That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard, the last couple of days.
How the hell did they find out anyway? Jesus, this is stupid.
http://blog.stayfreemagazine.org/200...t_ballroo.html
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now that's what I call theft. Theft of your fair use rights.When Agrelo and Sewell were filming boys playing foosball after school, Ronnie at one point shouted, "Everybody dance now!", a line from a C+C Music Factory hit. Incredibly, the filmmakers' lawyer said the line had to be cleared with the song's publisher, Warner Chappell. The price? $5,000.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard, the last couple of days.
How the hell did they find out anyway? Jesus, this is stupid.
It's a market economy. If you don't want to pay the price then don't use the line.
Actually, invent a nice catchphrase yourself and charge some muppets ??? for using it.
Surely for him to be infinging the copyright he must be saying/singing the words in the same style as the song or something. If he was just innocently using the words 'everybody, dance, now' that surely can't be illegal... Otherwise nobody could speak using any words that have previously been song titles - that would be quite limiting AND ridiculous.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 27, 2005 05:49 AM: Message edited by: Justin M. ]</font>
To be fair, they didn't challenge it under "fair use", they just decided to pay up on the advice of their legal team. Who knows, they may have got it for free if they'd dug their heels in? It is worrying that a documentary team felt so intimidated that they paid up with no questions asked though. It doesn't seem right, in my opinion, that the MCP is seen as a big scary monster.
---------------------
Stand and deliver.
Yep, sounds like the lawyers are creaming off the low-end of the industry.
IMO whether the kid sang the line in the C+C style or not, is irrelevant, this is documentary and is supposed to capture the moment.
When stills photography first started there was a big fight over image release but (thankfully) you don't have to get permission to take a photograph of, say, Piccadilly Circus in London. You can sell that photograph as you see fit. Take a moving image and try to sell it and you could be gambling a lawsuit with the owners of the trademarks. Why?
Go to jail you image thief!
I agree, Miker. It does seem silly that in a documentary, you couldn't show something that actually happened. That bit in the article about them being supposed to ask shopkeepers to turn off their radios and stuff was insane. And the scenes they had to delete becuase they were worried about infringement. Basically, all they're doing is giving those companies/artists some free exposure, it's not like someone would rip the soundtrack for a few seconds of music to listen to it for free!
I think ducumentaries should be exempt from royalty payments for music/images that occour in situ. Of course overlaying a soundtrack would be a different matter and should come under copyright law.
I think someone needs the balls to take it to court and try a test case. Sadly, these guys didn't seem to be willing.
----------------------
Ho hum.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 28, 2005 04:29 AM: Message edited by: jb. ]</font>
There is PLENTY of ways around copyright!
I know coz I studied MEDIA LAW as a module for part of my HND...
If you are referring to filming outside piccadilly circus, you should have no problems... If you are filming a scene and you accidentally get a large COCA COLA logo (or something similar) in the frame, you can use the defence (should there ever be any leagal repercussions) IF the image was not intentionally included...
Hang on, I'll look up my notes on copyright law and post again...
OK, I've scanned all my notes about copyright in and saved them as a 17-page .PDF document... if U want a copy of them, email me at the address below and I'll send it to you!
[email protected]_NOSPAM
NOTE: REMOVE _NOSPAM FROM EMAIL ADDRESS TO SEND.
Do you have neat handwriting?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks