Another copyright question. I know from your comments that ANYTHING recorded by anyone else is copyrighted--even if it's on YouTube.

But what about filming someone reading a story book to kids? I know the book is copyrighted, but would it be a copyright infringement to READ to book, show the pictures, etc. to a group of kids in a "story time" setting?

As a follow-up to that, how about this example: A video recorded talk to a group of kids (not reading anything) about firefighters. Would it be okay to use some copyrighted still photos and/or posters of firemen, firetrucks, fires, etc.?

Specifically, "These letters on top of this firefighters hat say NYFD, which stands for New York Fire Department....." [Pointing at the letters on the poster] etc. etc.

I am not a lawyer but my educated guess is not. Copyright is copyright, whether it's music or print, video or still images. Something like the NYFD logo wouldn't be copyright - logos, brandnames, etc aren't copyrightable - but it would be trademarked and would need their permission to use them. Something like just the letters 'NYFD' might squeek through but the actual logo itself would be another story. Still photos, posters, etc most certainly would be copyright and using them in the video would be just like copying them in any other medium.

Yes, it is copyright infringement to 'read' a copywritten book onto a video. I can no more videotape my reading of "The Firm" and sell or distribute it, anymore than I can audiotape it. Same is true for children's books and poetry.

As to using photos, same thing applies. If you know the copyright holder you can ask permission.

There are some exceptions for documentary work, classroom use, news reports, etc. But you are going to have to do more research, and probably talk to a lawyer.

(Some children's stories are in the public domain - Mother Goose for instance, however, the particular BOOK that you might be reading from, and the photos from it ARE copyrighted by the publisher. Like classical music)

Would it be okay to use some copyrighted still photos and/or posters of firemen, firetrucks, fires, etc.?

You just answered your question. The COPYRIGHTED photos aren't yours to use without permission. That's why they're copyrighted.

Would it be okay for a third party to show your finished DVD to a paying audience without your permission, knowledge or without compensating you?

Here is a link to the US federal government copyright office. good information here
http://www.copyright.gov/

You just answered your question. The COPYRIGHTED photos aren't yours to use without permission. That's why they're copyrighted.

Would it be okay for a third party to show your finished DVD to a paying audience without your permission, knowledge or without compensating you?

Not the same thing.

The angle I was looking at it was I wouldn't be reproducing the book and selling the book. Agreed--that's not a strong argument since the combination of words in that order comprise the book, whether aloud or in black and white.

However, with the copyrighted poster of a firetruck, I wouldn't be copying and reproducing a 24"x36" poster, but a video with the image used as a conversational piece. This isn't much different than you using your Honda Civic as a conversational piece in video. It too is patented, "copyrighted" in the sense it can't be copied, logo trademarked, etc. Just like you wouldn't be reproducing the actual car while filming, neither would you be reproducing the actual poster.

Lloyd, your not allowed to profit in any way from a copyright item. if you want to make a home movie using the book, you should be ok. If you sell so much as one copy of the video, you would be in violation of federal copyright infringement laws if you quote any section of the book, or show a single picture from it without permission. you would also be open to a civil claim for illegally using the images or phrases, as well as legal fees and damages. what you are asking about is clearly in violation of the law. I suggest you open the link I posted to the federal government copyright website, and read it. there are no gray areas here, it is simply against the law.
I recently needed to show a piece of starburst candy, and mention the name, in an instructional video. I contacted them for permission, and was told in no uncertain terms I am not allowed, and they would pursue action if they found out I used it. it was a polite, to the point, clear, concise, legal no.

This isn't much different than you using your Honda Civic as a conversational piece in video. It too is patented, "copyrighted" in the sense it can't be copied, logo trademarked, etc.

The laws defining patents and copyrights are INCREDIBLY different. You can't lump the two together. Call and speak with the publisher, offer them the free publicity. Get permission! Then you don't have to give your house to a publisher who caught you in clear violation of copyright laws, and sued you into bankruptcy. It really can be that bad if you're not careful. Enlist the services of a lawyer, either way, to make sure you are 100% legal.

Lloyd, your not allowed to profit in any way from a copyright item. if you want to make a home movie using the book, you should be ok. If you sell so much as one copy of the video, you would be in violation of federal copyright infringement laws if you quote any section of the book, or show a single picture from it without permission. you would also be open to a civil claim for illegally using the images or phrases, as well as legal fees and damages. what you are asking about is clearly in violation of the law. I suggest you open the link I posted to the federal government copyright website, and read it. there are no gray areas here, it is simply against the law.

Thanks Allen.

From what you said above, how could quoting from someone's book even border on copyright infringement? You see quotes from other people's books in other books all the time. Not just books, but talk radio does it all the time and clearly (pun) Clear Channel Communications is not a non-profit 501c3.

You mean to say that if I was selling Widget X and my competitor was selling Widget Y, I couldn't quote from his copyrighted written material and state "even on page 33 of their book 'Why Y Widgets?' Company Y says 'our product will not work underwater, so please no scuba-diving with it. Sorry.' That's why you need to buy Widget X since you can go swim with it on everyday with no probs..."

