-
Making a color reel, anyone know how fair use applies?
-
Fair use doesn’t apply to a reel. It only applies in situations where a party is informing the public (read news or press) not private marketing or promotional materials (read reels). So you’re in no way covered by fair use. That’s said, what’s the worst that could happen? A client asks you to take out their shot? You lose a client over it? If you’re willing to risk it, go for it. Or do them the courtesy of asking for permission. In all likelihood you’ll never hear a peep about the matter, if you do, just take that shot out.
https://JuanSalvo.com
https://theColourSpace.com -
[Marc Wielage] “Show me some case law to support your opinion.”
It’s stated explicitly in Section 107 of the Copyright Law of The United States of America (Title 17 of the United States Code):
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
As is the case with nearly all laws, while there is undoubtedly room for “interpretation” depending on the specific case, the Fair Use doctrine is very clear about its intent: To protect expressions of criticism, archival requirements, analysis, parody, news reporting and/or any other commentary on the copyrighted work. It also goes out of its way to make clear that Fair Use exemptions only applies to cases where “direct or indirect commercial advantage” is not the intended outcome of the usage of the copyrighted work. Demo Reels clearly do not fall within the parameters of these exemptions.
But as I (and others here) have already and repeatedly asserted, unless you’re breaking an NDA or other legally binding agreement you’ve already made stating that you won’t use the work in question for your own promotional purposes, then you effectively have nothing to worry about. The main practical concerns you have at that point is from a moral, ethical, professional and political standpoint. Although it still doesn’t negate the fact that the action is still technically illegal.
So while it may be a “pedantic” argument in the context of making a demo-reel, it’s still an important fact that needs to be understood by all content creators, lest you find yourself unintentionally breaking the law by using material in a project that seems like it should be “fair” use (with a lowercase “f” and “u”) .
You know the old saying, “Ignorance of the law is not an excuse?”
-
I agree with Juan in that in the real-world, nobody is going to give a crap about a :20-second or :30-second clip. Go over to YouTube if you want to see real copyright infringement, where thousands of entire features and TV episodes are posted. The studios are extremely selective about what they chase down and what they let slide; I’m astonished at the whole features and TV shows that are up there, particularly when they’re clearly done without permission.
A short demo reel of images isn’t depriving the studio or copyright holder of any income, though I would be cautious about trademark use and music use. Again, anybody can sue you for any reason they want, but the question boils down to how much time and money they want to spend to go after you, and whether they could really show a monetary loss in court.
I’m reminded of the old adage: “better to beg for forgiveness than ask permission.” This is one of those instances.
-
[Mel Matsuoka] “It’s stated explicitly in Section 107 of the Copyright Law of The United States of America (Title 17 of the United States Code):”
This is not case law. I had to testify three times in Federal Court during the Sony/Universal Betamax copyright case in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and I covered the case extensively for several magazines during that period, so I’m pretty familiar with Title 17 of the U.S. code. Judge Warren Ferguson’s original ruling in that case was actually fairly narrow.But again, I don’t know of anybody who’s been sued over a short demo reel in the last 10 years. I can imagine cases where there would be a phone call or a letter requesting that the clip be taken down, and YouTube frequently gets take-down letters from copyright holders.
Actors in particular are known for using short segments of movies and TV shows. As long as it’s not for public distribution, particularly for profit, I don’t see an issue in the real world for brief clips. In fact, I suspect the studios would be loathe to actually bring a case like this to court, for fear that a decision against them would actually become case law. But nobody I know has the time and deep pockets needed to bring a case like this to trial. That’s why I say: there is no case law to interpret the statute. Only a judge can really say where the boundaries are.
-
[Marc Wielage] “But again, I don’t know of anybody who’s been sued over a short demo reel in the last 10 years. I can imagine cases where there would be a phone call or a letter requesting that the clip be taken down, and YouTube frequently gets take-down letters from copyright holders.”
Yes, you are absolutely right. And that’s where this discussion became self-admittedly “pedantic”, because my original response took issue with the idea that by lending on-screen attribution or limiting the length of the excerpt to :30 or less, that it somehow makes it “Fair Use”. These are both very common misunderstandings of the Fair Use law, so I was specifically addressing and correcting those misunderstandings.
Granted, making a big issue about the specifics of Fair Use law in the context of an innocuous demo-reel might seem as douchey as someone taking a jaywalking person to task because they had an impending bout of explosive diarrhea, and the closest bathroom was across the street. But since Danny specifically asked about Fair Use rights, it seems appropriate to correct these common misconceptions, because a large majority of well-meaning people have these same misconceptions––the perpetuation of which has led to numerous urban legends about the nature of Copyright, even among otherwise well-enlightened people.
-
[Mel Matsuoka] “as douchey as someone taking a jaywalking person to task because they had an impending bout of explosive diarrhea, and the closest bathroom was across the street.”
You’re not referencing “Bridesmaids”, are you?
All of the above goes to show that we don’t really have a Justice System; we have a “Legal System.”
ASK. An ounce of something is worth … err, something else, a pound? Is that sterling?
jPo
“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up