Virus Risk with Internet Stills Used in FCP

Hello all

A recent client asked me if we could use the internet during our edit session and we started downloading stillls to use in the project. Its a documentary BTW. So we're searching the internet, finding large enough files, and then downloading them one by one. All kinds of different stills from servers all over the world.

Is there a chance of catching a virus or other computer disease from this activity?

We are now up to 400 or more stills on my hard drives as part of this project, (The client didn't sufficiently prepare for the project.) I have not been happy with the deal at all, no permissions, no licensing on any of the images.

Your advise
rockin ron

Macs don't get viruses...because no one bothers to write them for the Mac.

No worries man.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

Mr. Rockin,

I'd be more worried about "catching a lawsuit" than catching a virus. No permissions? Yikes.

Be sure you get paid before you turn over the project.

Mark

Virus for MAC is rare but you only need one. Search and save on another computer and external drive. Also be certain you have the rights to whatever "WHATEVER" you use. One bad seed will spoil the bunch.

Most of the time you do need rights. I know this isnt a popular thing to say right now, and one may get sued, but he does have a basic right to use short samples for illustration purposes, without permission, for the use in either parody or specific public commentary. Its a basic human right. But you better be sure you follow the law of Fair Use closely.

For example, I do not believe The Daily Show pays a dime to Fox News for playing a clip from them when creating parody or critical public commentary. Even under these circumstances, there may be a screen-time limit as well. A lawyer wouldnt hurt.

-Christopher S. Johnson

> he does have a basic right to use short samples for illustration purposes, without permission,
> for the use in either parody or specific public commentary. Its a basic human right. But you
> better be sure you follow the law of Fair Use closely.

Parody or public commentary, no. Parody means he can create his own stills and video that pay tribute to the composition, colours, objects etc. of an original work, not use the image of the original work.

And fair use is a myth. About the only thing he can use those internet downloads for, without permission, is if he's doing an internal version to try out editing ideas. The copyright holders won't pursue a case like that because it may lead to licensing profits if the filmmaker(s) want to use the photos in the final edit. If the version is publicly exhibited, however, he'll get into trouble.


www.derekmok.com

Make sure your name doesn't appear in the credits. Or on the tapes or boxes.

Koz

Drerekmok, I think you are probably mostly right and he should heed your advice. I bet it is correct in this case. But parody and commentary are basic-basic free speech rights, regardless of the legal mine field that one can get into and, for now anyway, people refer to those rights as "Fair Use".

I work on a doc series with a point of view but we clear the rights on every single picture to be safe. We do not fit all of the criteria for exception. But another film our exec producer made DID make use of Fair Use rights, and that was "Outfoxed" which had release not too long ago. Do you actually think FOX NEWS would sign a release for use of their footage, only to be criticized? It was Fair Use for critical commentary and it legally flew.

-Christopher S. Johnson

> parody and commentary are basic-basic free speech rights, regardless of the legal mine field
> that one can get into

Commentary in the case of film and book reviews would probably fall under fair use. But I'm pretty sure if you posted a five-minute excerpt from a film on your website without permission and then did a review on it, you'd still be in violation. There are certain degrees of acceptance -- I'm fairly certain that journalistic reviewers can use the cover of a DVD in a review. Parody is a whole other thing -- most parodies don't use the actual images (photographs, video, film) of the original work, and you can't copyright just the idea of putting certain actors in certain costumes, for example. However, "Weird Al" Yankovic still needs to clear his song parodies because he usually uses parts of the original composition (sync rights) and arrangements, even though he always replays the instrumental parts.


www.derekmok.com

[Be sure you get paid before you turn over the project. ]

And a copy of the email to your producer verifying he/she has clearances to all the images? Because you could be as culpable as the producer. This at least shows diligence.

"You saved a copy? Whaever possessed you to do that?"

"I thought I might need it."

- THE VERDICT

Best, as always,
Loren S. Miller
www.neotrondesign.com
Home of KeyGuide Central

Just don't download the .jpg file:
latestpics.tghz

!!!Trojan Horse!!! for
Leap.A

the only OSX virus I've encountered.

(17 yr. old girl downloaded on ibook @ the house)
pain in the rear end to be rid of