Quote:

Original post by Servant of the Lord I'm sorry but by what are you going off of? I will try and search for my law, but even without the music store segments people make remixs of songs all the time, and techno music uses unchanged segments of music or movie soundtracks in the background alot. Granted, they can't sell their songs(as far as I know), but even known bands use clips of movies to make a music video often enough without being sued and, sometimes, without permisson.

Yes and that's the difference. There is a HUGE difference between using 30s clips and remixing them and using raw un-modified 15s clips in a game. The difference is that in the former you are actually deriving new.

Now all that said, your presumption about techno artists is actually wrong. Many of them do in fact have to obtain liscenses to publish their remixed tracks.

-me

From wikipedia:
"The recent Sixth Circuit Court decision in the appeal to Bridgeport Music has reversed this standing. The new rule in that Circuit is even more strict in its rendering of copyright law: "get a license or do not sample." Fair use does not come into play at all."

*Bows to swordfish*

Ok, I was not aware of this recent law.

Get permisson destron, in the form of a recorded phone call or a signed permisson slip.

ok, thanks.

Quote:

Original post by Palidine Now all that said, your presumption about techno artists is actually wrong. Many of them do in fact have to obtain liscenses to publish their remixed tracks.

I acknowledge that, if the publish them
However, I said:

Quote:

Original post by Servant of the Lord ... people make remixs of songs all the time, and techno music uses unchanged segments of music or movie soundtracks in the background alot. Granted, they can't sell their songs(as far as I know), ...

However due to recent laws, I accept swordfish's statements, (see above post).

Quote:

I'm sorry but by what are you going off of? I will try and search for my law, but even without the music store segments people make remixs of songs all the time, and techno music uses unchanged segments of music or movie soundtracks in the background alot. Granted, they can't sell their songs(as far as I know), but even known bands use clips of movies to make a music video often enough without being sued and, sometimes, without permisson.

I'm going off of my experience as a music producer. I deal with copyright law almost everyday. I've dealt with record labels, radio stations, and even film studios. On an added note, a big part of my job involves remixing and digital sampling. What I'm saying is that there are strict laws and guidelines for this type of stuff.

When I think of 'techno music' and remixing, the first word that comes to mind is 'underground'. It is a known problem in the music industry, 'the underground', that is, where there are countless cases of copyright infringement that go unchecked. As long as it remains 'underground', meaning there isn't really any profitable activity, record labels aren't going to care much. But once something makes it into the 'mainstream', you better watch your back. The same thing applies to music videos. If someone released a music video on MTV which used clips from 'Ice Age 2' or something like that, you better believe that the major film studios are going to hop all over it. Even after they got the music video removed from the air, the studio could still sue you for depreciating the value of their movie.

So like I said before, it's a judgement call. Releasing the film, even for personal, non-commercial, non-profit, educational purposes, could still be an issue if someone finds a reason for it.

Quote:

Original post by swordfish I'm going off of my experience as a music producer.

[lol] Overstepped my bounds didn't I?

Again:

Quote:

Original post by Servant of the Lord *Bows to swordfish*

I admit that due to laws that I have not kept on top of, my 5min/30sec thing is no longer in effect, it appears. Thanks for clarifying with you wiki link.

Another issue with underground music is who is to blame? The musicians? Which if you can find them, and sue them, it isn't worth your time. Or do you go after the venues? Typically also not worth the time or money :)!

Sean Beeson

Quote:

Another issue with underground music is who is to blame? The musicians? Which if you can find them, and sue them, it isn't worth your time. Or do you go after the venues? Typically also not worth the time or money :)!

You're right on the money with that one. Who is to blame? Well, in this case, 'destron' would be to blame. But from the artist/label's perspective: who is 'destron'? Is destron a threat to our image or our revenue? If so, can we even pursue destron or would we have to pursue his label? Well then, who is his label? Does he or his label even have money to compensate us for any lost revenue or the cost of pursuing him? Is it even worth our time to go ahead with this?

Yeah, with my experience in the underground dance scene, there's few real issues with copyright infringement. One label, ripped 2 fcuk, released a track which was essentially coldplay's "clocks" with a new drumbeat and several MC samples layered over it.

Pink got ripped off by Brisk & Ham on Next Generation Records (along with the beastie boys and whoever made that godawful "we're in heaven" song.) It really depends on the market, as far as I know. Generally the samples weren't an issue until the record got used on a compilation CD which pushes many more units than a vinyl single... so really it's a question of "how much are you willing to risk?"

Quote:

Original post by Sean R Beeson Or do you go after the venues?

Performing rights organizations (PROs) in the USA (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC) do go after venues. For PROs, it's usually not a case of chasing down individual songs or snippets of them, but compelling the venue to have a proper license to perform any music in their catalogues, which covers most everything.


As other posters have pointed out, the 30 second rule is completely false. In spite of many myths, I believe there has never been a fixed number of seconds, frames, or sentences which can be automatically considered Fair Use under copyright law. Nor has there been a solid precedent set in court to establish any "rule of thumb" for time limits (like the 3 second rule I remember hearing some rap/hip-hop artists talking about in the 90's).

The only true rule of thumb is, "If you don't have a license, assume you don't have a legal right to use it." If you are planning to use a portion of someone else's music without a license in any venue or distribution channel where it can potentially be heard by the public, seek some professional legal advice before moving forward. Don't try to interpret copyright law by yourself. I personally know people who have gotten into some sticky situations as a result of their own misunderstanding of copyright.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I'm merely chiming in because these myths are so prevalant and get people in trouble. My very basic copyright knowledge merely comes from my experience working in the film & TV music industry for several years. This experience has included consulting members of the ASCAP board of directors and being present at U.S. District Court hearings on federal oversight of performing rights organizations.