Maybe there should also be a distinction between using some wildly common score, like the The Rock or Gladiator, vs. poor michael, the musician, barely trying to make ends meet. If a common score is used as background music or for a 20 second collage, no one who sees the movie is getting the experience of listening to that song. It seems different from P2P music sharing, because the ability to listen to that music is limited. In the end, I've seen numerous short films on student films that I've ilked the soundtrack to and bought albums to, like DJ Shadow. I guess I'm sort of biased because I listen to a lot of Underground Hip hop, where using beats from mainstream artists is very common and almost encouraged by major labels.

On a final note, if I was selling a DVD and someone else posted it fully on the web for free, I'd be pissed. However, if someone took a 30 second clip of it and posted it somewhere and gave credit to me. I'd be very happy. Get it. Isn't a score just a part of the original movie? Aren't most movies here much shorter than the full scores they are using?

Peace,
Rio

To anybody who suggests teachers and students cannot use copyrighted music for school-sponsored events, you may want to do some more research.

Start here:
http://www.techlearning.com/db_area/archives/TL/2002/10/copyright.html

This doesn't change the fact that posting copyrighted material on the internet is illegal.

So Rio, If I break into your car (without damaging anything) to listen to the radio, is that cool? I didn't start the car or drive it around. I'm not getting the "full experience" of the car. I just wanted to listen to the radio. The great thing about copyright law is that you, as the copyright holder, can grant people permission to use 30 second clips of your DVDs. But maybe someone else doesn't want to allow that, and they have the right to not allow people to use clips. For the most part, the law works great.

Shasta, I don't think anyone disputes teacher and students' ability to "fair use" of materials in an educational setting. What people don't understand is what can be done with a project that is using materials under fair educational use. And no, you can't use copyrighted material for school sponsored events. For example, I could make a video set to the latest Metallica song and I could show my teacher and my class, but could I show it in a school gathering, or show my friends, or even make a website and post it on the Internet? No, no, and no. Some people think, because they're not making money, and because they are a student, anything and everything they do falls under educational use and therefor can use copyrighted materials under fair use. That's very much not true. I get it. It's frustrating to spend hours and hours on a project for school and not be able to legally show anyone. Total drag.

edit: sorry, didn't realize this thread was over a year old. But it's important info, so I won't delete.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: joren,

Yes, if you use my radio for less than 30 seconds.

...Just wanted to start out with a bit of humor. I think your analogy of the car radio falls short because that person is getting full use of the radio. Think of it as what Amazon.com already does. They put up small clips of all the songs to various albums or they put up a few pages of a book all the time without consent of the owner. According to my knowledge, that's an opt-out policy.

There's a lot of salutary neglect going on with the use of copywrighted materials in their incomplete form used in other's art work on the internet and a lot of that is because it's the best form of advertising that has existed. The used and used and used again score of Requiem for a Dream has helped make that movie an icon.

While I know many people that download music that's blatantly a substitute for buying the album, this is not really the same. Watching the short film doesn't replace the original score.

The ethical codes behind these usage laws are not definite. Businesses don't want to zealously guard all their product if they are hurting themselves in the process. We've made exceptions, bright lines, and shades of grey in intellectual property laws for decades. We allow the use of copywrighted material if it's used for satire and some forms of expression as long as it doesn't substitute the original. Yet, we allow managers of public monuments discretion in allowing a toursit to film "home videos" on a tour, but restrain anyone who looks professional. It's all a game of relativism with the goal of making sure that creators of artistic and intellectual goods get their revenue without severely restraining the free interchange of expression.

I can't believe this is still being argued about. I have an idea. Create a score on your own for your film using something such as GarageBand, or Soundtrack/Soundtrack Pro. Then you don't even have to worry about this, or debate it. Come on now.

"They put up small clips of all the songs to various albums or they put up a few pages of a book all the time without consent of the owner."

What makes you think they don't get consent?

This is not 'relativist' in the legal sense. You can't use copyrighted works without permission, either partially or fully. It's not that hard to understand. Cutting a film to the score of 'Lord of the Rings' does not qualify as fair use.

Amazon has permission. There's not always clips up for every band.

Using copyrighted music is stupid, especially when it's some grand spectacular orchestral score to a couple of kids running around with guns, or some other nonsense.

Make your own music, find a band who wants exposure and use theirs. Don't steal from other people. That's just stupid.

We are all artist

So lets look at it from an artist view:

If an artist creates a painting and decides to show it to the public, does he have to request permission from the company that provided him paint?

When students make a mural downtown, are they required to ask who ever provided them the colored chalk, if its alright?

