Copyright | Video Contest News copyright : Video Contest News

Posts Tagged ‘copyright’

MuseOpen: A COPYRIGHT-FREE Music Resource

I have that same wig

See that fancy fellow with the violin?  That’s the Italian composer Antonio Vivaldi.  I was first exposed to Tony V’s music in “Humanities” class during my senior year of high school.  And this exposure happened to occur at a time when my hobby of “making videos” was starting to become a full-blown obsession.  Consequently, Vivaldi’s music as well as a lot of other classical music tracks found their way into my projects.  (In my mind a classical score = artistic depth.)

Years later I learned that by using Vivaldi’s music I was technically committing copyright infringement.  Vivaldi has been dead for 270 years now which means all of his compositions became “public domain” long before my great-grandparents were even born. But in most cases, filmmakers can’t use the work of long-dead composers because the recordings of those pieces are almost always copyrighted.  So you are free to use a Beethoven sonata or a Mozart concerto in your work but the living musicians that performed in those recordings are going to expect to get paid.

Or at least that used to be the case.  The other day I came across a brilliant website named MuseOpen.  Some ingenious and highly motivated person named Aaron Dunn raised enough money through a kickstarter campaign to hire musicians and orchestras to perform popular pieces of Public Domain music.   The musicians had to sign away their rights to the recordings and MuseOpen publishes the music online, for free.

That means the classical tracks featured on MuseOpen are 100% Copyright free!  Filmmakers and other artists are welcome to use those recordings in any way they see fit.  And this is great news for video contest filmmakers. Pretty much every, single video contest you’ll find on the web will require you to get permission before using a piece of music in your entry. And some contests take things a step further by explicitly prohibiting the use of any material that someone else has copyrighted. That means that even if you buy a license for a song, you can’t use it because someone else still owns it. But the songs on MuseOpen are literally owned by no one. No one has any copyright claim to those works.

So MuseOpen is a real bonaza for video contest filmmakers. But take caution when using music from the site. Some of the tracks are so good and sound so professional that video contest judges will probably assume you stole that piece of music. So it’s always a good idea to credit the source. You may want to add a quick title card to the end of your video that explains where the music came from and that it’s totally copyright free. Personally, I always cite my music source in a video’s description box, if possible. But if you really want to err on the side of caution I would advise you to e-mail the contest organizers and explain to them how MuseOpen works and why you are legally allowed to use the music posted there.

Here’s a link to the site: http://www.musopen.org/

You have to sign up if you want to download anything but membership is free.

UPDATE: Check the comments to see read an important note about the copyright status of some of the songs on MuseOpen!

Invest in your love (and maybe a lawyer)

invest

Invest in Your Love is a reoccurring video contest created to promote tourism to Tahiti.  Every couple weeks a new competition is announced and couples can send in videos explaining why the need a free island vacation.  Four couples have won so far but I don’t think I’ve posted the results before.  The winners are picked by online voting and you can even vote once per day so some videos wind up getting more than 5,000 votes which is pretty ludicrous.  Anyway, because the winners are picked in this way, quality entries don’t usually win so they’re not worth posting.  But I just saw the latest winning video and I thought it was worth sharing for one very important reason.  Here it is:

Kinda cute, right?  At the very least it was amusing to see little kids talk about Bernie Madoff and Enron.  But it’s sorta of odd that parents would use their kids to get a free trip to Tahiti, isn’t it?  I mean, it’s not a free trip for the whole family. Only mom and dad get to go.  I’d kind of feel gypped if I were those kids,  But I digress.  Here’s the thing that really caught my eye.  At the very end of the video, for like three seconds, this message appears on screen:

invest2

Seriously?  All images and music were used with permission?  Including the seven or so seconds of the movie Rocky that is shown playing on a TV?  (check the 1:16 mark) I just spent 5 minutes googling and I couldn’t even pin down which studio actually owns the rights to that movie.  So I’m going to guess that these contest winners didn’t actually clear that footage.

