Dave,

My hat is off for those who want to do weddings for more reasons than copyrighted music. It is strictly for those who enjoy a good ulcer or two. I'll stick with stage productions and quirky directors, sound, and lighting people.

John

Howdy...

Could you not just have your client sign a form that states "I certify that I have legal permission to use all the footage/audio that will be included in this video project" or some such, and then the responsibility is removed from your back?

or, are you so concerned about the copyright law that because you 'know' that she hasn't obtained the rights, you aren't able to morally produce the project? If that's the case, there's probably nothing that can be done for you. Even if you called the RIAA, I doubt anything would be done, because other that a few 'example-settting' cases, I doubt the RIAA goes after folks who use artists' recordings in their wedding videos.

While you are in the 'right' morally, to me it's a little like speed 5-10mph over the limit. Yes, it's illegal, but everyone does it and no cop will pull you over for it..

Thoughts?

Best,

Benjamin

People want music they know. Unfortunately, that is usually what is on the radio or CDs thus copyrighted.

For some reason, people don't want music they have never heard (sarcasm)

You have to stick by your own ethics on this, but it is not going to get any better. Every video I have edited for family or friends used songs from my CD collection. It is the music of our lives.

Dave T2

I dont do weddings ,but seen at least a half a dozen friends and families wedding videos,,sigh,,,,
all had illegal music,, .

It is the moral issue for me. As for having them sign a form I don't think that would hold up as I pretty much know that no one is going to have rights unless I book a wedding for a musician or a record label big wigg and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I may just move to Australia where the music rights flow like wine, but I will have to buy all of my equipment for the next several years first as it sure isn't cheap over there :)

But as for branching out that seems to be the only way to go. You can have some great video for them to sample but if they don't get the music they want, then the deal is off.

j razz

j razz

Perhaps they might agree to use something you can actually license for a reasonable price.

http://www.zoomlicense.com/

At least someone is trying to do something about this problem

John

Just one comment from Down Under.

From the scenarios you've described even down here you're in trouble.

1) The client MUST own a copy of the music. If I was in the wedding business I would insist on using THEIR copy off a LEGIT CD.

2) Our licencing arrangement only covers events. Making up some "compilation" music video is not covered, although mostly thing such as this are just let slip under the radar, real piracy takes up all the available resources of the copyright bodies.

Our laws and regulations are not 'anything goes' either, the word COPYright means exactly that down here. Again this has never been enforced but by the letter of the law if I want to copy a track off a CD to my mp3 player I should be paying the mechanical fee.


As you've rightly noted any 'hold harmless' contract is useless. Any reasonable person would know these clients are very, very unlikely to be able to secure a sync licence.

Bob.

sucks, doesn't it? There's warning all over. You follow the law. You start to take a smidge of business away from the "other guys." They get pissed. you do ONE illegal music license thing & they report it & send you to jail. You can't do squat because the trial would be about YOU & not about them breaking the law.

Welcome to the world of copyright law!

I've had to pass up several jobs because of this issue. It's discouraging, but I don't do this for a living.

One good argument that was put forth by Jay Rose is that popular music takes away the focus from the visuals. It becomes a music video, rather than a personal story. Also, some songs mean entirely different things to different people - wedding music is probably defined by the bride and groom, but in other venues, one person's cherished memory is someone else's bitter reminder.

When I'm asked to do a slideshow or put music to old films, I use these two arguments with a good degree of success.

Here the cops may pull you over for exceeding the speed limit by 5 Km/hour and that is an area where "everybody does it" isn't OK. However in the wedding and personal video production business there is a lot of "blind eyeing". Related to the magnitude of the damages resulting from the infringement of the copyright involved. Turn out too many copies of the DVD and you're likely to be pulled over. How many is too many? Five? Who knows. Driving down the street waving a beer can is likely to get you pulled over even if not exceeding the speed limit.
Couples use copyrighted music in the wedding service, so it is pretty much unavoidable on their video (unless you cut live sound, which is essential to the ambiance of the ceremony). The wedding video business is fraught enough by its nature (no retakes, emotional participants, unrealistic expectations). Yet many who want to break into the video business reckon that the entry is through the door of the church and they go in without knowledge of the difficulties or care about copyright. I think you have the choice of sharing their business ethics or of offering a much higher class of production (at much greater cost) where the client has greater cognizance of your advice.

How many is too many? Five? Who knows.

Actually here you're allowed 35 copies under the licence.

Bob.

well i don't do weddings - but i used to know a hell of a lot of wedding shooters in sydney - and i don't recall any of them having qualms about using the couples choice in music.

now, if every wedding video was screen in the local rsl, broadcast on cable, or (heavens forbid) screened nationally, then i'd certainly be worried. but being show maybe 2 > to family and friends (other than the couple, do other people watch these over and over again?) - i wouldn't worry about it either - as long as the couple supplied the actual cd - at least the artist would have got something out of it ;-P

leslie

I think this is simply Much "I do" about nothing.

We are lucky in this case in the UK, that we have a special MCPS and PPL licence specially designed for use in social events.

Looks as though you need something similar yourselves.

Personally, I'd use positive, negative advertising.

And by that I mean, "if we produce your video, it'll be legal, you can show it to the chief of police if you like. Using copyright protected music is illegal, such videos can be seized and burnt in front of the town hall, don't let that happen to yours..."

Or words to that effect. You're not blowing the whistle on your competition, just informing potential customers of the facts.

Just did the wedding video for the local chief of police, who insisted that we use copyrighted music. As far as he was concerned, he owned the CD and that was all he needed.

Seriously though; it doesn't matter what you tell the consumer. If they have decided that they want a particular song, educating them on copyright isn't going to change that desire and if you can't deliver, they will simply go to someone who can.

Ran into a variation of this with a local school doing an end of the year video for the 8th grade graduating class. They wanted me to do the duplication. Person at the school was saying they were going to ask for donations for the DVD and I asked why? Well, apparently every teacher involved thought is was ok to use copyrighted music on the video as long as they just asked for donations; it was charging for the DVD that would get them into trouble.

the 4ever group was working on licensing for wedding and event videographers

Dave

"We are lucky in this case in the UK, that we have a special MCPS and PPL licence specially designed for use in social events."

Any chance you can provide more specific details/links? I went to the MCPS site and whilst the site covered all sorts of things the closest it came to "a wedding video which might sell a dozen copies" seemed to be "Feature Film" with the only hint of pricing being "usually based on the budget"

I've seen http://www.wvrl.co.uk which is a nice simple way of getting the licences, but presumably they are making something on selling the licences.

Sort of related, for AMATEUR films, it would appear that members of the IAC (Institute of Amateur Cinematographers - about 40UKP per annum) can buy a licence for about 7UKP per annum which entitles them to use any music that they have bought retail in the UK in any of their productions.

At least this is what I understand from their website http://www.theiac.org.uk/central/copyright.htm

In doing some research into this subject recently with regard to a possible event venture I learned that copyright law may not be quite as strict as I had thought. Fair Use is certainly a murky area, but it is there for a reason. Keep in mind that I am a militant protector of intellectual copyrights, and, like others here, have refused work that was patently illegal or unethical.

But think about it---does anybody really think it is illegal or unethical to use copyrighted music from their collections behind personal or family videos? Of course not. So the question that falls into the murk is this: where exactly is the line separating personal and commercial projects? Wedding videos are certainly personal and only of interest to families and close friends. But if one pays a videographer to produce a wedding video containing copyrighted music or images, which is then distributed for free to everyone who attended the wedding, does that turn it into a commercial venture?

According to an experienced Los Angeles entertainment lawyer well versed in copyright law with whom I consulted, the answer is no. Even though someone is being paid for the work, and even though they may charge a fee for the DVD's, so long as the purpose behind those sponsoring the project is not for profit and distribution is limited to a select group, copyrighted music and images may be used legally under Fair Use laws. In other words, it's not the videographer who is charging for the use of the music, but the end-users, for personal use only, despite the fact that money has been exchanged.

It's important for the videographer and/or editor to require a signed waiver releasing them from responsibility should the end-users decide to do something stupid and turn it into a commercial enterprise. Of course, if it still feels wrong, then by all means hold your ground. But it would seem we can do this in good conscience.

Actually the law is pretty clearly written and it protects the artist and owner of copyright very strictly. I don't disagree with that - what I strongly disagree with is the impossibility of small time video producers (many of us) obtaining the necessary licenses in a cost-effective, reliable manner. The problem is that there is no system available in the USA as there is in Australia and possibly elsewhere, where we can legally use commercial music easily.

By the way, I've heard a few lawyers say that it falls under fair use, or that wedding videographers are small potatoes and they would never go after them (us)...that may be true, and probably is, but it doesn't make it legal.

<edit> I admit that with weddings I use about 50% commercial music (supplied by the client, played by the DJ, or purchased for the project), for the same reason that jrazz has stated - all my competitors do it, and the clients do not care. Anything other than weddings, though, is all stock music.

Ah, the age-old question of what is right and wrong. And the almost-as-old question of who gets to decide. I’m always reminded of the fun we can get into when we try to make something that everyone is doing illegal. Preposterous fun. If I am going to consider myself moral, and if I am going to consider moral to mean obeying the letter of the law (you know, the law written by people with pens and enforced by people with guns), then I am going to have to find the fun of living strictly within my choice. For those who consider moral to mean living out the spirit of the law, they probably will be able to find the fun of it all more easily.

Strangely, and hard for straight-thinking people to understand, the law is filled with nuances and ambiguities that even in their unambiguousness give room for the human spirit. Live on. And have fun as you will.

Tim

An IP (intellectual property) lawyer once told me that when someone hires a videographer to shoot anything, as far as he is concerned it's a Work for Hire, and the employer is the responsible party.

Of course, most wedding videographers' contracts say otherwise - for reasons that I have never understood.