So on twitter, I decided to follow one of my favorite composers, XXX XXXX (whom by the way, I used on majority of my wedding trailer) and that was the biggest and dumbest mistake that I have made in my life...
His assistant accepted the following on tweeter and decided to stop by my website where he discovered that 2 of my demo trailers, his music has been used. So he e-mailed me with "illegal music usage, let me know "exactly" how many songs you have used, cue timing, etc, and how much I charge my client for the video, etc, etc...."
I really wanted to shoot myself in the head when I was reading the e-mail...
I guess I am learning my lesson in very.. very.. hard way...

JJ

o my gosh.. I feel you man.. that must've hurt..

I mean.. in my personal personal personal opinion.. if I were the composer, I'd be very happy to know that my music is being used in weddings. Its not like people pay to play it on events and stuff... its a free advertising for them as well.. but yeah.. thats just me i guess.

Santo

Its not like people pay to play it on events and stuff

Actually, I BELIEVE that "real" DJ's and such pay a BMI/ASCAP licensing fee that allows them to use copywritten music, just like bars do. Of course, are there "fly by night" DJ's with a laptop full of illegal downloaded music that don't pay fees? Hmmm....

Actually, I BELIEVE that "real" DJ's and such pay a BMI/ASCAP licensing fee that allows them to use copywritten music, just like bars do. Correct and, if they don't, the hall in which the wedding is held does.

From the legal perspective, if Muzzey is inclined to sue and discovers that, rather than taking down the material, it was simply moved somewhere else, the OP has incurred liability for intentional copyright infringement, for which the penalties are severe.

o my gosh.. I feel you man.. that must've hurt..

I mean.. in my personal personal personal opinion.. if I were the composer, I'd be very happy to know that my music is being used in weddings. Its not like people pay to play it on events and stuff... its a free advertising for them as well.. but yeah.. thats just me i guess.


So would you film a wedding for anyone that wants it for free? Paying for it all out of your pocket, using your time, just so you can have free advertising?
The composer didn't create that music for free advertising... that's his product.
Music costs money and time to make.

I am in process of talking with his assistant and attorney for signing the contract of usage of his music with licensing fee. I have sent them my wedding price package and they will determine how much they would charge for my usage of his music.
His music has been used 3 of trailers and nowhere else which is usually 30 sec to one minute. The entire DVD is usually from 1.5 hours to 2. I guess it's important to them what' the portion of his music being used as to a whole project.
I mean, I am a musician myself and I do respect and admire very talented musicians/composers, like XXX XXXXX.
As long as music fee is reasonable, like American Music Co, and stock 20, I am willing to pay the cost. I have read some big thread about music licensing in this forum, but I didn't know it could actually hit me like this.. but then again, it's all my stupidity of deciding to follow Kerry's twitter...

JJ

So would you film a wedding for anyone that wants it for free? Paying for it all out of your pocket, using your time, just so you can have free advertising?
The composer didn't create that music for free advertising... that's his product.
Music costs money and time to make.

No, but I wouldn't mind if I see my wedding film shown in someone's party because they think its a very cool stuff to be shown :) I'd be thrilled! of course I'd love to be paid for it, but I'm still happy if they just do whatever they like with it because they like what I do.

This is because I already got paid in the main job. which is the wedding day.

For composers, I think their main income is from album sales, itunes download, concerts, commercials, etc.

But then again, like I said, its a personal personal personal opinion.. :)

Santo

Just out of interest - did you credit him in the clip?

Just out of interest - did you credit him in the clip?

No, I wish I did.
I am thinking about doing that for my trailers from now on.
But then again, how many wedding videographer/video production service put the composer/musician name on their trailer or highlight? I know some do, but most of them don't, correct?

lucky for australians, we got a license that covers commercial music used in weddings...

US should provide this such license..

That's a big problem JJ. If you had credited him I doubt he would be taking this aggressive an attitude.

This is a very unfortunate trend in wedding video. Hunting out more obscure pieces of music which the client is unlikely to have heard. Creating highlights/montages where 90% of the impact is from the music and then by not crediting the artist effectively claiming 100% of the credit for yourself.

Of course you/I don't necessarily want to credit the artist, especially if we promote our work to other videographers, but succumbing to the temptation is flat out wrong and not just in the legal/technical sense.

Kudos for going public.

This is from his twitter update:

I get annoyed at unauthorized uses of my music, esp. becuz my attorney fees get a little outrageous.
about 1 hour ago from web

I just don't want anyone else to make same mistake that I made.
Who knew following someone in the twitter could get this much trouble...
I am very frustrated and a bit scared even... with this mass...
I don't mind credit the artist at all... OH I wish I had...


JJ

Correct and, if they don't, the hall in which the wedding is held does.

Thanks for weighing in Paul. Good to know that I haven't been misled.

