OT - itunes now ready for prime time!!!

> That wouldn't stand a Supreme Court test. And that kind of test is closer to my moral
> compass than some lobbyist-arm-twisted fly-by-night law.

What's so "immoral" about protecting people's creations?

What baffles me is that you, a producer of creative works and intellectual property, are advocating a free-for-all. Like I said, if somebody inserted your video work into a porn video, would you be okay with it? Copyright protection is a good thing. This is the reason I get so riled up over the issue. I get pitted into the "big bad corporate" side of the argument when all I'm trying to do is protect my music work, my film work, my art designs. While small-time thieves, basically, want to argue that my legally protected rights really belong to big corporations.

And it's not the same as temp music. If you use my music as temp music in a film, and then contact me about licensing it properly, there's no problem at all, and as long as you don't publicly distribute the work with my temp music before you secure my consent. But anti-copyright advocates always want to argue that my intellectual property, such as the recordings I've slaved hours to create, is up for grabs and they can distribute it and use it however they want. Sorry, but if you put my music file into the old Napster network without asking my permission, it's thievery, plain and simple. If I were selling CDs online, you've just robbed me of potentially hundreds, thousands, even millions of customers -- ask Aimee Mann and Roger McGuinn, who were running their own online stores just as Napster users were robbing them blind. Let's not even get into how unethical engineers and studio assistants now leak unfinished raw demos from major artists and it gets distributed over peer-to-peer networks for free.

> Should Shakespeare be public domain?

Shakespeare is public domain. It's 400 years old.


www.derekmok.com

Derekmok, I think you are having a debate with someone other than me. Your projecting positions on to me I have not taken. You may be looking for the Limewire kid out on his skateboard. I think I have clarified this above a few times now. In fact I think we are probably in 80-90% agreement.

And... OK 400 years is a good start for public domain. I wonder how much further down the ladder it should go?

- Christopher

Just a little sidenote here that in Australia (yes, I know, jokes will be forthcoming) its actually illegal to put songs from CDs you own onto your iPod. I believe while I was overseas last year they changed the copyright laws somewhat, mainly reharding television recording, but left the music laws in place?

Can Jude/Nick/J Corbett confirm/deny?

JR.

Additionally, I lost my last job when my Record Company client started making less EPK's because of dwindling profits. I know *first hand* the impact of irresponsible use.

- Christopher

Quote
Just a little sidenote here that in Australia (yes, I know, jokes will be forthcoming) its actually illegal to put songs from CDs you own onto your iPod.

They have iPods in Australia? And CDs?



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

> They have iPods in Australia? And CDs?

They have laws?

> I think you are having a debate with someone other than me. Your projecting positions on to
> me I have not taken.

Seems to be: I'm arguing against hard-line anti-copyright college brats who aren't here, and you're arguing against hard-line anti-temp-music fascists who aren't here.

Perfect harmony. Hegel would be proud.


www.derekmok.com

Yeah, AFAIK that's true, Jus. It's technically illegal to move songs you own on CD (or otherwise) onto your iPod in Australia.

Best just to nip over to New Zealand or Bali and do it there..

And pulEEse. Of course we have iPods here. Mine has even been modified to the extent that I only need ONE sheep running at a time in the big 'lectricity wheel to make it work good. SO there.

derekmok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > They have iPods in Australia? And CDs?
>
> They have laws?
>
> > I think you are having a debate with someone
> other than me. Your projecting positions on to
> > me I have not taken.
>
> Seems to be: I'm arguing against hard-line
> anti-copyright college brats who aren't here, and
> you're arguing against hard-line anti-temp-music
> fascists who aren't here.
>
> Perfect harmony. Hegel would be proud.


At this point you might be right. But at the very start of the thread there was a clear vibe that was either quoting sync-law or being sheepish about the methodology for bringing iTunes into FCP. And I felt the need to call B.S. on that. That we all know we use temp music in a professional work-flow and its nothing to be ashamed of. Its why I used the "out of the closet" metaphor.

- Christopher

But you know what's going to happen. A good number of those amateur editors on YouTube are going to think that the extra 30 cents would entitle them to use the song without limits.

It's not "sheepish" to think that the point needs to be made. Many people don't understand sync rights, and several of us make it a point to explain it so that they won't find themselves breaking the law or asking how to.

And sorry, but your calling the first posters "frightened schoolgirls" -- including Shane, Scott, Mike and me -- was out of line.


www.derekmok.com

Ha! Funny. You know there are some ribbings that are intended to be mean and others that are intended to be among friendly peers in a group -- especially when he or she thinks the others are slacking off -- intellectually or otherwise. Mine was of the second variety. My pokes have.... levity.

