Copyright Downloadable AV's

[TonyFalla]

I have never uploaded any of my AV’s to Beechbrook Cottage or other similar sites because I have always obtained my music from copyright CD’s. My understanding of copyright laws is that it is illegal for me to distribute my AV’s this way, it is just the same as if I put the CD on to a website and allowed people to download tracks.

I notice however that when I download AV Shows from Beechbrook Cottage and others that sometimes the music is attributed to an artist and I assume that this must again be copyright music. Is there some licence you can obtain which allows you to do this?

I have an MCPS licence but that only allows me to show my AV’s to an audience. I know I can use non-copyright music but the music I want is never copyright free and my own musical talent is non-existent.

Tony Falla

South Wales, UK

[Fernlea]

I have never uploaded any of my AV’s to Beechbrook Cottage or other similar sites because I have always obtained my music from copyright CD’s. My understanding of copyright laws is that it is illegal for me to distribute my AV’s this way, it is just the same as if I put the CD on to a website and allowed people to download tracks.

I notice however that when I download AV Shows from Beechbrook Cottage and others that sometimes the music is attributed to an artist and I assume that this must again be copyright music. Is there some licence you can obtain which allows you to do this?

I have an MCPS licence but that only allows me to show my AV’s to an audience. I know I can use non-copyright music but the music I want is never copyright free and my own musical talent is non-existent.

Tony Falla

South Wales, UK

Hi Tony You may like to try the following

Contact the (Institute of Amateur Cinematographers) on their website you which gives all the information to suit your needs. www.fvi.org.uk/central/copyright.htm

Kind Regards.

David Evans (fernlea)

[Bernpenguin]

Hi Tony, you have to join IAC and you can buy all the licences from them its about £48 ayear including membership of IAC Cheers Pen

[cottage]

Tony,

Like many others I have used popular music along with my own personal photographs in various presentations. I consider all my presentations, as well as those hosted on my site, to be strictly light entertainment for the general public, without the desire or request for monetary reward or compensation.

Obviously these are my personal opinions and comments. I welcome other comments.

Regards,

Bill

[fh1805]

Tony/David/Bill,

I don't profess to be an expert on this subject (and, Bill, I can speak only for the situation in the UK) but my understanding is as follows:

In respect of a commercial recording of a piece of music there are at least three seperate elements of copyright:

- the rights of the original composer(s) and librettist(s) in the written down form of the piece

- the rights of the recording artist(s) in the performance captured in the recording

- the rights of the record company in the commercial product (LP, tape, CD, etc)

Unless you have copyright clearance for all three then any copy you make of a commercial recording is a breach of all three. Whether you do anything with that copy or not, the moment you make the copy you are in breach of those copyrights; and are consequently open to litigation.

I believe that the above is the general situation world-wide as far as copyright is concerned.

In the UK, copyright clearances are granted by the IAC via their agreements with the MCPS, BPI and PPL organisations. These clearances come with some restrictions as to use. The licences are intended solely for amateur film, video and AV makers. The finished product (in our case the AV sequence) may be shown only to:

- family and friends

- members of the film/video/AV club to which the individual belongs

- at meetings of other similar interest groups

- in local, regional, national and international competitions

- at public meetings organised for and advertised as being for the purpose of raising funds for a registered charity

(I think I've got those details about right)

Any other use of the copied material is still a breach of copyright.

Now we come to the Internet and how these licences might or might not be interpreted. Remember, I'm not an expert. There are lawyers out there who make their living by dealing solely with issues of copyright infringement. Copyright law is one huge "can of worms"!

In my very personal opinion, it could be argued that our PTE Forum is an online "club" for AV enthusiasts. To join the forum we have to "subscribe" to it just as we would subscribe to a camera club. Therefore showing our sequences to other forum members seems to me no different to showing them to a club in its meeting venue. Our meeting venue is the Internet.

The problem, as I see it, is that non-members of our forum can view the forum contents. Therefore they can see the links to Beechbrook or MediaFire or wherever the sequences are being hosted. Therefore they can download that sequence; and the moment they do they are in breach of copyright law as well. One solution that possibly could be argued as being compliant with the law but applied to an Internet environment, would be to have a hosting service that was accessible only via login through the forum; i.e. a site that only registered and logged in users of the forum could access. Then the sequences would be viewed only by "club members" and the terms of the copyright licence would have been adhered to. But as I keep stressing I'm not an expert of this law and I'm not a lawyer.