I wish or hope Canada comes up with a similar license fee as Australia, I know Djs through AVLA pay a one year license fee. Would love to pay a one year fee. WEVA should start a campaign of some sort, I am sure thousands of videogs from the US and Canada would love to pay that fee.

So on twitter, I decided to follow one of my favorite composers, Kerry Muzzey (whom by the way, I used on majority of my wedding trailer) and that was the biggest and dumbest mistake that I have made in my life...
His assistant accepted the following on tweeter and decided to stop by my website where he discovered that 2 of my demo trailers, Kerry's music has been used. So he e-mailed me with "illegal music usage, let me know "exactly" how many songs you have used, cue timing, etc, and how much I charge my client for the video, etc, etc...."
I really wanted to shoot myself in the head when I was reading the e-mail...
I guess I am learning my lesson in very.. very.. hard way...

JJ

J.J., I hope they don't charge you an extravagant amount ( I hope they base it on a certain percentage of what you charge).

No, but I wouldn't mind if I see my wedding film shown in someone's party because they think its a very cool stuff to be shown :) I'd be thrilled! of course I'd love to be paid for it, but I'm still happy if they just do whatever they like with it because they like what I do.



So you wouldn't mind if someone took one of your videos (that you would have made on spec hoping to make money on sales of that video, not production) and used it to enhance the value of their product without compensation or even credit?


This is because I already got paid in the main job. which is the wedding day.

For composers, I think their main income is from album sales, itunes download, concerts, commercials, etc.


And licensing...
Musicians don't get paid to make music, they get paid to sell and license music.
Kind of like feature films.
Sorry, touchy subject for me.

So you wouldn't mind if someone took one of your videos (that you would have made on spec hoping to make money on sales of that video, not production) and used it to enhance the value of their product without compensation or even credit?

OK, I'm wrong. Nicely put up there by Chris.

Somehow I pictured some guy making a wedding entertainment product and he uses my video without asking for permission.. that'll be quiet upsetting.

Santo

Just a little FYI: I was curious and went to hunt down this composer's Twitter page. I typed Kerry Muzzey Twitter into Google and this thread was on the first page of search results, about five or six results from the top.

Considering that you're currently still working out a deal and it's a rather sticky legal issue, it may be best to keep your frustration private, at the risk of what you write here being used against you.

Just a little FYI: I was curious and went to hunt down this composer's Twitter page. I typed Kerry Muzzey Twitter into Google and this thread was on the first page of search results, about five or six results from the top.

Considering that you're currently still working out a deal and it's a rather sticky legal issue, it may be best to keep your frustration private, at the risk of what you write here being used against you.

Thank you for your info, Matthew. It does show up there...
I would like to keep it private, but I just wanted to share with fellow video professions at this forum because as simple thing as following someone in the twitter could cause such a big issue, others (and I) will think twice when they decided to do twitter and facebook in that matter.
But should I erased his name from my first thread??
I am going to do it anyway...

JJ

First, JJ, I'm really sorry to hear of your troubles. Considering how little we get paid to do what we do as it is, this has got to be very frustrating. I'm sorry, man.

Second, contrary to what Doug said, I seriously doubt that 'crediting' the composer would have made much of a difference in how they interacted with you. If they are willing to pay lawyers to try and get money out of a wedding videographer I seriously doubt they would do things differently if you had put the composers name on the piece.

Third, I would like to point out that there's a difference between using a composer's music in what amounts to a personal project for the couple ... and using someone's video to sell a product or services on a mass scale. I'm not justifying the legality, I'm just saying there is a difference between the two.

Fourth, how long is it going to be before the music industry gets it's act together and gives us a system that works? Seriously.

Lastly, I hope this thread doesn't hurt you JJ, and I appreciate you sharing your story. Very thoughtful of you.

J.J., I hope they don't charge you an extravagant amount ( I hope they base it on a certain percentage of what you charge).

But I have not made a single penny from the trailer yet, because all the trailers with his music has not been fully produced at DVD yet. They are still in editing process.
I can leave it out from full DVD and explain it to my brides and I am sure they will understand.
I am really nervous right now... (sigh)...

JJ

Travis - you doubt it would have made any difference? IMHO that is is the classic "get out". There is no point in behaving honorably because they will still go after you for maximum legal damages.

I think JJ knows only too well how much of a difference it would have made.

But perhaps we are wrong. How would you feel if I showed a clip of yours on my website without credit? Would it be different if I included your name, email and website?

Let's get real guys. In the battle between wedding videographers and the rest of the world wedding videographers are not always right.

I do feel for JJ - it's a painful experience, but not giving credit in circumstances where you stand to gain competitive advantage by assuming the credit yourself is flat wrong.

JJ - if this is the biggest mistake of your life the you must be very very young.

Travis - I checked yr work man. VERY nice!! I have some clients coming round in a few - so I've taken a couple of yr clips and put them on my site. Hope that's OK. I won't credit you if that's OK. But if they do explicitly ask who shot that clip I will give them your name. That way no-one can accuse me of dishonesty.