Stupid example, but you see what I mean... What do you think?

Lloyd, live broadcasts, news reporters, and live performances are under different laws. I can start a band, and play live performances of famous bands. I can keep all the money, and pay no royalties. If i make so much as a demo cd of the music to send to venues to listen to my sound, i would be in violation of copyright laws. I can perform live, but not record and sell it. I couldn't use pictures of the albums or groups from the songs I play, without permission. your being told the laws, if you don't believe the people here trying to help you, contact a lawyer that specializes in this type of thing.

Lloyd, live broadcasts, news reporters, and live performances are under different laws. I can start a band, and play live performances of famous bands. I can keep all the money, and pay no royalties. If i make so much as a demo cd of the music to send to venues to listen to my sound, i would be in violation of copyright laws. I can perform live, but not record and sell it. I couldn't use pictures of the albums or groups from the songs I play, without permission. your being told the laws, if you don't believe the people here trying to help you, contact a lawyer that specializes in this type of thing.

Fascinating! I never would have suspected this. That's why I'm asking the "but what if" questions...

Sorry for another one, but if you're recording a video that you're going to sell on DVD later and you happen to walk by some wall copyrighted mural during a on-street recording, and then one of those large billboard-/ad-truck displaying a Harry Potter book happens to drive by and get in the shot, would or could that too pose a copyright infringement problem?

I know this is maybe farfetched, but I have been surprised a couple times already, so I want to see how far copyright laws really can go.

Lloyd, that happens, and is fairly easy. in post, during editing, you cover up the unexpected drive by advertising. mask it, blur it, remove it completely, depending on what it is.
I sell instructional videos. I started out selling them on ebay. before I had sold my 100th video, an ebay buyer purchased one of each of my videos. the person was representing a law firm looking for copyright violations, hoping they could get business if they found anything. had we used a song for an intro, a picture, anything, they would have found it. I have nothing in my videos that are not legally mine to use, all pictures, sounds, etc. I do not show brand names, or mention any names. and I hope others also follow the law, and do not steal any of my images, sounds, etc.

Lloyd, that happens, and is fairly easy. in post, during editing, you cover up the unexpected drive by advertising. mask it, blur it, remove it completely, depending on what it is.
I sell instructional videos. I started out selling them on ebay. before I had sold my 100th video, an ebay buyer purchased one of each of my videos. the person was representing a law firm looking for copyright violations, hoping they could get business if they found anything. had we used a song for an intro, a picture, anything, they would have found it. I have nothing in my videos that are not legally mine to use, all pictures, sounds, etc. I do not show brand names, or mention any names. and I hope others also follow the law, and do not steal any of my images, sounds, etc.

Thanks again! That's probably the best policy to have. I guess this is where the phrase comes in, "When in doubt, leave it out?"

Thanks for your help. That makes sense.

Incredible story about the lawyer buying your product on Ebay! BTW, how did you find out it was a laywer searching for a lawsuit? Just curious.

If you are familiar with ebay, they have what they call a "me" page associated with the name. they have a description of themselves on that page. it clearly stated that the purpose of the buying was to look for copyright violations, as well as bootleg, fake, counterfeit items, etc.

Lloyd,

If you are really interested in Copyright, Trademark and Patent Law - then go take a couple of courses at the University.

All of the topics you bring up have been brought up in various threads. We are fortunate to have an IP Attorney, Paul Tauger - who occasionally weighs in with professional comments on general topics (But NEVER specific legal advice). Do a thorough search with the word copyright or trademark or the term 'fair use' on this forum, and spend an evening reading them - most of your questions have already been covered.

As mentioned, documentaries and news productions fall under different considerations than others. "Fair Use" is NOT a clearly defined specific parameter IE "Ten seconds, five lines etc." - "Incidental Reproduction" and Parody is another issue to be considered. It's a deep, deep subject. I'm married to an IP attorney, and she is constantly explaining to people (Her clients, or her adversaries) why they can't simply make a copy or 'read these lines' on tape without getting permission.

Look at the back of a book, or read the end credits to a film VERY carefully, and you will see "Lines of the Poem used by permission from SoAndSo" "Footage from the film XYZ used with permission from Paramount" "Pictures of ELVIS used with permission from his estate" - it really is cleared before it's used.

Come to think of it, you might just do a search for Paul's name, and read ALL his posts, so you seperate the wheat from the chaffe.

Richard, Allen,

Thanks guys for that! I will do just as you said Richard. Interesting reading for sure. Some of this just seems unrealistic....
Thanks again.

I can start a band, and play live performances of famous bands. I can keep all the money, and pay no royalties. If i make so much as a demo cd of the music to send to venues to listen to my sound, i would be in violation of copyright laws. I can perform live, but not record and sell it.

Just to make sure I understand correctly, I want to take this and apply it back to books, as in Lloyd's situation as I understand it in other posts.

If he does a public book reading he is ok. (performance) If he tapes the reading and then sells the video he is in violation for placing copyrighted material into a tangible form. Is that correct?

