Contact On2 Technologies Support

does anyone have any idea on how to contact On2 Technology?

i have thier product and there seems to be no way to get support b4 or after the sale.
they have an email form that ask for user name but i have never had to use a user name in my dealings with them so that form will not work for my a paid customer. they have no place that even suggest a login for thier products anywhere i have seen on that website.

i know i am not the only one with this product cause it was recommended from this forum. has anyone EVER had success comtacting them.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Not me. I had questions, filled the form, never got answers. Went with another product.

what other product did you use.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Telestream Episode. Flash was only one format I needed. Episode gave me an all in one package. The file size to quality in Flash is not as good as I would have liked, but it seemed comparable to On2, which gave you less control use FCP export.

Do you happen to know the best flv / swf encoders. i want my stuff to be as clear as Youtube.
the swf files are extremely skippy. and i need something better if they are not going to help me.

if you would like to see what i am getting from them take a look at my site. here is the address written in an od way so that it doesnt come up in google.

3w - c-reek
--c-ity--t-v DOT com

look in the screen room and tell me what you think about the quality

BTW i am filing a fraud claim on On2 Technologies.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

What I saw played fine for me. It may be your bandwidth isn't sufficient to support the data rate.

You might be concerned about your use copyrighted material on a public forum.

i have 1000gigs transfer i ahvent seen more than 37gigs used in a day.

why would there be a concern with copywrites? i maybe grey on what you are pointing out.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

ps how did you get your user name?

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

A 1000G transfer? What's that take a couple of dozen fiber lines straight into your house?

As I said I'm not seeing a problem here. I'm in Florida at the moment with a cable modem, so no stuttering of movement, other than stuttering in panning.

The piece I saw used a pop song. Did you get copyright clearance to use it?

I got my user name from my father.

no copy-write to use it but neither does cnn or fox. they use plenty of popular song on the fly. i use to work in a cnn control room they would quickly download a song (itunes) and use it without any copy-write clearances. most of the music i use is original (70%) but people seem to react better to pop tunes.

i released 2 cd of my group over the last 6 years and a few songs have been used without my prior knowledge. when i saw what they did with it i was not bothered enough to sue.

plus to some degree i want to be sued, it makes the product have more popularity. sorta like free publicity for a product whos marketing dollars are limited. if some millionaire wants to sue me for the 100 dollars that i made with his/her song so be it. it has gotten to difficult to contact these people for permission and i am not into talking to a screener who just says no because of some script they were suppose to read.

there are only 4 people working directly for my company and we dont have the time or resources to wait 5-10 weeks for answers from record labels and such. i know that its not the best thing to do but its what i can do with the resources i have availible.

i have financed this with all the money i have saved. a law suit will not stop me from getting to my goal. its sorta do or die for me right now, and i am tired of getting kicked around by unfair business access practices. i cant get funding so i have to do as much as i can to make this work.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

oh isn't bandwidth and transfer the same thing. i got this plan from godaddy.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Jeff

Truly not a good idea to be stating this on a public forum. You may get your wish and these posts will bite you in the butt big time. I'd think about deleting these posts.

Michael Horton
-------------------

<<no copy-write to use it but neither does cnn or fox. they use plenty of popular song on the fly.>>

There's a reason THEY can do this. They pay a large blanket license fee to ASCAP and BMI for live broadcast.

> plus to some degree i want to be sued, it makes the product have more popularity.

Wrong. A lawsuit prevents you from exploiting (ie. making money, publicizing) the product so long as the suit is unresolved. You think Negativland is doing well after its illegal use of U2's materials?

> if some millionaire wants to sue me for the 100 dollars that i made with his/her song so be it.
> it has gotten to difficult to contact these people for permission and i am not into talking to a
> screener who just says no because of some script they were suppose to read.

This is a very dangerous and irresponsible attitude to take. Copyright law protects everybody, and you always have to remember the concept of punitive damages. Even if you made no money off a copyright infringement, you can be liable for punitive damages that bear no relation to how much money you make, but only depend on how much the court deems you have transgressed.

> there are only 4 people working directly for my company and we dont have the time or
> resources to wait 5-10 weeks for answers from record labels and such. i know that it's not the
> best thing to do but its what i can do with the resources i have availible.

Wrong again. Get an in-house or freelance composer. Just because you want to be using popular songs for your commercial products doesn't give you the right to do so. "Most of the music i use is original (70%) but people seem to react better to pop tunes" is not a defense for your actions.