JJ - if this is the biggest mistake of your life the you must be very very young.

I will be 31 this October.
And yep, this one is the biggest one so far, but let's hope not... let's just hope this will work out OK...
The wedding DVDs with the trailer with his music has not been produced yet. All 3 of them are still in editing process and one of them has not been even started yet because the bride has not been submitted her music CD yet.
So really... I haven't made a single penny off his music yet if they want to investigate how much I have made with the trailer itself....
Urgh.. I just want this nightmare to end........
Funny, he is following me as well on Twitter...

JJ

Second, contrary to what Doug said, I seriously doubt that 'crediting' the composer would have made much of a difference in how they interacted with you.I agree completely. Crediting music in this manner is no more nor less than a prima facie admission of intentional infringement.

If they are willing to pay lawyers to try and get money out of a wedding videographer I seriously doubt they would do things differently if you had put the composers name on the piece.Do not, for a moment, think that the primary reason people sue is to get money from the defendant. My advice to IP clients is always the same:

Do not think of an IP lawsuit as a profit center. There is a very simple calculus for determining whether or not to sue: if the cost of litigation is less than the value of the IP at issue, sue. If not, don't.

IP plaintiffs sue to vindicate the right at issue, not to make money. Valid reasons for suing include sending a message to other and potential infringers, get an easy win to hold up to other, more problematic, potential defendants, etc. My clients will routinely pick a "weak" defendant, i.e. one with few financial resources who provides a clear black-and-white case, to get an easy win that can be publicized.

Third, I would like to point out that there's a difference between using a composer's music in what amounts to a personal project for the couple ... and using someone's video to sell a product or services on a mass scale. I'm not justifying the legality, I'm just saying there is a difference between the two.I agree from the standpoint of logic and ethics, though it is worth emphasizing that, from the standpoint of the law, the are one and the same.

Fourth, how long is it going to be before the music industry gets it's act together and gives us a system that works? Seriously.Answer: not until they stop making money from the existing system. I agree that a compulsory license such as that available in Australia (and, I think, Canada), is a simple solution that would work for everyone. I have, however, spoken with BMI's counsel about this and there is simply no interest on their part to push for such a scheme.

I will be 31 this October.
And yep, this one is the biggest one so far, but let's hope not... let's just hope this will work out OK...


no JJ however this works out if this is the worst you're doing pretty good in my book. We make mistakes - we get suckered in to behaving dishonorably, because "everybody is doing it".

He is following you on Twitter? Maybe he reads this thread and decides you are a well-intentioned innocent, who has been brainwashed into thinking that because this is "Standard Industry Practice", it is OK. Now you have seen the error of your ways he goes easy on you.

No that couldn't happen.

Answer: not until they stop making money from the existing system. I agree that a compulsory license such as that available in Australia (and, I think, Canada), is a simple solution that would work for everyone. I have, however, spoken with BMI's counsel about this and there is simply no interest on their part to push for such a scheme.

Why is that do you think? I mean, from my perspective it takes care of the legal issues AND provides additional profit all at the same time. Even if the legal issue solution doesn't motivate them, I would think profits would. Is it that they don't believe they would make a profit off of such a system?

Hey all,

I read all the posts with great interest because I read the thread a bit a while ago about the discussion of using music as a DJ or in wedding videos.

I am confused by a few issues. I am hoping some of you can clear these up based on J.J.'s issues at hand. As he said..he used this guys music in a video trailer that is on his sight. He didn't credit the guy..ok.. but JJ isnt making money (yet) off of the videos. If I understand correctly, isn't JJ selling the video as part of his service for shooting the wedding video? Thus, there is only 1 person buying it? It's not like he's redistributing this guys music and making money off of it. So how much "license" can a song demand?

I ask this because, I have been wanting to get in to the wedding video business, but after reading this, I don't think I do now. This is insane. I agree a musician needs to make his money, and if J.J. Were selling his music on some site and profiting from it without permission, J.J. would be in a heap of trouble. That is mostly common sense. We see pirated DVDs, CDs, etc all over the place and we read about places that get caught and their owners go to jail.. etc etc.. but they are redistributing music possibly in quantities for profit with not even a penny going back to the original musicians and parties involved in the production of said music. That is illegal.. agree. But J.J is simply using his song in a video that he is "showing off" so while somebody can watch it.. it's not the full song and it's probably not even CD quality and it's not being sold.. so how the heck can he be charged any sort of nominal price for using a portion of the music in a non-profitable way? By that I mean..if this musician has lawyers involved (plural mind you), that's costing the guy a lot of money..probably a lot more than the money JJ was going to make off the whole wedding video service. It would be my guess that he would then try to sue JJ for at least the costs of his lawyers + some sort of cost for the use of the music. I don't know for sure how that works..but it's a guess.. why have lawyers looking into this one use of it and pay their astronomical fees if you don't plan to recoup the costs of their fees at least?

