Another type of copyright infringement - Music used in montages

[engr]

Folks, I heard so much about this in the past few months. In short, using copyright songs for Photo Montages or Video Highlights IS an offense. There is no way to go about it.

The action body is RIAS, not COMPASS. Pls do not think of using the songs secretly and hiding the videos. I heard they even come to the weddings now to nap people on the spot.

The only way out, is to use royalty free songs. Unfortunately, these songs are usually not as good as the copyright songs ppl love. I wrote in to RIAS to ask if they have a licence option for such applications. The problem it seems, is it involves synchronization rights and broadcast rights, which is administered by different bodies. Anyway, there has been no replies so weeks now.

I am hoping, enough of us here will rally and petition for a reasonable solution from them. Rather than they just going on this blitz. I do not suffer much as I dun do this for a living. The poor full timers are suffering real bad.

 

[vince123123]

From your industry knowledge, are they targetting the montage makers (ie the videographers and the like) or the wedding couples themselves?

I would think a case of this type of profile will have the rights holder aiming the montage maker rather than the wedding couples; and if my deduction/assumption is correct, this can be solved by simply having the montage makers give the finished product sans the music track to the couple.

And by the way, they will need a court order or search warrant before they can come to weddings to nab pple on the spot. Otherwise I'll get them for trespass as an additional bargaining chip.

Folks, I heard so much about this in the past few months. In short, using copyright songs for Photo Montages or Video Highlights IS an offense. There is no way to go about it.

The action body is RIAS, not COMPASS. Pls do not think of using the songs secretly and hiding the videos. I heard they even come to the weddings now to nap people on the spot.

The only way out, is to use royalty free songs. Unfortunately, these songs are usually not as good as the copyright songs ppl love. I wrote in to RIAS to ask if they have a licence option for such applications. The problem it seems, is it involves synchronization rights and broadcast rights, which is administered by different bodies. Anyway, there has been no replies so weeks now.

I am hoping, enough of us here will rally and petition for a reasonable solution from them. Rather than they just going on this blitz. I do not suffer much as I dun do this for a living. The poor full timers are suffering real bad.

 

[2100]

And by the way, they will need a court order or search warrant before they can come to weddings to nab pple on the spot. Otherwise I'll get them for trespass as an additional bargaining chip.

That's an idea.
Usually the couples would open the door slightly to peep at the Express slideshow or video. In order for any guy to know that there is an infringement and to video it down, he would need to be very close.

Is the reception area considered to be a private area, as it is used by a private event? I know some places like Raffles City do put up signages to restrict, and hotels like Intercontinental even put security guards nearby. But most are pretty open unfortunately and share the place with other establishments, eg Orchard Parade 2nd storey is pretty open and shares with Club Chinos.

The bad thing is that even if the PG/VG knows something is "amiss", there is no way of preventing it. You can't exactly run to the control room and yank out the power to the DVD player right. :sweat: (of course paying a couple hundreds as compensation to the couple sure beats several thousands to RIAS or whatever). I have a feeling that they were/are indeed nabbing people red handed....just don't know how they do it. So would be good if someone could share here.

So for now bo bian....searching for decent and cheap soundtracks. Can forget about good stuff like Jason Marz, Tao Ze's Marry Me Today. :sweat:

As for sample montages online, that type no need to say liao.

 

[vince123123]

Well if they are sneakily going into private functions, then I'll tell them that if they want to take action for infringement; sure they can, but I'll slap them with a counterclaim for trespass. It's always nice to up the ante a bit for those who think they can go around doing as they like such as trespassing into other people's private events just so as to enforce their own property rights.

It will also be nice if for example, when caught sneaking around, they get defensive, or try to be funny, or refuse to leave, or the like Sometimes private investigators get ahead of themselves hehehe Anyway dont want to teach too much here; else everyone be smart liao then i got no more "ba bing" when its time to take these pple to task

Also, as stated before, if the target is the vidoegraphers, then just give the montage to the couple sans music. I don't know why no one has come out to rebutt this suggestion of mine yet.

That's an idea.
Usually the couples would open the door slightly to peep at the Express slideshow or video. In order for any guy to know that there is an infringement and to video it down, he would need to be very close.

Is the reception area considered to be a private area, as it is used by a private event? I know some places like Raffles City do put up signages to restrict, and hotels like Intercontinental even put security guards nearby. But most are pretty open unfortunately and share the place with other establishments, eg Orchard Parade 2nd storey is pretty open and shares with Club Chinos.