> and i am tired of getting kicked around by unfair business access practices. i can't get funding
> so i have to do as much as i can to make this work.

What's unfair about it? You can say they want too much money for licenses to songs in your opinion, but they're not putting a gun to your head to force you to use their copyrighted material. And Steven's absolutely right -- major companies pay through the nose for blanket licenses for both sync and master rights so that they wouldn't be slowed down by individual approval processes. And even then, there's certain music they can't use because it isn't covered by the blanket license.

I think you're wrongheaded about this, Jeff. You are not entitled to use somebody else's music just because you like it and think it will work great with your products. Do your own music, or pay somebody else to do it. Nobody's stopping you from doing that.

Besides, if you want it hard enough, you can do it the legal way. Publishers and record companies *want* you to use the music, as long as you pay up. A student director I worked with gawked at my use of a Belly song in her short, then fell in love with it two days later, and she nailed down the festival rights in about a week. Another friend is now pursuing a Buffalo Springfield song I'd put into her feature. It can be done legally.


www.derekmok.com

Someone in CNN is keeping track believe me. Most networks also pay flat fees to copyright clearance houses for annual usage. I don't think you have that kind of money; I know I don't.

They won't sue you for $100. If they bother they'll shut down your business and go for EVERYTHING they can lay their hands on. Copyright violation is not only a civil matter, it is a criminal act. Done on a large enough scale it's a major felony, fines and serious jail time.

You can look at buy out music, or you make your own with Soundtrack and GarageBand. There are a lot of different ways to get music on video without spending a fortune, and still be legal and honest.

The bandwidth I'm referring to is your transfer rate, not godaddy's. If you have a narrow pipe coming into you, or a slow ISP it's going to stutter. As I said I had no problem with the frame rate playback.

look you guys can believe what you want about copywrite. i have no legal means of stopping some one from using my idea even thought its format is completely original. a company like cbs could look at what i am doing and then copy that on a larger scale. i wouldn't be able to do anything about it cause i dont have enough money to fight them. i dont believe in the standard that the rich can push over a little guy. i REFUSE to live my life based on that premise. i have a dream and no cbs, jack johnson, or rich guy from Kalamazoo is going to make me adjust that dream.

to many people have become complacent with the no money no rights theory. if they made it easier for me to get proper funding or easier to get permission to use a simple song then i could take these points into consideration, but they dont. then we get accustom to settling for weddings and corporate events which are not bad but they dont allow us to really go for the gusto.

i have exhausted all funding avenues if they want to sue to stop me they can but i have everything i need to produce this rite here in my basement and i will not stop unless they ask me to do so in a public forum. then they can have their cheesy song removed from my format.

i am a 1000 pound guerilla on this. i want to reach the next level of clients and weddings wont get me there. when people sing these songs at the end of a show they dont sue. when its played at parties they dont sue. i am the little guy with a dream they can come and i will do everything in my power to make sure that some news station covers it. then i will comply with what they want.

they have their fame and financial security i dont. so as far as i am concerned if they want to sue me for using 1 or 2 song let them come but they better be ready for a battle that can only go their way if they make it public enough for it to get my company name out there.

i am in noways a push over. what i do is how i pay bills and how i will send my son to college. i will play by the rules when they let me in their game otherwise i am trying to get there and until i have the same access as rich media companies they can kiss my dairy air. i will not comply til they let me in the game.

some of you do this as a hobby or secondary income. i do it because it is the only way to make more that 15 buck an hour. editing is my only source of income and unless they cut my hands off i will continue to edit. i am hungry for a chance, starving as some would say and i am going to get in the real game one way or the other. so since they stopped me every other way this is the way they have left for me to choose. its only 2 songs.

i cant protect my ideas so neither can they. that how i even the field. spin it or remix it, i am not concerned with a system that wont allow me to protect my stuff and then expect me to respect their protection. i dont normally do this but as far as respecting a copywrite on some millionaire's stuff when i cant get the same protection ..... well they are sadly mistaken.

when they give me that protection i will respect theirs. yall have no idea how hard it has been for me playing by rules that exclude me.

as far as that song goes i have used it to show how kind people are in my area not to slander or exploit the good nature of living. i would have asked for permission but i dont have 3 or 4 months worth of money to wait till some secretary calls me to read a statement that her boss gave her. her boss should have took the time to speak to me personally and not treat my company like some template of a company or person.

i have never bitten my tongue in this forum and i wont start now. some of you are kinda friends if you can see it the way i do. so dont be mad at me for what i am doing there are plenty of people not brave enough to agree with me in this thread who can totally see where i am coming from.

quote:
if you dont take a chance you wont get one.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Mate, you're bonkers. I would delete all this stuff asap and take the copyrighted material off your page if I were you. It's hard to get your kid through college when you're in jail too.