That said, now that I am also scared about thinking of going into this business.. how does one in the US of good o'l A license music for videos? I ask this primarily because I have no money and wanted to offer some free shoots/editings to get a portfolio going..but it sounds like I may get my house taken from me if I try to use any song at all without paying some license? I have read that there is a new site that offers music for wedding videos, events, etc at a low price.. forget how much it was per use, but it wasn't too bad. Naturally wedding people have to work that in to their prices. I would love it if someone could point me to some info on that so I can get a rough idea of what will be required to actually use any music I want in a video.

Incidentally..what about videos people post on YouTube and Facebook and such? If this guy can go after J.J for this.. why can't everyone on youtube and facebook be sued for posting videos with illegal music and such?

You wonder why people download mp3s.. it's because of this crap exactly. People are tired of paying $16 for a CD that costs less than $1 to make an distribute. This is why iTunes has done so well and frankly the music industry is in serious trouble.. even more so with the higher bandwidth internet to homes, more musicians doing it themselves because they don't want to wait for BMI and whoever else to try to sign them and take 90% of their profits, etc.

Sorry for the anger.. but this is just sickening how this happens. Lawyers have been tearing apart people's lives with all kinds of loopholes for decades now and our country is a damn sue happy country at any cost. This is just one more case where a musician could have taken a very professional approach and simply said "Hey, I notice you're using my music.. I like to be credited for it and I ask a nominal fee for use.." Bam. I am sure JJ would have obliged and everybody would be happy. If this guy is going to try to sue JJ, frankly I think his music career is going to have a rough ride. There are professional ways to handle things in small situations like this, I don't think involving lawyers right off is the right approach. Why not be professional, ask JJ for a little compensation that is fair and some credit. That would go a long way in bringing this guy more business. I for one would rather have seen JJ say "Hey guys..I got caught on twitter by a musician for using his music, but this guy was really professional.. asked me to credit him and pay a nominal fee for each use.. you guys should check out his site and music.. give him some business." To me..that would have been far better. But our country is no longer built on good morals like this.. everyone is out to make a buck and screw the next guy over.

Ugh.. JJ, I feel for you man.. this makes me angry just reading this. I am really sorry you're going through it. :( I hope it turns out ok.

This is a very unfortunate trend in wedding video. Hunting out more obscure pieces of music which the client is unlikely to have heard.Why? If you're going to use obscure music that the client has never heard, why not use legally obtained royalty free music from Stock20, Digital Juice, Free Play Music, et al?

This event reinforces my opinion that soon (very soon!) music publishers, composers and authors will use music fingerprinting software to crawl the web searching for infringing uses of their music, including in videos many of you have posted on your websites. Facebook and YouTube already do it, what makes you think others won't?

I am confused by a few issues. I am hoping some of you can clear these up based on J.J.'s issues at hand. As he said..he used this guys music in a video trailer that is on his sight. He didn't credit the guy..ok.. but JJ isnt making money (yet) off of the videos. If I understand correctly, isn't JJ selling the video as part of his service for shooting the wedding video? Thus, there is only 1 person buying it? It's not like he's redistributing this guys music and making money off of it. So how much "license" can a song demand?It doesn't matter how many copies or if it's being sold or given away. He used the music without permission. It doesn't matter if he only made a video for his dying grandmother.

how does one in the US of good o'l A license music for videos? ... I would love it if someone could point me to some info on that so I can get a rough idea of what will be required to actually use any music I want in a video.You can purchase royalty-free music from stock20.com, digitaljuice.com, freeplaymusic.com and many others.

BTW, it gets worse. When you record and redistribute the bride's cousin singing "Endless Love" during the ceremony, you are violating copyright.

Incidentally..what about videos people post on YouTube and Facebook and such? If this guy can go after J.J for this.. why can't everyone on youtube and facebook be sued for posting videos with illegal music and such?They don't get away with it. YouTube and Facebook have music fingerprinting software that will eventually sniff out your infringing video, remove it from the site, and alert the rights holder. Maybe those people are getting the shakedown from those music publishers, or maybe not. None of them have posted their experiences here.

This is just one more case where a musician could have taken a very professional approach and simply said "Hey, I notice you're using my music.. I like to be credited for it and I ask a nominal fee for use.." Bam. That is what's happening. So chill out.

This event reinforces my opinion that soon (very soon!) music publishers, composers and authors will use music fingerprinting software to crawl the web searching for infringing uses of their music, including in videos many of you have posted on your websites. Facebook and YouTube already do it, what makes you think others won't?

I think this would be great. Right now, we break copyright constantly because if we refuse to use the songs the couple wants, we don't get the job. So this topic gets hashed and bashed around over and over.

Wouldn't it be great if we could just all get to say to our clients "nope, can't do it. Here's a list of royalty free stuff from my library that I can use in your video. The music police have shut us all down."