When film-makers like us make films why do we all of a sudden have to request rights to the music, its part of a piece of art. thats why we do it (just as long as u dont profit of it though)

o yea that "stealing bread and giving it to the poor" saying is bull. We're not stealing the bread and giving it to the poor, we're buying it

That's kind of a bad example...we're not talking about if you need to ask permission to use tapes (which is what paint would relate to with our movies). If you want to paint a giant mural of Superman then you would need permission to use Superman. Music is something that someone took TIME to create, and THEY own it (you just get to borrow it and listen). They should be able to decide if you can use it or not. Just think of it as a crew member. You're never going to be able to get a huge being time hollywood DP to work on your $100 epic you just wrote. There's no way. There's also no way you're ever going to get permission to use a song that some rock big rock group just came out with. Besides it's ILLEGAL and you're just going to run into problems with it, and have to find music you can use for cheap to replace it. So just start now and get some of these composors, that post ads on the forums but get no replies, some experience. I'm sure you'll get better stuff than the other crap out there.

w.e ill abide by the rules, as long as it doesnt get in the way of what i like doing, just putting my thoughts that all

I read somewhere (don't ask me to credit the source), that you can use copyrighted material, without intent to sell, only if it was 75 years or older, can anyone verify?

I'm new here and I see there is a lot of argument about using copyrighted material. Well from my experience there is smething called the "Fair Use" something rather. Basically, you can use any soundtrack as long as you do not make money of it. It also says you can use "Parts of a soundtrack." So what it is saying is to use copyrighted material in moderation.

The 75 year thing is for public domain music. But most all of it is rag time, Thomas Edison recordings. Look on Archive.org and search for public domain music.

PS -

I entered a film festival and my film was the only one to have an original film score, laborously crafted by a talented young musician. He spent weeks working on the score. I was sure that our film would win best music.

Instead, a film that used copyrighted music won best sound.

Something wrong with this?

Obviously, a Hollywood score is going to be far superior to a student creation. But I think it's unfair that a film could even be entered in a film festival with copyrighted music. If you want to talk about "being an artist," then don't use someone else's work. Make it 100% original.

Thought I'd take a brief break from the script I was working on to make a comment on this topic; it may have already been made quite a few posts back, but I don't really have the desire to search through 53 posts.

As someone has pointed out, a lot of composers post on here about needing films to score. So yeah, I agree that there is always a way to get someone to score your film for free.

Another thing to consider, too, is that there are a lot of talented, unsigned bands out there who would love to have their music featured in a soundtrack for a movie, no matter how great or small it is. It's exposure for them. Now that we have sites like myspace and purevolume, there really is no excuse not to give some of these bands a shot, and use their music for a soundtrack instead whatever rock or pop act is the latest flash in the pan on the radio.

For my movie, Everyman: A Romantic Comedy (it's on google video, for those interested), I used all unsigned bands who had submitted music to my radio show. They loved the exposure, and I got a rocking soundtrack out of it.

All that said, for my movie that is posted on here, Mneumonic Devices, I used music from ABBA and TATU, and I didn't get permission to use it. Do I think that deems me as unoriginal or dishonest or anything? Nope. It was essential for several jokes in the movie, a movie that was intended to amuse people. I accomplished that goal, and have no regrets using their music for this goal. The only thing that I do regret is the fact that I made the movie, and spent a lot of time on it, and now can't submit to any competition because of the music. Ah well...there's worse things in life.

Different strokes for different folks I guess...time to get back to writing.

quote:

Originally posted by ochopatas:
Instead, a film that used copyrighted music won best sound.

That does suck ass. Sorry to hear that...

quote:

Well from my experience there is smething called the "Fair Use" something rather. Basically, you can use any soundtrack as long as you do not make money of it. It also says you can use "Parts of a soundtrack." So what it is saying is to use copyrighted material in moderation.

Not true. Unless it's public domain you can't use *any* of it unless it's for parody purposes (very limited), educational use (this requires permission at times, also), etc...

Well, all my movies so far have been parodys. (that's probabaly why I have heard that) But definitely in a film contest best sound awards should be for original music unless best sound means something else.

You have to be parodying THE SONG or else it still won't count. That said, I doubt anyone is going to sue you for a student film only your friends and family see.

As mentioned above, there are tons of composers in the Composers section who are willing to score student films for free. There are also thousands of indy bands on sites like Garage Bandand Sound Clickwho would probably jump to have their songs exposed in a film. Sites like Production Traxhave thousands of songs and scores available which you can license for use in your film fairly inexpensively. So there really is no excuse to use copyrighted material without permission.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Leon Portelance,