We understand that you think it's not fair, but that doesn't change the law. It can't be made any plainer than that and to anyone else reading this thread - don't do it. It's not worth it.

Make it easier on yourself and go to someone like this and buy something for ten bucks.
[www.revostock.com]

Nobody's angry at you, Jeff. But it's like you're sticking your head onto the train tracks just for spite. Are you truly willing to risk your financial future, your son's, your company's, just because the rules don't fit you?

Besides, you're still ignoring the fact that even though some of those copyright holders are indeed millionaires, their property is still legitimately theirs. A songwriter wrote a song, formed a publishing company, made a deal with a record company.

> i have no legal means of stopping some one from using my idea even thought its format is
> completely original.

You can't copyright an idea, only its specific expression and execution. If you wrote a love story between a rat and a monkey, you only own the specific dialogue and words, and to an extent the way the scenes are orchestrated, not the idea of a love story between a rat and a monkey.

> i dont believe in the standard that the rich can push over a little guy. i REFUSE to live my life
> based on that premise.
> if they made it easier for me to get proper funding or easier to get permission to use a simple
> song then i could take these points into consideration

So, if the legal system favours a rich murderer over a poor murderer, are you going to go out killing people just to spite the system? If there's a millionaire in your neighbourhood who's not friends with you, and he has a very nice car but won't give you enough access to borrow it, do you steal it just because he's being "unfair"? You're talking about other people's property.

You want to beat the game, write your own songs, make them great and make them come to you trying to get rights to your material.

> when people sing these songs at the end of a show they dont sue.

When an artist does an impulsive cover song at a live show, somebody in the retinue will inevitably have to pay the publishing company of said song some kind of live-performance fee.
The publishers don't sue because they don't want to stop people from performing the songs and generating revenue for them. But they will sue if the songwriters' property is being used and no compensation is given. There is such a thing as intellectual property. If there weren't such a concept, then any creative endeavour will become an impossible choice of careers.

Just think about this. If you were to commission original music for your projects, or whip something up yourself in Soundtrack or GarageBand or a little standalone digital multitrack recorder (as I do), is it truly going to be so heinous that it would ruin your show? Is it really worth it? If Martin Scorsese couldn't get the rights to "Be My Baby" for Mean Streets, would it truly have killed him to use a public-domain Italian song at the beginning to complement the home-movie footage, or some other '60s rock classic he could use?


www.derekmok.com

Quote
mok
So, if the legal system favors a rich murderer over a poor murderer

yes the do favor rich killers over poor killers.

Quote
mok
The publishers don't sue because they don't want to stop people from performing the songs and generating revenue for them. But they will sue if the songwriters' property is being used and no compensation is given.

what i am doing is equivalent to putting music to some home movies. people do it all the time. i will remove the jack johnson song from any place that is creating money. its not like i dont like my music better anyway. however i see no problem with using it how i am currently using it. no one gets sued when their my space page has a Gloria Estafany playing in the background so i dont see how i could.

in california most peoples nick name is sue because of a system that allows some pretty convoluted law suits. so maybe they do know of some strange ways for people for people to get sued over a myspace page. on the east-coast those silly loop holes are not allowed and you better have a strong case to sue or a judge will laugh at you. i do not get revenue for the video in which that song is used. which is how i made the decision to use it.

why do people make songs?
because they have a message that they want the world to hear.

why are not the same rights given to the little guy?
because we dont have the money to buy our own rights

i will take in consideration what has been said here in this thread, but i know i am not the only person in this thread that has done it.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Quote
Jude
Mate, you're bonkers.

that would be correct my friend. it is the truest statement i have ever had leveled against me.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

"what i am doing is equivalent to putting music to some home movies."

Actually it's not. You're not making home movies; you're making movies that are being distributed and published for all to see. Copyright violation occurs irrespective of revenue earned. Your making money on it has nothing to do with it.

"because they have a message that they want the world to hear."

