get away with and if you haven't been sued and lost, it's okay.

I think we should agree to disagree on this and leave it at that. Enough bandwidth has been spent on this issue already with no progress being made.

The thing that upset me is that I freely shared my work on a forum when I really didn't have to. I could have kept my techniques and "secrets" all to myself and my clients. That's what alot of leading videographers do in our industry and rightfully so. When's the last time you saw a clip from the VonLankens or Loi Bahn or Joel Peregrine? To me when someone posts a clip, whether he or she is a begginer or industry leader, I feel priveliged that they want to share their talent or ask for advice. That's good for us all and should be appreciated and respected.

Instead, I got a very different reception. One that I felt was unwarranted and disrespectful. We have differences of opinion on copyright issues and I think we both want the same thing in the end. If you want to dioscuss this, then start a thread of your own. You'll have plenty of responses I'm sure but have respect for those willing to share their way of doing things with the greater videography community.

CW

Rick Steele December 9th, 2005 05:14 PM

Quote:

And they won't be our allies until everyone in the industry stops using their works without license.
Yeah, that'll work... the RIAA has been very generous especially when it holds all the cards.

A lofty goal if not fantasy. I think the copyright holders need to give up on it (as well as DRM) and throw in the towel because this just ain't gonna happen.

Besides, I find it hard to believe the videography industry is to blame for stiffling music sales. I don't have a solution for the MP3 downloaders but I know most videographers wouldn't mind paying for an affordable synch license.

Until then, I will continue to buy the music and include it with my edits.

Ash Greyson December 9th, 2005 05:28 PM

I did a few weddings back in the day but I quit for these very reasons. It has nothing to do with copyright music, it has to do with the fact that you are better than them and they dont like that. Trust me, if you posted some lame clips the stink wouldnt be as bad.

The wedding business in general is pretty nasty. I know there are some GREAT guys who do fabulous work but there are also a lot of jealous hacks...



ash =o)

Steve House December 9th, 2005 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Moreau
Steve,

As you are obviously so concerned with following all of the rules, perhaps you should reread the forum rules yourself and try and practice a little more discretion. Perhaps next time you feel the urge to discuss an issue so passionately, you could start a separate thread and refrain from using members as specific examples. I think it can safely be said that the majority of members here would prefer to have others share their work and be inspired, even if that means living without your very insightful and well-timed criticisms.


Chris,

I would like to echo what has already been said. Thanks for sharing your work and perhaps you will try again down the road. It really is a huge benefit to the majority of users.

I'm confused ... you're saying it's a good thing for members to create video clips in flagrant violation of both the letter and spirit of the law, and not okay for other members to point out that they are doing something improper and they should change their business practices because they are doing the wrong thing? Are you saying we hold up these practices as examples of good and proper working methods to lead and inspire us, encouraging us to for forth and do similar wrong things? Does not fair treatment of the people who created and own the music mean anything to you and its absence touch something inside you that says people should do the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do? It just seems so obvious to me that people in the creative professions should operate from a position of total respect for the rights of others in similar creative endeavors and should join together to encourage those who do not do so to mend their ways. If we don't, who will? Or do you choose to live in a world where the only definition of right is who has the better lawyer?

I find your reactions and those others who have expressed similar opinions to be very disconcerting to say the least. In truth I would have expected the majority opinion to be 180 degrees opposite. Perhaps you can explain to me why you seem to find business practices that are both illegal and harmful to the profession and to other artists to be examples of the way people ought to act, practices that are to be applauded, encouraged, and rewarded?
Do you similarly hold software and movie pirates to be cultural heros to be applauded when it happens that they are very very good at what they do? Or should we have a moral compass in our business life that is guided by a higher standard than expediency?

Patrick Moreau December 9th, 2005 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I'm confused ... you're saying it's a good thing for members to create video clips in flagrant violation of both the letter and spirit of the law, and not okay for other members to point out that they are doing something improper and they should change their business practices because they are doing the wrong thing? Are you saying we hold up these practices as examples of good and proper working methods to lead and inspire us, encouraging us to for forth and do similar wrong things? Does not fair treatment of the people who created and own the music mean anything to you and its absence touch something inside you that says people should do the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do?

I'm saying that your ruining the potential of this particular message board for many others. You have made your opinion known, why don't you leave it at that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
Do you similarly hold software and movie pirates to be cultural heros to be applauded when it happens that they are very very good at what they do? Or should we have a moral compass in our business life that is guided by a higher standard than expediency?