Then we could just get on with it.

I think this would be great. Right now, we break copyright constantly because if we refuse to use the songs the couple wants, we don't get the job. So this topic gets hashed and bashed around over and over.

Wouldn't it be great if we could just all get to say to our clients "nope, can't do it. Here's a list of royalty free stuff from my library that I can use in your video. The music police have shut us all down."

Then we could just get on with it.

Actually.. you nailed it on the head for me. Thinking of going into this business.. this is the only way to go. Seriously. I don't know if it would make sense to have say a page on my company website that lists the hundreds if not thousands of songs (maybe with a nice search facility) so someone can check what songs they could be allowed in their wedding video. I do think as time goes on with all the issues going on with this, more and more musicians will sign up for the royalty free avenue as they'll have yet another outlet for money.

So..question then for Chris (or anyone who knows), what if the wedding client has purchased a CD of music that they want to use. Can I legally use that music in their wedding video since they purchased the music legally and the video is for them and nobody else? It would mean I can't show their video on my site, sure.. but could I legally use the music they purchased in their video? OR.. could I go out and buy a CD (or itunes music), and put it in their video for their use only? If so.. how does this apply to making copies of the DVDs for their friends/relatives? I am guessing that would NOT be allowed due to multiple distributes of the music without paying for it... hence what a royalty free license covers.

I haven't looked at the sites yet, but was is the average price for a single song royalty free to use? And.. if I myself pay for that song.. is it normally a one time use, or can I use it in anything I want from then on (or some duration probably the license covers)?

Thanks.

Kevin, do a search on the site. This topic has been discussed a million times and you'll get lots of info.

Cheers...

There was a huge thread about the music licensing issue a while back and there have been numbers of threads about this issue.
I started this thread just to share that twitter and facebook could very often be used against you... More on that subject than the actual music licensing.....
But, really, I want to thank you all for your advice and help.
Hopefully things will work out OK...

JJ

what if the wedding client has purchased a CD of music that they want to use. Can I legally use that music in their wedding video since they purchased the music legally and the video is for them and nobody else?

Copyright = the right to copy. Even if they have bought a hundred copies of the CD you still don't have the right to copy the song and sync it to video.

I often fantasize about Vito's idea of our industry collectively telling our clients, "Sorry, can't use that Madonna song." But as long as the majority of us are giving the option of using any song, licensed or not, it's a death sentence.

I often wonder how the higher priced studios with the most exposure get away with it. Uncle Bob with the handycam who charges $500 and does five weddings a year I can see flying under the radar, but I would think more companys that are featured on popular wedding websites and magazines, would be caught by now.

But I don't want to get off track so I'll zip it :)

Why? If you're going to use obscure music that the client has never heard, why not use legally obtained royalty free music from Stock20, Digital Juice, Free Play Music, et al?

Because that music is created on a computer, and it sounds like it. Nothing says 'cheese' more in a wedding video than music that sounds like it should be playing in an elevator somewhere.

Because that music is created on a computer, and it sounds like it. Nothing says 'cheese' more in a wedding video than music that sounds like it should be playing in an elevator somewhere.Maybe some, but I've found several that work well with my corporate productions. I get lots of comments about my choice of music fitting perfectly with the video. But perhaps my ear is not as educated as yours. Laws be damned - we're in it for the art! :)

I use royalty-free stuff from places like Digital Juice for corporate projects, but wedding clients are a whole 'nother ball game. d;-)

I second Travis' comment. I use Stock 20 for most of my non-wedding client and they always loved it. It's the wedding clients that I can show 1000 songs to pick from my royalty free music library, and honestly, I have used some royalty free music for some weddings, but it is very very rare...
Still waiting from their attorney...

JJ

Why is that do you think? I mean, from my perspective it takes care of the legal issues AND provides additional profit all at the same time. Even if the legal issue solution doesn't motivate them, I would think profits would. Is it that they don't believe they would make a profit off of such a system?When I used to work in aerospace (my day job while I was a professional actor), we always had two reasons not to change something:

1. We've always done it this way.
2. We've never done it that way.

My expectation is that the copyright owners don't see wedding and event videography as a significant source of potential income. Though I think they wrong in this assessment, there's little I (or you) can do to change there minds. I do think that WEVA and similar organizations can and should lobby for this change. Perhaps you should ask them. ;)

Hey all,

I read all the posts with great interest because I read the thread a bit a while ago about the discussion of using music as a DJ or in wedding videos.

I am confused by a few issues. I am hoping some of you can clear these up based on J.J.'s issues at hand. As he said..he used this guys music in a video trailer that is on his sight. He didn't credit the guy..ok.. but JJ isnt making money (yet) off of the videos. If I understand correctly, isn't JJ selling the video as part of his service for shooting the wedding video? Thus, there is only 1 person buying it? It's not like he's redistributing this guys music and making money off of it. So how much "license" can a song demand?