How charmingly naive. They make music because they want to make money, and lots of it. And even assuming you're right, that it's all about someone's artistic vision, the message they want to tell. What gives you the right to take that vision and bowdlerize with your own images? Shouldn't the artist have the right to say how their music will be used? That's a primary function of copyright law. You don't get to do anything you want with someone else's work.

Everyone has the same rights in copyright law. If you shoot a video, it's your copyright. If you write some music and put it on your video, it's your music and your movie, and I shouldn't be able to rip it off and do whatever I want with it. Just because you're a little guy it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want to someone else's work.

by law you are right. the copywrite law does come in conflick with how i used it.
but really do you think that jack Johnson is gonna waste his time persue some guy whos yearly is equvelent to 2 weekends of his clubin???? really?
i wouldn't think so i am sure that there has to be some type of value in cash in it to be worth the time.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

The RIAA (the people who will sue you...or Universal Music...or BMG) went after illegal downloaders for $1100. $800. If they knew about someone making a wage selling products without a license, you're darn sure they'll come after you.

And will Jack Johnson see any of that money? Well, maybe $1.95. After the laywers and the company gets it's share...of course.


www.shanerosseditor.com

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

so its ok to use someones music to sweeten and environment in order to better sell steaks and coffee.

i get your point and out of duckin hassle i will eventualy change that file i mean if california people dont know what you can get sued for then all lawyers are honest. but i still dont think that i wouldnt have the same rights unless i had 10k to throw at a lawyer. that one is plain fact there.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Businesses can play radio stations for patrons to listen too. Dental and medical offices too. And hold music can be the radio and be free. But if they wanted to, say, plug in an ipod and play music all day long, they'd need to get a license to do so. Same thing with hold music on phones. If you play music, you need the rights to it.

Is it stupid? Very. Monumentally stupid. I cannot fathom WHY you'd need to license music for instances like that.

What is the cause? Corporate greed. Companies making money any way they can...off of the labor of others. Will the artists see one penny of the licenses a dental office would pay for the right to play the music? Not one penny.

So yes, it is stupid. But it is the law. One I don't like nor agree with, but have to follow.

If you were using this music as TEMP music...to get a feeling across or general mood (we do this all the time...use movie soundtracks as temp music so that we have something to cut to, and so the producers get an idea of what it might sound like.) But that music is all replaced by the time the show is viewed by the public.


www.shanerosseditor.com

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

> by law you are right. the copywrite law does come in conflick with how i used it.
> but really do you think that jack Johnson is gonna waste his time persue some guy whos
> yearly is equivalent to 2 weekends of his clubbing???? really?

J, you gotta be careful. You just all but admitted that you knew the use was illegal. You can't even use the "I didn't know" defense now. Punitive damages increase if they can prove intent to infringe, and knowledge of the law.

> If you were using this music as TEMP music...that music is all replaced by the time the show
> is viewed by the public.

Certainly. And record companies and publishers do not go after editors' and directors' use of temp music as long as the film isn't made publicly available, because it can result in licensing profits. But that's why film teachers always warn about "falling in love" with your temp music. If the director does fall in love with a temp song, then you'd either have to license it, or you'll spend a long time working with the composer hunting for another song "just as good" to free the director from that initial perception. When I did my thesis film, I didn't even bother trying temp tracks; I used my own music. One hundred per cent ownership, every instrument played by me, written by me solely. Sue that!

I still use temp tracks, though. My job as an editor is to present the film in the best light possible. And if using "I Get Around" as a temp track is the way to do that, I'll do it. And sometimes, a certain song just works...imagine Reservoir Dogs without "Little Green Bag" or Pulp Fiction without "Misirlou". But you can be sure that if they hadn't been able to get the rights for the actual release, they would have replaced those two songs.


www.derekmok.com

well my product is a dvd not a website and when the dvd comes out it may be slightly different than the examples i have there. that site is simply a brochure of the area.

p.s. wait til you see the cooking show the footage was great as soon as i get another hard drive it "in the cut".

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Well, [www.upclosemedia.com] seems to be out of commission. Maybe the CNN bad guys laid in a bit of muscle.

I purchased about 50 CDs at NAB that were crammed with 60/30/15-sec royalty-free music tracks of every flavour and description. Suits my purpose. Paid about $400 bux for 'em. I recovered my investment on the first job. Great deal for everybody.

Jamie