Interesting article today in NYTimes about the costs of clearances for films/documentaries...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/movies/16rams.html

It opens with a story about "Mad Hot Ballroom" and a scene which featured a 6 second cellphone ringtone from the movie "Rocky" which the rights holder wanted ten thousand bucks to use....whoa.

Interesting read.

See also

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=41897

Yeah, if it weren't 'illegal' I'd put it up on this board permanently. This is exactly the sort of example that people need when they ask "Why can't I just keep the logo or music in my film? It's just in the background...

Basically, you have to ask yourself "Do I feel lucky?"

IF you think your film has any chance of being seen outside of your living room, if you have any aspirations for broadcast, broad band or broad sales (Including theatrical) then you are betting AGAINST yourself if you don't get the clearance rights.

Good article.

What's really agravating about that story is that most every example they gave would probably be protected under fair use laws, since they were talking exclusively about documentaries. Intead, the rights holders gamble that you'll give in to blackmail rather than pay for a court fight. It's really terrible that they're allowed to get away with it. The more times documentary makers give in, the bolder the other side gets. It's sure a nasty and depressing cycle.

The music industry and lawyers act like pimps. Fair use and photojournalism has died and strangled by the roots of creed. I am all for protecting artists rights, if a family sings "Happy Birthday" or a school sings a holiday song or someones phone goes off while shooting and the song was not the feature but the background of the 'action', then tough tooties- we capture life- fairly.
Who is protecting my rights to report.

Buy previously viewed CDs of ebay, etc.