Page 2 of 2

Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 3:11 pm
Author: clide
markfh11q wrote:Queen is royalty free?


No. I initially thought the record labels didn't care that much about using music in non-commercial Youtube videos because with other sounds over it and the poor quality it is not worth ripping. Like Fnord said it acts like a free advertisement more than anything. I had already had the video made before Warner started making a fuss. I tried to find some legal replacement music before putting it up, but couldn't find anything so I just put it up anyway.

Thanks for the link Rag, looks like there is some good stuff on there

Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 4:47 pm
Author: SpudFarm
sorry if anyone has said it but i could not find it anywhere, why don't you just use audioswap like me?

My 2 cents

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:47 pm
Author: Technician1002
clide wrote:Hey, I'm wondering if anybody knows some good sources for music that I could legally add to the background of video clips from my high speed camera.

I would consider paying up to $50 for the right music.


I have seen lots of legal action taken against uploaders and other hard hitting measures. I view it as biting the hand that feeds it. Since this has turned into a war, I make sure all my tracks are free of any music. I don't promote anybody's music for free.

There is one exception on one of my high speed videos. I left it online as an example in another discussion on copyright reform. The video has the i-Tunes / Amazon advert, for which I am being exploited.

In short I stopped buying music as it is illegal to use for our intended uses so I don't use it.

The very popular Carson Wilson's video was a viral hit. The band loved him and gave him star treatment at a concert. The Labels squirmed badly in their seat and didn't press charges. Because of Carson Williams, it is now possible for private individuals to license some music for home public displays. More on that is located on the site selling the light control system.

This is a good start! :D
http://store.lightorama.com/sequences.html

Some day maybe the tracks will be at more reasonable prices for youtube videos. I'm not spending $30 for a video that only gets a few hundred views.

" For private home use only" is badly obsolete and desperately needs fixed. :evil: There has to be a better way to license music.

I hope a site appears soon permitting buying tracks for public videos.

Even out of copyright stuff, may still be in copyright in other countries, so just using expired stuff from the 1920's is not a fix.

I am looking into Creative Commons. It is where artists fed up with the labels and copyright are releasing stuff to share, just like we are doing here with our cannon plans and knowledge. I would seriously consider using their stuff and promoting Creative Commons copyrights.

http://creativecommons.org/audio/

This is much more user friendly.

Info on the actual license is here
http://creativecommons.org/

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 1:52 pm
Author: john bunsenburner
Nice comment, this should be hung on some wall of fame:

"How to bring up a dead topic, properly"

Good job, and very informative, thanks technician1002, great 27th post!

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:16 pm
Author: Technician1002
john bunsenburner wrote:Nice comment, this should be hung on soem wall of fame:

"How to bring up a dead topic properly"

Good job, and very informative, thanks technician1002, great 27th post!


Thanks :D . I was warned when I first joined to not bring up dead topics unless you have a very important contribution.

There has been lots of noise over copyright violations and some pretty large monetary nukes tossed at people, so I viewed music as a war zone to stay away from until they find out how to sell a useful product with a friendly license.

If you want to see the ugly side of the industry war, look here;
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/
*** :oops: added forgotten link ***
This site is put up by a lawyer who is collecting the case info online. The RIAA despises him. I love him. The publicity is causing all kinds of pressure for reform. I hope it happens soon so I can use music soon.

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:20 pm
Author: john bunsenburner
Sadly i am around a few lawers(a few good ones) all the time, and none of them will leave out any details about anything. Oh and your link did not show up...

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:16 pm
Author: PCGUY
When I was in a professional video production class, the law was that no more than 10 seconds of a copyrighted song could be played in a video unless you had a license agreement for it. I don't know how YouTube is designed to detect things though... (if it measures how long it is or not).

Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:51 pm
Author: Technician1002
PCGUY wrote:When I was in a professional video production class, the law was that no more than 10 seconds of a copyrighted song could be played in a video unless you had a license agreement for it. I don't know how YouTube is designed to detect things though... (if it measures how long it is or not).


You might want to review the contracts with BMI and ASCAP. Some of their licenses over reach their authority. They try to impose license restrictions on music that is not produced by the labels under the RIAA protection.

This should be illegal as it is counter to the rights of the artists, the legal copyright holders that didn't sellout their rights to a label.

Why should BMI and ASCAP have authority over stuff created under the Creative Commons license. Please ask your instructor and rep.

Without action, this won't get fixed.