And that is not a small deal.  Is it likely that Sylvester Stallone or Warner Bros or MGM or whoever will come along and sue some contest winners from Lexington, KY?  Hey…you never know.  Did you ever think that you’d see the day when the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) would sue 15 year old kids for downloading music?  And those kids didn’t even make any kind of profit from their acts of infringement.

Point is, be careful what you put in your contest entries.  Maybe you’ve heard the term “Fair Use” but fair use isn’t as fair as you’d think.  If you’re shooting documentary and a TV is playing in the background of a shot, that’s not copyright infringement.  But if you shoot a video contest entry and deliberately play a well known film on a TV set for a laugh, you technically just broke the law.  And if you end your video with a disclaimer saying “all images and music were used with permission,”  then some could argue that you are also committing an act of fraud.  No….I’m serious.  If the rules of a contest state that only entries that don’t violate the copyrights of others are eligible to win and if you lie about the legal status of your entry you are intentionally deceiving the contest organizers into allowing your ineligible entry in to the contest.  So worst case scenario, the couple that made this Tahiti video could be sued by the contest organizers, the losers of the contest and whoever owns the rights to the movie Rocky!  Oh, and Sly Stallone and Talia Shire since actors are supposed to get paid to appear in commercials/videos/whatever and they are being used to promote tourism in Tahiti without their knowledge.  (just look what happened to American Apparel after they put a picture of woody allen on a few billboards in NY without his permission)

As always, the best advice I can give anyone entering a video contest is this: Read and Follow the rules to a T.  The use of copyrighted material has sunk the chances of many great contest entries.  These Tahiti folks got away with a little copyright infringement but it’s always better to err on the side of caution.

Score another victory for copyright infringers

20

This is really starting to get annoying. It seems like half the contest results I post include one video that should have been deemed ineligible by the contest’s judges. Today’s example is the first place winner of the 20/20 For Life video Contest. In this competition, people were supposed to create a video that promotes eye health and that illustrates themes set forth by the advertisers, blah, blah blah. First prize was good for $2,000. I can’t embed the winning video so click on this image to see it:

magoo

Not bad…well edited and written. They even got a good actor and filmed inside a real eye doctor’s exam room. So what’s wrong with it? The video is called “Boomer Magoo” and features a quick sound clip from a Mr. Magoo cartoon. That’s 100% copyright infringement right there chief. Also, I’m guessing that if the person behind this video didn’t care about infringing on the Mr. Magoo copyright then they probably didn’t bother to make sure the music in the video was royalty free. Here’s what the 20/20 “rules” say about doing stuff like that:

“Video must not contain any materials that are subject to third party ownership, including without limitation copyrighted materials such as music, videos or artwork; third party trademarks or names, likenesses, voices of third parties for whom Entrant does not have express written permission.”

Jim_Backus_thumb

Jim Bakus (AKA Mr. Magoo AKA Thurston Howel III) does not approve

As a bonus violation of the rules, I’m guessing the people who made this video didn’t dig up Jim Bakus and ask if they could use his voice.

Even though there were $3,500 in prizes up for grabs in this contest, only 15 people entered this one and most of the entries are not great. The Boomer Magoo video was the best video entered but legally it was ineligible. Why is it that filmmakers are expected to follow the contest’s rules to a T but the contest organizers can do whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want? The “Rules” of a contest are supposed to be a legally binding contract between the contest organizers and the participants, aren’t they?  They promise in writing that if we do A, B and C they will respond by doing D, E and F.  Obviously the contests have to have a lawyer write up their contest rules.  So where are these lawyers when it comes time to enforce these rules?  Isn’t anyone worried about getting sued?  Seriously, the second place winner in the 20/20 contest has a slam dunk small claims court case here if he wants.

Designed by: Free Cell Phones | Thanks to Highest CD Rates, Domain Registration and Registry Software