Just to get one other related thing completely clear: there is no such thing as copyright free music. All music carries copyrights - the three mentioned at the beginning of this post. What there is, is royalty-free music. The royalty is the monetary fee that the copyright holder is entitled to levy for each copy and/or each separate use of each copy. Some individuals waive their right to this fee by including a "limited use" licence as part of the sale of that music. Before buying royalty-free music (or the mis-leadingly advertised copyright-free music) you should always check the limitations as to usage set out in that "limited use" agreement. For example, the "limited use" agreement that applies to the royalty-free music that Barry Beckham sells via his website is published on his website for all to see.

I hope this has helped all members to improve their understanding. If I've got anything seriously wrong I'm sure someone will point it out.

regards,

Peter

[TonyFalla]

Thank you everybody for all your replies, I think that the one conclusion that I have reached is that this area is a minefield. I found Peter's reply very useful and I think (I also am not a lawyer) that his interpretation is correct.

I already have an IAC/MCPS licence and I do not believe this covers me for putting AV’s on the net to be downloaded. The licence states that it is for Exhibition purposes either privately or in connection with a club or society.

I think that the problem we have is on the term exhibition. When an AV is downloaded, we do not have control on who can download AV's and what use they will put them to after they have been downloaded. As Peter said these downloads are not even restricted to members anybody on the net could download an AV and then do what they like with it, even sell it on. I am sure that a lawyer would not see this as exhibition but as distribution.

The only way that I think it would be possible to overcome this would be to have AV’s which were not downloadable but displayable, i.e. the AV would only run from the host but would not be copied. I do not know what the practicalities of doing this are and again even this may still breach the terms of IAC/MCPS licences and copyright laws.

I think for the moment I will have to play it safe and only exhibit my AV’s locally where the control remains with me.

Once again thanks to everybody who has replied.

Tony

South Wales

[davegee]

Tony,

Taking a PRACTICAL viewpoint, there are masses of cover CDs of music on cheap labels of INSTRUMENTAL background music which when used would be IMPOSSIBLE to identify.

If you want to use an instantly identifiable artist (vocally or instrumentally) then you are giving yourself problems.

Personally, I don't use/like vocals in AVs unless the MUSIC is the main part of the show and the images just help to tell the story.

Classical pieces by obscure artists on cheap labels like NAXOS or music from some of Barry Beckhams CDs seem to be the best way forward.

The copyright police are not worried about our little efforts - they have much bigger fish to catch.

But if it worries you.............

DaveG

[denwell]

To be safe - buy royalty free music from any of the numerous music libraries on the net. Or try podsafe music - uploaded by wanabe musicians for free use in the furtherment of their creers.

When I make a presentation for a client I invariably take this route.

I have IAC licenses too, but they do restrict the distribution of presentations - I always state that they must not be made available for public viewing ( for whatever cover and peace of mind that gives me!)

DEN (NE UK)

[fh1805]

All,

The copyright police are not worried about our little efforts - they have much bigger fish to catch.

But if it worries you.............

DaveG is quite right in his statement (above). Those of us who are individual producers of AVs in furtherance of our hobby are, almost certainly, not going to appear on the radar of the Copyright investigators. Their returns in fees and fines would not cover the costs of their investigations.

However, Bill at Beechbrook might be in a different position. He is hosting AVs for download from his server. If these AVs contain "illegal" content, he might find himself targetted - just as those individuals and organisations that host illegal copies of music files for download have been and are being targetted. Moreover, he lives in a country that is somewhat notorious for its "litigation"-driven way of life.

regards,

Peter

[xahu34]

...Those of us who are individual producers of AVs in furtherance of our hobby are, almost certainly, not going to appear on the radar of the Copyright investigators....

Hello Peter,

In Germany it is very dangerous to offer copyrighted material for download, you should even be careful with links on your homepage. The German law has a mechanism of written costly warnings (Abmahnung). There is (for example) a particular lawyer in Munich who is known for sending hundreds (or more) of these warnings. There are major labels among his clients. Here everybody seems to be on the radar, and such a warning will cost at least several hundred Euros.

Best regards,

Xaver

Munich

[davegee]

I totally agree with Peter and nothing should be done to compromise Bill's position.