I have been attending LAFCPUG meetings off and on since the Dr. Rawstock days, so I feel... comfortable slinging a little hash. I feel like we are on the same team.

And I have a vested interest in both American society and creative content people not being hindered by the unconstitutional legal excesses of corporations who have ZERO interest in our liberties. So when I sense a red flag around this issue, especially among my peers, I gotta pull a little Norma Rae! Your signature quote is exactly about this, Derekmok.

I perceived that "the group" here in this thread was behaving in a manner that resembled fear and "the party line". And I don't want to see my colleagues like that. Perhaps I misinterpreted the vibe, but I don't think so. Its not our responsibility to second guess the intention of those who wish to use iTunes songs in a FCP Sequence. But we can offer an example of responsible creative citizens and even give advice to the young Padwans about the difference between temporary private use and irresponsible distribution. That's not rocket science.

- Christopher

Quote
And pulEEse. Of course we have iPods here. Mine has even been modified to the extent that I only need ONE sheep running at a time in the big 'lectricity wheel to make it work good. SO there.

While we are on the subject of AU culture, are the sheep there like all the other animals? I mean do they they kill you? Like the spiders and snakes and jelly fish and drop bears?

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

I'm going to ignore the controversy here and stick to the aussie thread...

Of course - all our animals kill people. Kangaroos regularly hop over the Harbour Bridge to work, there are more deadly spiders here than people and snakes inhabit all our urban areas like gangsters....

Oh hold on, that's the USA that has gun issues?

JR.

Oops, I had a typo in an early post in this thread. I should have written that it is iDVD, not iTunes that can import and convert iTunes tracks to AIFFs. Truth be told, though, the results are not nearly as nice as importing from a CD. The results are lackluster. Makes for quick temp music, though.

Oh, hey kids, you cant really use these tracks for public consumption, just for playing around with an idea at home.

- Christopher

> I should have written that it is iDVD, not iTunes that can import and convert iTunes tracks to
> AIFFs

Huh?
You mean iMovie.


www.derekmok.com

What about if an actor hums a current tune in a scene? Is one breaking the copyright law if the tune ends up in the movie?

Quote
Oh hold on, that's the USA that has gun issues?

What gun issues? You want a gun in America, drive a couple blocks and get one. No questions asked.

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

derekmok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I should have written that it is iDVD, not
> iTunes that can import and convert iTunes tracks
> to
> > AIFFs
>
> Huh?
> You mean iMovie.


AHA! Got ya! Now we're blood brothers in crime! Bonnie and Clyde. Butch and Sundance. Thank you for participating.

;-)

-Christopher

"What about if an actor hums a current tune in a scene? Is one breaking the copyright law if the tune ends up in the movie?"

most definitley

"What about if an actor hums a current tune in a scene? Is one breaking the copyright law if the tune ends up in the movie?"

Is the 10% rule global?

I read an article many years ago - 10% difference will get you through. Think K-Tel tapes. Think about a chorus that has 10 notes in its melody - change one and you're OK supposedly. It'll still sound like turps of course....

My dad to this day still whistles the Flintstones theme....

Shane-
[ I would like you to point that part out in the copyright law, and site ONE case where someone was prosecuted for doing so. ]

Can't think of any regarding cutting room temp tracking-- I'm guilty of it too, BTW.

No, the story which comes to mind involves Mrs. Bill Conti, who happened to be in a New York hotel, passing by a function room and a corporate meeting within. She heard the score to ROCKY blast out from a video.

She told her husband, who had composed it.

In the resulting suit, he got big money for the use.

That's *supposed* to be a true story.

- Loren
Today's FCP 5 keytip:
Set Video Only In and Out with Control I or O !

The FCP KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

> I read an article many years ago - 10% difference will get you through. Think K-Tel tapes.
> Think about a chorus that has 10 notes in its melody - change one and you're OK
> supposedly. It'll still sound like turps of course....

I could be wrong, but I don't think it works that way. Since western music consists of only 12 notes, you're bound to resemble some western song written at some time. I think the test is whether an average person can identify it right away as a certain song. It's left to the jury whether it "resembles" another work. Because technically speaking, if there's a 10 per cent rule, then an actor who is tone deaf would be immune from infringement since all his notes would be off! From the case studies I've read of copyright suits, the judgment seems to be subjective and up to the judge/jury.

Generally when an actor hums, whistles or sings something in a film, the point of it is to be identifiable as an earlier piece of music, so it's probably rare that somebody would try to change the tune enough to disguise what piece of music it is.


www.derekmok.com

of course 99% of the time the person whose copyright is infringed upon doesn't have the money to sue, so this discussion is somewhat academic

<They have laws?>

Of course they have laws in AU... don't you remember MAD MAX? I believe it was a documentary of sorts....