The bad thing is that even if the PG/VG knows something is "amiss", there is no way of preventing it. You can't exactly run to the control room and yank out the power to the DVD player right. :sweat: (of course paying a couple hundreds as compensation to the couple sure beats several thousands to RIAS or whatever). I have a feeling that they were/are indeed nabbing people red handed....just don't know how they do it. So would be good if someone could share here.

So for now bo bian....searching for decent and cheap soundtracks. Can forget about good stuff like Jason Marz, Tao Ze's Marry Me Today. :sweat:

As for sample montages online, that type no need to say liao.

 

[shojibake]

Well that's because it's a good suggestion.

The infringement then becomes the couple's problem. The only hiccup is the couple might not have the wherewithal to add the music. Maybe an editor might have a contract that says music provided by the couple themselves.

 

[vince123123]

Hmm okay Well I do know commercially speaking customers always like an All-In-One solution; but I guess this is the risk/exposure that a videographer has to decide before incorporating. Most of the time the couple already has a music track in mind/store so its just a matter of teaching them how to play the music and video at the same time so it syncs.

Well that's because it's a good suggestion.

The infringement then becomes the couple's problem. The only hiccup is the couple might not have the wherewithal to add the music. Maybe an editor might have a contract that says music provided by the couple themselves.

 

[engr]

I know that a lot of freelancers kenna. Small timers do not have the money and time to deal with them. What I am most pissed is they should be giving a reasonable solution to people who were caught. Name a price. Full timers will pay if it is affordable, freelancers will go for royalty free music if they cant afford it. Then the industry service pricing will change too. I think the hardest hit are VGs, cuz music is the soul of the video.

As far as possible, we should do it the legal way and sleep in peace. No point finding ways to avoid getting caught. They will find new ways to get evidence. They have also been posing as potential couples to to get evidence. BTW, whatever we discuss here are also being monitored so we can never beat them unless there is an organized task force in an attempt to deal with this.

 

[velasco]

So the bottomline is that if its used for commercial purposes, it will be subjected to copyright infringement.
If it serves for a personal agenda like a one-time play for family gatherings, graduation ceremonies its okay?

What about those for fan tributes only posted at youtube and stuff, i heard they are illegal too, hence the recent monitoring from YT management to remove all those music that infringes copyright

 

[vince123123]

The more accurate way to put it is, whether or not it is for profit or non for proift/personal, it is copyright infringement nonetheless.

However, it is less likely (although not impossible) that rights holders will pursue personal parties and are more likely to pursue commercial entities.

So the bottomline is that if its used for commercial purposes, it will be subjected to copyright infringement.
If it serves for a personal agenda like a one-time play for family gatherings, graduation ceremonies its okay?

What about those for fan tributes only posted at youtube and stuff, i heard they are illegal too, hence the recent monitoring from YT management to remove all those music that infringes copyright

 

[2100]

Also, as stated before, if the target is the vidoegraphers, then just give the montage to the couple sans music. I don't know why no one has come out to rebutt this suggestion of mine yet.

Heh heh...that's easy to answer. Coz a good video montage would not be rendered with a single or two songs, just clips, and there would be sound clips from the mic.

Photo montage could be of a whole song from beginning to the end.

 

[vince123123]

Hmm good point; well at least we solved the photomontage issue.

For the video montage, is it possible in Adobe Premiere to link to a video rather than playing it? In that way, the videographer need only deliver the video without the music, and give the clients' instructions to put the music they want to use in the correct folders to link to. Similar to OLE for Microsoft Word and the like.

Heh heh...that's easy to answer. Coz a good video montage would not be rendered with a single or two songs, just clips, and there would be sound clips from the mic.

Photo montage could be of a whole song from beginning to the end.

 

[sprintist]

if a song was reproduced when it was played/sung/recorded by my friends and then used for the whatever purposes such as website, video montage etc, is there still any infringement of copyright?

i couldnt find the exact royalties needed etc...an email stated to email them at info@mps.org.sg didn't work too...

can anyone verify

 

[lsisaxon]

if a song was reproduced when it was played/sung/recorded by my friends and then used for the whatever purposes such as website, video montage etc, is there still any infringement of copyright?

i couldnt find the exact royalties needed etc...an email stated to email them at info@mps.org.sg didn't work too...

can anyone verify

It must be written by your friends as well. A song's composition and lyrics are the ones protected. That's why there is the (p) and (c) logo. Of course, some songs are already public domain and anyone can use them.

