Music Rights and internal communication

[Greg Ball]

Copyright is copyright…if you do not have the rights to music you legally can’t use it. Not to mention that you’re handing out these DVd’s to 300 people. I’m no lawyer, but it really doesn’t matter the end use with a corporation. Some folks justify using copyrighted music in various ways. “It’s only internal”…”Not for sale”, “Nobody will find out”

Ask the design company if you can send out their best designs to the general public for them to use any way they want. How would they feel? I wouldn’t risk my business over this.

Greg

[Austin Bowie]

That was my sentiment. Much money is being dangled so I figured I would go for a second opinion.

[Debe]

All it takes is one of employee who receives this DVD to be married to a lawyer, and it’s all over!

Not worth the risk!

debe

[Ian Karr]

Austin,

I wholeheartedly agree with everyone else…

BUT…

There is another way to keep the job and lower your risk…have the client sign a document stating that THEY have secured the rights for the music they want to use. Your lawyer can probably draft up something quick…

If they’re telling you it’s no big deal to use this copyrighted material, etc…, then they should have no problem signing the release and taking responsibility ;)!

Good luck!

Ian

[Frank Otto]

If a client signs a document that claims to have licensed the material, it is up to you to do the due dilligence and verify the veracity of the document. If you accept, “bald-faced” the document and it turns out to be false, then you get to be a party in the action. Worst case for you if it turns out to be false is a hefty fine…the minimum will be a trip to court and some days of scrambling over paperwork…still more hassle than it’s worth.

Let me repeat this…again…

There is no such thing as a release of liability or a liability waiver…PERIOD! You can lessen your liability in the above scenario, but only if you do your homework and verify the legitamacy of a document of that type.

You don’t want a document…you want a reciept showing a billing or payment for the use from the rightsholders or a clearinghouse.

Cheers,

Frank Otto

[Bob Cole]

[Frank Otto] “If a client signs a document that claims to have licensed the material, it is up to you to do the due dilligence and verify the veracity of the document. If you accept, “bald-faced” the document and it turns out to be false, then you get to be a party in the action.”

I think you are absolutely right; but taken to extremes, this policy can be too careful.

If you think the client is wink-wink-nod-nod signing a document he/she knows to be false, then I’m with you 100%. If a client brings me material and his/her claim of ownership does not seem to be dubious, I don’t ask for documentation. For example, for clients who bring in factory-labelled buy-out music libraries or image CDs, I’m not going to demand documentation.

But if a hypothetical client were to claim that his copy of the latest Rolling Stone CD is licensed for his/her use…. maybe my editing system would suffer an inexplicable sudden total breakdown, and “you might want to try another shop.” Fortunately I don’t have clients like that. But if they were that unethical, you wouldn’t want to have them as clients anyway.

Wedding videographers do this all the time, right?

More to the point for documentaries, what about incidental music playing on a jukebox or radio, in the background of an interview?

— BC

[Frank Otto]

Rights clearances are the reason so many docs are not being finished. A recent article in “Independent Film” has a rather long disertation on the burgeoning problem of securing rights. The truly independent documentarian can’t afford the staff to clear music, art, copyrighted architecture, logos and all the rest of the intellectual property that seems to end up in every shot that wasn’t shot in the Gobi Desert or the moon ( although NASA may have the rights to use of lunar lander images…)

It used to be that incidental, or natural sound that included music was deemed to be fair use. Or the old idea that if it’s in a public setting, it’s fair game.

Not anymore. Bulidings, such as Grauman’s/Mann’s/whoever Chinese Theater, The Flat Iron Building, The Gugginheim are copyrighed and trademarked. Virtualy every U.S. corporation has restrictions on use of it’s logos. And if music is heard that is in the least bit recognizable someone will have their hand out.

For me, it’s not the idea of user-pay…I’m willing to pay a creator a fair price for use. It’s the issue that there is no established fee structure – it’s based on whim, favor and greed.

Cheers,

Frank Otto

[Bob Cole]

[Frank Otto] “Bulidings, such as Grauman’s/Mann’s/whoever Chinese Theater, The Flat Iron Building, The Gugginheim are copyrighed and trademarked.”

otoh, check this out:

https://www.swlearning.com/blaw/cases/rock_and.html

It is all very confusing. I agree with your sentiments entirely. The use of copyright and trademark law is oppressive.

My personal example: for a documentary I wanted to illustrate the concept that American culture has world-wide impact. Some corporations were happy to help, and sent me images of their products being used by ordinary people around the world. But one corporation sent me a letter threatening legal action if I used a shot of a man in China wearing a sweatshirt with their cartoon figure on it. It worked; I didn’t use the shot. Who needs trouble? But I sure won’t be going to their amusement parks anytime soon….

I’ve suggested this before for the COW, but I would still love to see a forum on law as it relates to filmmaking. We need a place to pool our knowledge. Is there such a forum anywhere?

— BC

[Bob Cole]

[Frank Otto] “A recent article in “Independent Film””

Frank, is this a magazine? Are you referring to I-F- Quarterly?

[Ron Lindeboom]

[Bob Cole] “I’ve suggested this before for the COW, but I would still love to see a forum on law as it relates to filmmaking. We need a place to pool our knowledge. Is there such a forum anywhere?”

We’d love a forum like this, Bob. But our wanting it and you suggesting it, isn’t going to make it happen. As of today, no lawyer has ever offered to participate in the Cow. Without an attorney present — and one that knows their stuff when it comes to the law as it pertains to media — there seems little point to adding a forum and calling it “Legal”…

Best regards,

Ron Lindeboom