I think that is another very misleading comparison. I think many users here are acknowledging a problem in the system and practicing civil disobedience until the problem is addressed or they are forced to stop. If there was a viable option to produce the same kind of product legally than most would adopt that method, but until that method is available we have the option of complying with the letter of the law or not. You have said, repeatedly, where you stand on the issue, as have others.

While your intentions may be morally guided, you also have to consider the net effect of your actions. Those who will no longer share clips have not changed there practices because of you, they are simply not sharing them. You have not made things better, or more legal, you have simply tainted something that is an excellent resource ofr many of us. There are much better tactics to present your point of view, perhaps you could consider some of those next time.

Steve House December 10th, 2005 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Moreau
...
I think that is another very misleading comparison (comparing use of copyright music without license to software piracy - sjh). I think many users here are acknowledging a problem in the system and practicing civil disobedience until the problem is addressed or they are forced to stop.
...

I think not. How does it differ from a situation where someone obtains some of your own video, lets say some fantastic and rare scenics, shots that you have gone to great difficulty and considerable expense to obtain and that reflect a personal style that took you years as a videographer to develop, and uses them without your permission as cutaways to enhance the production values in a video they are selling to their clients or preparing for broadcast? Or lets say they sought your permission but you declined their offer, either because you had other purposes in mind for your work or you felt they had not offered what they were truly worth, or perhaps just because you felt ornery that day. Would they be justified in using them anyway since they felt you weren't being fair in hogging such wonderful video all to yourself? Or would you feel justifiably outraged? And then lets say they post their work here - should it be admired and held up as a model for others to follow, applauded and encouraged because they had done such a terrific job of merging your material with theirs? How about our fellow forum members - should they admire and applaud this practice and its fruits, condemn it, or just keep silent? I'm going to go out on a limb here but I'll wager you'd be outraged if your hard work and talent was appropriated in this way and then rewarded by the accolades of your fellow professionals without comment on the injustice you had been done in the process. So how does it differ if the medium is music instead of video and the artist is Celine Dione instead of Patrick Moreau? Remember, if you say it is okay to use copyright music because those bad people won't cooperate by selling you a license at the price you're willing to pay, you're also saying it's open season on your own work, fair game for anyone to use as they see fit whether you like it or not.

Patrick Moreau December 10th, 2005 11:01 AM

Steve,

Let it go.

Ash Greyson December 10th, 2005 02:59 PM

Get real... quit acting like it is the same to put a minute of a song in a one-off wedding montage as it is to bootleg DVDs and sell them on the streets of Hong Kong as originals. I have recently completed a feature doc that has many famous songwriters, most I became friends with. I cant imagine ANY of them having a legal issue with someone putting a song on a wedding DVD or sharing a clip on a website.

The fact is, that more artists are taking back their own publishing in an effort to ENCOURAGE this kind of use and exposure. In the next 10 years you will see many artists making their new songs and catalog available, either for free or for a small standard fee with NO red tape, for independent film makers and videographers.



ash =o)

Steve House December 10th, 2005 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
Get real... quit acting like it is the same to put a minute of a song in a one-off wedding montage as it is to bootleg DVDs and sell them on the streets of Hong Kong as originals. I have recently completed a feature doc that has many famous songwriters, most I became friends with. I cant imagine ANY of them having a legal issue with someone putting a song on a wedding DVD or sharing a clip on a website.

The fact is, that more artists are taking back their own publishing in an effort to ENCOURAGE this kind of use and exposure. In the next 10 years you will see many artists making their new songs and catalog available, either for free or for a small standard fee with NO red tape, for independent film makers and videographers.



ash =o)

It absolutely is the same thing. It is taking someone else's property without their permission and using it to your own benefit and profit. It doesn't matter much it is a song clip or a bootleg copy of Star Wars.

I think it's great that some artists are making their work freely available and I heartily endorse those who choose to set up new and reasonable licensing arrangements. But in that case it is the artist and copyright owners that are choosing to do that. You simply cannot ethically justify someone coming along and simply taking the work from them whether the artist wants them to use it or not. It is for them to initiate the process and give, not for us to take without permission until we get caught. Just because someone feels that artists *should* give away their work doesn't justify taking it.