 

[sprintist]

It must be written by your friends as well. A song's composition and lyrics are the ones protected. That's why there is the (p) and (c) logo. Of course, some songs are already public domain and anyone can use them.

so i presume most classical songs are under public domain? so that is so even if there are many different remakes of them?

 

[lsisaxon]

so i presume most classical songs are under public domain? so that is so even if there are many different remakes of them?

I guess so, but I believe each recording of a certain orchestra playing the same piece is copyrighted by the respective label.

Here is some useful info...
http://www.pdinfo.com/copyrt.php

Copyright and the Public Domain

Authors own the exclusive rights to their compositions. This is called a copyright, and the composition is protected for many years--even if the copyright is never registered with the copyright office. A composition is considered to be "intellectual property" The copyright may be sold, transferred, or inherited--but the copyright still endures. If any music or lyrics are still under copyright protection

• you CANNOT reproduce the music or lyrics
• you CANNOT distribute the music or lyrics either for free, for no profit, or for profit
• you CANNOT perform the music or lyrics in public
• you CANNOT play a recording of the music or lyrics in public--even if you own the CD
• you CANNOT make a derivative work or arrangement for public use in any form

Legally a copyright means that a musician, author, or artist has a "limited duration monopoly" on anything he creates. The US Constitution grants the government power "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." (Article 1 Section 8, US Constitution). To legally enforce an author's claim to his copyright, his work must be registered with the copyright office. Registering a composition provides public notification of copyright, and you cannot use the composition publicly unless you pay royalties--which can be substantial. If you use a song under copyright without the owner's permission, you are subject to legal repercussions.
Public Domain
Fortunately, copyrights eventually expire and the owner has no exclusive rights. Also some composers renounce their copyright and give their music or lyrics to the public, either during their lifetime or at their death. All compositions which are not protected under copyright law are said to be in the public domain. If you can prove that a composition is in the public domain, you can arrange, reproduce, perform, record, or publish it. But you cannot just "know" a song is in the public domain or just "see" the name of the song in a book or on a list. You should use a public domain composition only if you have proof of public domain from a legitimate source.
United States Copyright Law
US copyright law is found in Title 17 of the United States Code and is administered by the US Copyright Office. " Terms for Copyright Protection", a U.S. Government publication, summarizes the current duration of copyright protection for published works as follows:

• Works created after 1/1/1978 - life of the longest surviving author plus 70 years - earliest possible PD date is 1/1/2048
• Works registered before 1/1/1978 - 95 years from the date copyright was secured.
• Works registered before 1/1/1923 - Copyright protection for 75 years has expired and these works are in the public domain.

The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act was signed into law on October 27, 1998. Prior to the Sonny Bono 20 year copyright term extension, copyright protection for works registered before 1/1/1978 was 75 years; therefore, compositions registered in 1922 or earlier entered the public domain on 1/1/1998. The 1998 copyright extension did not extend copyright protection from 75 to 95 years for songs already in the public domain so . . .

• The Good News - works published in the United States in 1922 or earlier are in the public domain even if they are not yet 95 years old.
• The Bad News - no new works will enter the public domain until January 1, 2019.

You can confirm the above information about public domain and copyright protection in "Extension of Copyright Terms", Circular 15t, of the U.S. Copyright Office. Specifically the last paragraph of Page 3 states in part "Works published before January 1, 1923, have fallen into the public domain." We suggest that you print this circular and keep it as part of your public domain research materials.
International Copyright Law
The Berne Convention is an international treaty standardizing copyright protection since 1886. In 1994 a "General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)" was signed by 117 countries, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in Geneva, Switzerland, to enforce compliance with the agreement. GATT includes a section covering copyrights called the "Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property" (TRIPS) U.S. law was amended to be essentially consistent with GATT by the "Uruguay Round Agreements Act" (URAA) in 1994 and the "Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act" in 1998. Despite GATT, copyright protection varies greatly from country to country, and extreme caution must be exercised on all international usage of any intellectual property.
Rule of Thumb for Public Domain Music

• Works published in the United States with a copyright date of 1922 or earlier are in the public domain in the United States.
• Copyright protection outside the USA is determined by the laws of the country where you wish to use a work. Copyright protection may be 95 years from publication date, 50 to 70 years after the death of the last surviving author, or other criteria depending on where the work was first published and how the work is to be used.

 

[sprintist]

I guess so, but I believe each recording of a certain orchestra playing the same piece is copyrighted by the respective label.