DaveG

[Barry Beckham]

Good news.

I have just spoken to the performing rights society and they have said that all PTE users are exempt for any copyright whatsoever. Copyright only relates to all those others who do not use PTE, not us. Honest!

[TonyFalla]

Having started this topic the comments I have received have made me think about this issue and I have come to the conclusion that if the music is copyrighted then it is not right and is illegal for me to put it on to the net for people to download even if it is part of an AV.

I suppose in some ways we are all artists and I know that suppose one of my photographs was accepted for an exhibtion, then I would be pleased. If however I found that the photograph put into the Exhibition was then put on the net so people could download I would not be pleased as I would have lost control of that photograph. Thinking of it in these terms make me appreciate the position the CD artists are in.

Tony Falla

South Wales

[targa912]

Thinking of it in these terms make me appreciate the position the CD artists are in.

I agree to a point. As I have spent many years as a working photographer/darkroom tech, when I sold something it no longer was mine. Dl some elses work and using it is unethical and wrong. But when someone sells something such as a cd/video ect it should no longer be considered his or her position to control it. Using the legal term lease agreement is bull imo! ! When you lease an automobile there is a buyout at the end of the agreement. A lease to me implies repurchase at the end of term. Does the artist or record company offer this option? Not that I have seen. When I shot weddings I sold the negs. This was my way of conducting my business. I charged extra for this. My choice and my customers choice. Again, in my oppinon once something is sold it no longer belongs to you.

Bob W.

[davegee]

You can debate the ethics of this forever - this has been going on since Barry were a lad.

Can ANYONE HERE who has been chased down by the copyright police PLEASE step forward.

Once again, if it worries you...................

DaveG

[Ian]

A side issue, but relevent to the topic. I have a few sequences on You Tube, one of which uses a Cat Stevens track. I had a note from You Tube saying that the copyright holder had found the video on You Tube and had granted a license for it to be used. In return the copyright holder is allowed to place an advert on that page. I could either choose to accept this, which I did, or reject it in which case You Tube would remove the video.

Ian

[davegee]

It is VERY relevant Ian.

I am surprised that it happened and it does prove that someone is watching!

However, I made the point earlier that if an instantly recognisable voice or instrument(alist) is used then trouble could occur.

I would also point out that Cat Stevens - Stephanos Demetre Georgiou - Yusuf Islam - is not the copyright police but could invoke their assistance.

DaveG

[Barry Beckham]

If you drive on a motorway you might get killed in a feak accident

If you fly, you may be unlucky enough to fly right into a mountain

If you get out of bed in the morning, you might have an accident that day and break your neck.

If you use a Mike oldfield track in your AV you might get sued.

Its against the law to speed and of course no PTE user ever does that.

Its against the law to park on yellow bands and no PTE user does that either, do they?

Of course we could just apply common sense.

[Ronniebootwest]

Good news.

I have just spoken to the performing rights society and they have said that all PTE users are exempt for any copyright whatsoever. Copyright only relates to all those others who do not use PTE, not us. Honest!

This does really sound like a statement to be cautious about! Barry, surely this cannot be correct. Users of PTE are no different to users of other slide making software so why do you think that we are exempt from copyright laws - very misleading indeed!

Ron

[Tomuk]

Its against the law to park on yellow bands and no PTE user does that either, do they?

Barry,

I park on double yellow lines most days and quite legally, I'm the holder of a disabled blue badge permit.

So it follows that all you need to use copyright material is a permit.

Tom.

[fh1805]

Lighten up, Ron! Barry couldn't find the Emoticon for "tongue in cheek"!

Peter

[Conflow]

Hi Guys,

The following Links may be of interest to you all ~

Copyright Link General:-

(Although aimed at the 'Digital Image Creator' it also covers how to 'Copyright' any work of Art)

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/copyright..._on_the_Web.htm

Copyright Link "Specific All About":-

(How to copyright virtually anything)

http://inventors.about.com/od/copyrights10.../copyrights.htm

Brian. Conflow.

[Barry Beckham]

Ron

Access your memory banks under Humour - Sense of etc.

Tom

Don't get me on that bandwagon. I am sure you are well in need of your badge, but if ever there was an abused privilidge in our society, disabled parking it is.

[Ken Cox]

AS WELL AS FOR PEOPLE WITH BABY CARRIAGES!!!!!!!!!

KEN