There's a boatload of music available free or at very affordable licensing right now. What is wrong with restricting oneself to using the work of the artists who are presently making their work available under the arrangements you suggest or using buy-out and needle drop libraries, creating one's own music with software such as Acid, or collaborating with a musician to develop your own? The appeal of using popular and classic music is the fact that is popular and classic and that's why people want to use it. It's unlikely a tune as popular as "Theme from Titanic" will ever be included in the no-fee or low-fee catalogs such as you see on the horizon any more than you'll find it in a buy-out library today. But if artistic merit is the criteria, I'm sure there are hundreds of songs available at affordable prices that are musically of as good ln quality or better without the need to wait for new licensing models to evolve - why not use them? If many of the famous songwriters in your documentary have no problem with someone using their work in a wedding video, how about simply obtaining a license from them and being legal about it? If they truly are willing and they haven't yet sold their rights, it could be accomplished in matter of moments for the effort of a couple of emails.

Think you can't do quality wedding video without using popular music? Take a look at the sample clips on San Francisco's Big Pookiehead Productions website.

Speaking of famous songwriters and performers, our own forum here has several Grammy and Emmy winners participating. Pop up into the audio forum and ask Doug Spotted Eagle or Ty Ford how they'd feel about you using using some of their work in your next wedding video.

Pat Sherman December 10th, 2005 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I think not. How does it differ from a situation where someone obtains some of your own video, lets say some fantastic and rare scenics, shots that you have gone to great difficulty and considerable expense to obtain and that reflect a personal style that took you years as a videographer to develop, and uses them without your permission as cutaways to enhance the production values in a video they are selling to their clients or preparing for broadcast?


Easy.. It's on the owner to track down the infringing user and ask nicely for some payment for the use. If I had a manager or label I would expect them to do that for me and if not, it is up to me to get my payment or stop the infringment. Just because you have a copyright doesn't mean jack unless you the owner enforce it or choose to enforce it.

AND since we all know nobody seems to be doing anything about it.. I figure they know when they want their money and when they want to do something about it. I mean I think it's pretty evident enough of us have done the leg work trying the legal way and we all get the standard response from the big labels and publishers in that 4th grade teach tone "Oh that's so cute for your little wedding video. Well we don't have anything in place to do that but just don't make a bunch of copies and I hope the video turns out for you. "

As in my work I suppose if another videographer rips it. Well it's fair game I mean I can't really copyright it since I am using "THE BAD MUSIC". So if they rip it good.. Now I can advertise even more and show how others like it so much they use my work as well..:) Then again in court I could say, "Oh I didn't create that So and So did, check out his site I just downloaded it to watch it"..

Now if I did all original and someone ripped it. Then I would send a nice letter asking for a monetary amount in exchange for the use. Again, it would be on me to do that..

I personally feel at this time the only musicians to benefit from a lengthly highly publized trial against the videographer community would be Enya and Celine Dion since every darn demo seems to use their music..ROFL!


(Yes Steve I know multiple muscians under one label, yadda yadda)

P.S. The only thing I am worried about his David Bonner kicking my butt for over using his DVD Cover design and using some of his techniques.. Dave tell me where to send the check..:)

Pat Sherman December 10th, 2005 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House

There's a boatload of music available free or at very affordable licensing right now.

Yeah true.. Maybe you can help.. I got this Bride who wanted Butter Fly kisses for her Father/Daughter dance.. So I'm in a dilema now:

Smartsound Maximum Action: Texas Rock or Smartsound Fashion Dictates. I'm kinda partial to Fashion Dictates over the Texas Rock.

Copyright music threads are useless. Some people choose to drink and drive, some choose to load software to friends, some choose to not yeild on arterials and some smokers toss lit cigarettes out their car window, some people don't report that $300 slot machine win, some people murder people, some people rob people, some people speed, some people use trial software pass the trial period, some people take other peoples land and force them to live on reservations, some people read these forums, some people don't read these forums and some people have nothing better to do than do the work of the RIAA for free..

In all fairness to Steve he is doing and saying the right thing and if he were to apply with the RIAA he could have some good reference material. But I have to ask the question. Does he even do wedding videos and I can't imagine a Bride going with Smart Sound or Dewolfe over say Shania Twain per say..

Well let me be honest.
"HI. My name is Pat and I'm a license Abuser"

Chris Hurd December 10th, 2005 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris M Watson
Instead, I got a very different reception. One that I felt was unwarranted and disrespectful.

My apologies for this. I'm working with the other forum moderators to find a viable solution. Some members here are far, far more militant than they need to be, and there will be some changes coming soon. I really hate to see good threads hijacked and new members railroaded, no matter what the seeming justification is... in my opinion there is no "justification" for that sort of bad behavior at all. Once again, I'm sorry about this, and trust me there will be a big change in this highly negative atmosphere very soon.

(for Glen, I'm closing this thread; let's chat by email. thanks -- CH)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network