Here is some useful info...
http://www.pdinfo.com/copyrt.php

Copyright and the Public Domain

Authors own the exclusive rights to their compositions. This is called a copyright, and the composition is protected for many years--even if the copyright is never registered with the copyright office. A composition is considered to be "intellectual property" The copyright may be sold, transferred, or inherited--but the copyright still endures. If any music or lyrics are still under copyright protection

• you CANNOT reproduce the music or lyrics
• you CANNOT distribute the music or lyrics either for free, for no profit, or for profit
• you CANNOT perform the music or lyrics in public
• you CANNOT play a recording of the music or lyrics in public--even if you own the CD
• you CANNOT make a derivative work or arrangement for public use in any form

Legally a copyright means that a musician, author, or artist has a "limited duration monopoly" on anything he creates. The US Constitution grants the government power "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." (Article 1 Section 8, US Constitution). To legally enforce an author's claim to his copyright, his work must be registered with the copyright office. Registering a composition provides public notification of copyright, and you cannot use the composition publicly unless you pay royalties--which can be substantial. If you use a song under copyright without the owner's permission, you are subject to legal repercussions.
Public Domain
Fortunately, copyrights eventually expire and the owner has no exclusive rights. Also some composers renounce their copyright and give their music or lyrics to the public, either during their lifetime or at their death. All compositions which are not protected under copyright law are said to be in the public domain. If you can prove that a composition is in the public domain, you can arrange, reproduce, perform, record, or publish it. But you cannot just "know" a song is in the public domain or just "see" the name of the song in a book or on a list. You should use a public domain composition only if you have proof of public domain from a legitimate source.
United States Copyright Law
US copyright law is found in Title 17 of the United States Code and is administered by the US Copyright Office. " Terms for Copyright Protection", a U.S. Government publication, summarizes the current duration of copyright protection for published works as follows:

• Works created after 1/1/1978 - life of the longest surviving author plus 70 years - earliest possible PD date is 1/1/2048
• Works registered before 1/1/1978 - 95 years from the date copyright was secured.
• Works registered before 1/1/1923 - Copyright protection for 75 years has expired and these works are in the public domain.

The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act was signed into law on October 27, 1998. Prior to the Sonny Bono 20 year copyright term extension, copyright protection for works registered before 1/1/1978 was 75 years; therefore, compositions registered in 1922 or earlier entered the public domain on 1/1/1998. The 1998 copyright extension did not extend copyright protection from 75 to 95 years for songs already in the public domain so . . .

• The Good News - works published in the United States in 1922 or earlier are in the public domain even if they are not yet 95 years old.
• The Bad News - no new works will enter the public domain until January 1, 2019.

You can confirm the above information about public domain and copyright protection in "Extension of Copyright Terms", Circular 15t, of the U.S. Copyright Office. Specifically the last paragraph of Page 3 states in part "Works published before January 1, 1923, have fallen into the public domain." We suggest that you print this circular and keep it as part of your public domain research materials.
International Copyright Law
The Berne Convention is an international treaty standardizing copyright protection since 1886. In 1994 a "General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)" was signed by 117 countries, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in Geneva, Switzerland, to enforce compliance with the agreement. GATT includes a section covering copyrights called the "Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property" (TRIPS) U.S. law was amended to be essentially consistent with GATT by the "Uruguay Round Agreements Act" (URAA) in 1994 and the "Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act" in 1998. Despite GATT, copyright protection varies greatly from country to country, and extreme caution must be exercised on all international usage of any intellectual property.
Rule of Thumb for Public Domain Music

• Works published in the United States with a copyright date of 1922 or earlier are in the public domain in the United States.
• Copyright protection outside the USA is determined by the laws of the country where you wish to use a work. Copyright protection may be 95 years from publication date, 50 to 70 years after the death of the last surviving author, or other criteria depending on where the work was first published and how the work is to be used.

very useful, i had did a search too and it appears most to be under US laws and have not found any regarding PD in Sg.

Songs like pachalbel could be under PD i suppose? (of course we have to verify against the list)

 

[shojibake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM


!!!

 

[sprintist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM


!!!

LOLLLLL :thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[shojibake]

The thing is, sheet music is exempt, but the recording is not. So you cannot use a london philharmonic recording of them performing the canon in d. Amazingly there's this jazz band the bad plus who do interpretations of rock/pop/electronica songs as jazz versions and somehow haven't been sued.

 

[mo2]

If RIAS or COMPASS is monitoring this thread and also considering they are not responding the emails sent to them.

I feel that an association like WPAS (Wedding Photographer Association Singapore) should write to them and ask for a public forum to clarify the music copyright issues.

*There's no WVAS in Singapore yet (Wedding Videographer Association Singapore)

regards,
Mo2