Copyright law reserves to the copyright owner a number of protected rights. Among these are:

1. The right to make copies.
2. The right to distribute.
3. The right to prepare derivative works.
4. The right to publicly perform.

By posting the video trailer on a website, the OP has infringed all four. Copyright confers and exclusive right, meaning you can't "make" a copyright owner let you use something (absent a compulsory license or fair use, which this is not).

I ask this because, I have been wanting to get in to the wedding video business, but after reading this, I don't think I do now. This is insane.This is the law. I won't comment on its relative sanity or insanity.

I agree a musician needs to make his money, and if J.J. Were selling his music on some site and profiting from it without permission, J.J. would be in a heap of trouble. J.J. is already in a heap of trouble. The remaining questions are only two: does the copyright owner intend to sue and, if so, what will be the amount of damages for which J.J. is liable.

As I said, "exclusive rights," means exclusive as in, "the power to exclude." The purpose of copyright is as an incentive to creation by authors. I happen to write music. Suppose I think wedding videos are tacky and cheapen my compositions (I don't, by the way -- this is a hypothetical). I have an absolute right, confirmed by the Constitution, to say, "I don't care whether you're making money or not -- you can't use my music for a wedding video."

That is mostly common sense.And this is the law.

We see pirated DVDs, CDs, etc all over the place and we read about places that get caught and their owners go to jail.. etc etc.. but they are redistributing music possibly in quantities for profit with not even a penny going back to the original musicians and parties involved in the production of said music. That is illegal.It would also be illegal if they were giving them away for free. The fact of profit on this scale renders it criminal.

agree. But J.J is simply using his song in a video that he is "showing off" so while somebody can watch it.. it's not the full song and it's probably not even CD quality and it's not being sold.. so how the heck can he be charged any sort of nominal price for using a portion of the music in a non-profitable way?I have own a vacant house in San Francisco. I'm not using it and it's not making me any money at the moment. Do you think that means you can spend the weekend there for free without my permission? Like real estate, copyright confers the power to exclude for any reason or for no reason.

By that I mean..if this musician has lawyers involved (plural mind you),And it appears that it does.

that's costing the guy a lot of money..probably a lot more than the money JJ was going to make off the whole wedding video service. It would be my guess that he would then try to sue JJ for at least the costs of his lawyers + some sort of cost for the use of the music. I don't know for sure how that works..but it's a guess.. And you've guessed wrong. Intentional infringement does result in liability for attorneys fees, but it also includes statutory damages, which can be elected instead of actual damages. Statutory damages for intentional infringement are awarded in an amount at the discretion of the judge and can be up to $1,000,000.

However, you also said you read the thread. You must have missed my post in which I explained that people rarely sue for copyright infringement because they think they will make money from the litigation. There are many other far more valid reasons to sue.

why have lawyers looking into this one use of it and pay their astronomical fees if you don't plan to recoup the costs of their fees at least?What is "astronomical" to you isn't astronomical to a business that derives its income from license fees and royalties for its intellectual property.

That said, now that I am also scared about thinking of going into this business.. how does one in the US of good o'l A license music for videos?You either obtain a license from the copyright owner (and, because we're talking about recordings, there are multiple copyrights involved, i.e. the recording and the underlying composition constitute separate copyrights), or you use royalty-free or public domain music.

I ask this primarily because I have no money and wanted to offer some free shoots/editings to get a portfolio going..but it sounds like I may get my house taken from me if I try to use any song at all without paying some license?Legally, you could. Whether it's likely that would happen is another question. I'm a lawyer and can only offer opinions about the law. Whether or not you will get caught is not something I could or would advise about.

I have read that there is a new site that offers music for wedding videos, events, etc at a low price.. forget how much it was per use, but it wasn't too bad.There are lots of sites like that. I'm just an amateur, but I post my videos on YouTube. I use royalty-free music from SmartSound for my videos.

Naturally wedding people have to work that in to their prices. I would love it if someone could point me to some info on that so I can get a rough idea of what will be required to actually use any music I want in a video.Do a search here on "royalty free music." You'll find lots of suggestions.

Incidentally..what about videos people post on YouTube and Facebook and such? If this guy can go after J.J for this.. why can't everyone on youtube and facebook be sued for posting videos with illegal music and such? Everyone can. I've sent take-down notices and cease-and-desist letters to people who have pirated my videos (though why they would want to do so is absolutely beyond me -- I'm just not that good).

You wonder why people download mp3s.. it's because of this crap exactly.I don't understand why you think this is crap. As I said, I write music. Why would I want to let anyone have it for free?

People are tired of paying $16 for a CD that costs less than $1 to make an distribute.That's the cost of physical production of the CDs. It doesn't cover marketing, distribution of CDs, financing recording sessions for unknown groups (though many -- at least those with bad contracts -- are required to self-produce), clearances, insurance, etc. However, if you think the cost is too high, don't buy them and the record companies will be forced to lower their prices. I think the cost of houses is too high. That doesn't mean I can steal one.