I am going to try to phrase this as generically as possible in the hopes that Mr. Tauger will comment. In what form does 'derivitive(sp?) works' apply. Is derivitive works what allows a band to play cover music live? Applying it books, could a group then 'perform' the story of the book. How might that be different than say the 'Lord of the Rings' books and movies.

Hmm....after reading that, it sounds complex. Let me try again.

Would a group 'performing' a story live be comparable (from a copyright standpoint) to a band playing another bands music live? I tend to be mathmatical in my thinking so I could phrase this as....

'copyrighted song' is to 'coverband playing live' as 'copyrighted story' is to X.

I have recently found 'Circular 14, Copyright Registration for Derivative Works.' in the copyright.gov web site listed above and will be reading it but I would appreciate comments as well.

Randy


Sorry for the long post, and its gonna get longer now. Mr. Plowman, how does your band senerio above work in the face of so many resturant chains being sued over the use of the 'Happy Birthday' song?

Sorry for the long post, and its gonna get longer now. Mr. Plowman, how does your band senerio above work in the face of so many resturant chains being sued over the use of the 'Happy Birthday' song?

NO WAY!!! Restaurants are being sue for this? It's not in the public domain?

It's not in the public domain?I thought for sure it was common knowledge by now that "Happy Birthday" is not in the public domain, but if you need clarification about this, you can read more about it on Snopes, Wikipedia and other sources:

http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Birthday_to_You
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/7/5/112441/6280

NO WAY!!! Restaurants are being sue for this? It's not in the public domain?

Actually I have forgotten if it was sued or threat of suit but yes. I'll admit I have not researched the matter but a good google will likely find things.

Randy

The way I understand it, (from my days playing in a band) the venue in which a band plays purchases licenses from ASCAP and BMI and any other regulating agency, in order to provide music to their patrons. This license covers the "cover band" that plays there. If perchance the band decided to play in the street in front of their home and did not secure licenses for the music then they would be in violation of copyright.

that famous birthday song is not in the public domain and it's rights are vehmently protected. That is why restaurants have those sappy stupid birthday songs they sing.

Whenever a discussion like this comes up and reveals the sorry state of affairs and how lawsuit happy some people are it makes me shake my head. I mean, hearing stories of a 12 year old girl being sued by architects for taking a snapshotof a building with her Bar... oh, let's see; female action figure with an unrealistic figure, camera, claiming it violated their rights. If I hold up a standard stage microphone in a video and use it's proper name, or iif the viewer can just see it in the video... I could be sued? What is this world coming to? (Rhetorical question).

Pretty soon someone is going to trademark or copyright or some other way register the color sky blue, and they we will all be out of luck.

sorry it's Friday, I'm in a bad mood work around lawyers and needed to vent. ;)

oh and here's a good read on the song in question

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/15999

here are clearly defined laws, there are gray areas, and its difficult to know them all. I advised two things early on in this thread. contact a lawyer, and read the US government site about copyright law. A public reading of a book without permission is expressly prohibited. playing a video for a public group is prohibited. a news team can play part of any of it as a news story. I admit, I am not a lawyer. I work with recording some music, and obviously video. I have researched the specific areas I need, and it was very confusing at first, and still is. it is easier to have a specific question, such as "can I take a picture from the internet and use it as artwork for my video" (of course the answer is probably not, but possibly).

Lloyd specifically asked about reading from a book, and showing pictures, in a for profit video. That is expressly prohibited according to copyright laws. If the book in question is not covered by a copyright, or is royalty free, he is able to use it. My first thought to Lloyds dilemma would be to make a book to use in the video. your only showing a few pages, as long as he doesn't zoom in on a tight shot, you should be able to make a prop from pictures you take with your camera, and print on a heavy paper, using a photo printer.

Another option would be to find a struggling artist that has written a book, and needs exposure. you might get permission to use it in exchange for credit in the video.

Thanks again Allen. I don't know if this adds to this discussion or changes anything, but this work I was inquiring about was likely to be through a 501c3 non-profit organization.

Is the issue solely that you are MAKING MONEY from other copyrighted work? In this case, say the 501c3 organization was to produce these videos and distribute them at basically cost + S&H, or even publish them on the internet (YouTube, etc.) for free (i.e. not sell them at all).

Would that be different than doing it for profit? Or does that even matter?

MAKING MONEY has no impact on whether or not Copyright Law applies to a given situation. It might come into play in terms of damages awarded, but you can be sued for infringement even if you LOSE money. It simply is not important. Infringement is illegal copying. Period.

By the way, damages are awarded on EACH infringement, and they can impound ALL EQUIPMENT used in making the illegal copies.

Please read the posts by PAUL TAUGER and use the search function. These topics have been covered.

"Happy Birthday" is not in the public domain, but to the best of my knowledge, "Good Morning Dear Teacher" is public domain.

So what?

Well, aside from there being two notes to match the syllables of "Hap-py" vs a longer single note to match the syllable of "Good", the music is identical

Guess which one we always played? Of course, everybody thought it was just our version of "Happy Birthday"

Good morning to you
Good morning to you
Good morning dear teacher
Good morning to you

Just put a little break in your voice to make "Good" sound like "Goo-d" and you'll get it.