This is why iTunes has done so well and frankly the music industry is in serious trouble.iTunes has done well because it is selling popular music. If your music tastes are more eclectic, you won't find the music you want on iTunes. Music or, for that matter, any other art shouldn't be based on lowest-common-denominator commercial appeal.

even more so with the higher bandwidth internet to homes, more musicians doing it themselves because they don't want to wait for BMI and whoever else to try to sign them and take 90% of their profits, etc.BMI doesn't take 90% of the profits -- it collects royalties for musicians. Your complaint is with the record companies, not the agencies that represent artists.

Sorry for the anger.. but this is just sickening how this happens.No offense, but your anger is completely misplaced.

Lawyers have been tearing apart people's lives with all kinds of loopholes for decades now and our country is a damn sue happy country at any cost.That's the populist myth. And it's completely wrong. Don't confuse IP lawyers and commercial litigators with personal injury lawyers.

This is just one more case where a musician could have taken a very professional approach and simply said "Hey, I notice you're using my music.. I like to be credited for it and I ask a nominal fee for use.." Bam.And that's exactly what is happening. The copyright owner is negotiating a license fee. Just like you can say, "Hey, I hear you have a vacant house in SF. How much do you want to rent it to me for a week?" Note that I'd be less inclined to rent it to you if I find you've already moved in before I said, "yes."

I am sure JJ would have obliged and everybody would be happy.See above.

If this guy is going to try to sue JJ, frankly I think his music career is going to have a rough ride.Please re-read my posts in this thread about why people sue.

There are professional ways to handle things in small situations like this,What makes you think it's a "small" situation? Do you think I wouldn't call the police if I found you in my house in SF and you said, "Hey, I only jumped in here to get out the rain"?

I don't think involving lawyers right off is the right approach.On the contrary, it is critical. Lay people waive rights when they try to handle things like this themselves. Worse yet, lay people find themselves sued for declaratory relief if they hand things like this the wrong way by, for example, threatening to sue.

Why not be professional, ask JJ for a little compensation that is fair and some credit.I'm sorry, but what you are suggesting is unprofessional.

The professional way to handle this is for JJ to have approached the copyright owners and requested a license. It's possible they might even have given him one for free. Instead, he simply appropriated for himself something that didn't belong to him. Instead of just immediately suing him (which the copyright owner was completely within his rights to do), they contacted him first and, now, are discussing a license.

That is professional.

Approaching someone and saying, "hey you took something that's mine -- how about putting my name on it and giving me a few bucks" is not, in the least, professional.

That would go a long way in bringing this guy more business.You don't get it. This guy doesn't want wedding business. He thinks, rightly or wrongly, that he doesn't need it. His business is recording music, selling records and giving performances.

I for one would rather have seen JJ say "Hey guys..I got caught on twitter by a musician for using his music, but this guy was really professional.. asked me to credit him and pay a nominal fee for each use.. you guys should check out his site and music.. give him some business." To me..that would have been far better.It might have been better for you, but it would have been incredibly stupid as it could be construed as dedication to the public domain or, at least, grant of an implied license to anyone who came along.

But our country is no longer built on good morals like this.. everyone is out to make a buck and screw the next guy over.There is so much wrong with statement.

1. Law has nothing to do with morality.
2. Copyright exists because it provides a social benefit.
3. The Constitution guarantees that the only one who can make a buck from a protected work of authorship is the author.
4. Enforcing copyright has nothing to do with screwing anyone over, anymore than my throwing you out of my vacant house in SF is screwing you over.

Ugh.. JJ, I feel for you man.. this makes me angry just reading this. I am really sorry you're going through it. :( I hope it turns out ok.I hope it turns out okay, too. I also hope that people spend a little time understanding the nature of copyright, why it exists, and what purpose it serves. It is painfully obvious that quite a few folks simply don't understand it.

Thank you Paul for that very complete post. If I could close the thread I would, so it doesn't go down the "here is how things should be" road (which is an endlessly speculative road).

Suffice to say, use this experience of JJ's as a good warning.

It kinda sucks to be a bad example, but I really hope he would just send me an invoice for usage of his music and get it done.
I don't want any court appearances in NY.
Thank you for your detailed advice, though, Paul.
I have a wedding to shoot tomorrow and I am not feeling it..
I couldn't do any editing today, no nothing....
It simply sucks to get into something like this.
If I didn't follow him on Tweeter, I could have avoided this...at least for now.
Again, just like the title says, stupid of me...

jj

I often fantasize about Vito's idea of our industry collectively telling our clients, "Sorry, can't use that Madonna song." But as long as the majority of us are giving the option of using any song, licensed or not, it's a death sentence.

I do EXACTLY that ALL THE TIME. I even have TWO points in my FAQ on my website addressing the fact that I will not use non-Royalty Free music in any video I produce UNLESS the client sources the rights to use and provides me with written proof PRIOR to placing said music track in my production. Only ONCE has a client gone ahead.

I don't do wedding videos as a direct result of this moral and legal position that I am VERY comfortable with. REMEMBER that every corporate client wants to use Tina Turner's "Simply the Best" for advertising and years of service acknowledgments.

I understand that it is difficult (if not impossible) to convince a bride that you CANNOT legally use her favourite songs in her video (because face it, it's the bride's, not the groom's...) BUT you ARE BREAKING THE LAW in many countries if you do this.

I'm sure if you told a couple you couldn't steal a Ferrari so that they could arrive in style at their wedding, they'd get it. Every videographer that uses copywritten music illegally is helping to perpetuate the problems that you are facing.

AGAIN, for those that CAN legally buy rights en masse as discussed (Australia) POWER TO YOU.

The rest of us make choices: I CHOOSE to use Royalty Free and I face the realities to my business that perhaps I won't get that next corporate piece where someone who hasn't discussed the issue with Legal wants to use "Born in the USA" for their next marketing piece. I ALSO won't have to wait for the lawyers to show up...

Shaun - can you do one thing for the board.

On Monday phone the RIAA in New York. Tell them you want to license music for a wedding video. I can't remember the reply verbatim - but two points were made when I made a similar call a couple years back.

1. You don't need a license
2. Many top attorneys and judges, including Supreme Court Justices have commissioned wedding videos.

If you could reserve judgment until you've made the call that would be great. Once you get an answer do let us know if it's changed from the ones that have given me and many others over the years.

For those who don't want to make the call themselves but still require incontrovertible advice - why not check out what NPR's Intellectual Property attorneys and NY Times ethicist think of it: "Could a wedding dance turn into a copyright infringement if it's videotaped?" -

Is Videotaping a Wedding Dance Illegal? : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5060669)

Including copyright music in a wedding video is neither illegal or immoral. If you have a problem with that view - why not phone NPR? I'm sure they would be really interested in your viewpoint, although in the interview they are pretty scathing about people who hand out bogus legal info on the net.

On the other hand setting a montage/highlight reel to a piece original music without crediting the author is illegal. Hoping to secure some commercial advantage from that is immoral.

Thank you Paul for that very complete post. If I could close the thread I would, so it doesn't go down the "here is how things should be" road (which is an endlessly speculative road).Not to worry; the end is growing near... I fully agree with you that Paul's post would make an excellent conclusion to this thread.

If I didn't follow him on Tweeter, I could have avoided this...J.J., I'm sorry about your situation and I wish you the best. However, this could have been more easily avoided if you had not uploaded that video clip to the web. For anyone out there who is using music without permission of the copyright holder, this is a good example of why it's never a good idea to put that material on the internet.

For those who don't want to make the call themselves but still require incontrovertible advice - why not check out what NPR's Intellectual Property attorneys and NY Times ethicist think of it: "Could a wedding dance turn into a copyright infringement if it's videotaped?" -

Is Videotaping a Wedding Dance Illegal? : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5060669)Close, but no cigar. What you hear in that piece is one person talking about capturing background music while recording an event. He was not referring to syncing a montage to music.

Chris

Go back read the final paragraph of my post.

Just send a box of Romeo Y Julieta and you can skip the grovelling apology

:)

JJ,
My hope for you is that the musician is just trying to scare the living crap out of you to teach you and I (all of us) a lesson about not using copyrighted music. Sure he's mad, but my hope is that he won't actually sue his fan.

Cross your fingers.....

Dang - all I have is Hoya De Monterrey Excalibur, and you're not getting those. I'll go buy a pack of Swisher Sweets for you! :)

Paul,

I stand corrected. I feel for JJ in this case and have read various cases, like the 8 year old (or so) girl that got sued a few years back. I don't know that I agree with all your points, but if you're a lawyer that deals with this you no doubt know what you're talking about.

Your reply and post was really informative and brought me up to date regarding this issue. And yes, you are right..this has nothing to do with the majority of those of us that think lawyers ruined this country.. that was indeed an incorrect statement.. the majority seems to fall on the ridiculous lawsuits over injuries and such.. so I apologize if I offended.

So it sounds like most of you that understand this do ok even tho you have to severely limit the selection of music you can use in a video. I am really curious tho.. when you recording sections of a wedding that have DJ music in it..I am guessing you have to edit out the sound completely (unless of course you had permission to play the music..which I would assume is almost never going to happen).

How do ya'll present your music list that you can use in a video then? For that matter, when you're making the videos.. do you choose the music for it, or do you let (or offer) the bride/groom the option then present a list and explain the copyright issues (not nearly as much as Paul did of course) and tell them you'll look up their choices to see if they can be used via one of the royalty free or yearly license sites?