Using Music...

[Brock Burwell]

I watch a lot of universities videos to get inspiration and almost all of them use music that I'm sure they don't own (many are hit singles) in the videos. I guess my question is, am I allowed to do that?

For example, this guy works for the WVU football program and makes many of these highlight videos for their players but doesn't use royalty free music. How do they do this?

Too Easy (Kevin White Senior Highlights) - YouTube

[Rob Neidig]

They do it because they either don't know any better, or assume they won't get caught. It's illegal.

[Ervin Farkas]

How do you know he does not have a license to use that music.

YouTube is pretty efficient in flagging copyrighted music, I don't think it would fly without a license.

[David Barnett]

Originally Posted by Ervin Farkas

How do you know he does not have a license to use that music.

YouTube is pretty efficient in flagging copyrighted music, I don't think it would fly without a license.

Youtube's policies is not aligned with Copyright law. I can post a marryoke using Bruno Mars and youtube will keep it up, possibly place an ad on it, but that doesn't mean its legal for me to do. Lets say I make a quick 30 second ad for a car dealership, I cannot use a Bruno Mars song, even tho Youtube would probably keep it up until it was discovered. (Are they even catching copyrighted photographs at all?) There was a case years ago where Tony Romo's video went viral, more for being for Tony Romo & $20,000. Turns out, the guy used Coldplay in it & got burned for it.

I agree with Rob on this, it's somewhat common practice. Frustrating to see, especially by an institution which should know better, but they do it. I think these highlight videos have been common since VHS days, there was an Eagle Hollis Thomas who was drafted in something like the 7th round, turned out to be a really good player but I remember reading he went to a small school and had someone there edit him a highlight video & set it to "Whooot There It Is" or something in 1997 or so.

[Mike Watson]

That guy might do it 50 times a year for the rest of his career and never get caught.

You might do it tomorrow and get caught immediately.

If you work for a big organization, you can educate your boss and let them decide.

I work for myself and so I do my best to educate the client, but at the end of the day it's me who will go to jail/pay the fine, so I don't do it.

Flying a quadcopter is also illegal. While I try and keep it both safe and low-key, I do that all the time.

I personally think the quadcopter thing is of greater risk than the music thing, and yet I choose to do one and not the other.

Consider your risk tolerance and make a decision.

[Vince Pachiano]

Originally Posted by David Barnett

Frustrating to see, especially by an institution which should know better

They do know better, but they don't care. It's athletics, and they hold a privileged spot in our culture.
Now try calling up the athletic department and tell them you want to sell T-Shirts with their logo...

[Steven Digges]

+1 Vince!

I have never understood it but academia has always seemed to have an attitude of exception for copyright rules at all grade levels. But, now we are talking major sports here. Even though the players are not paid there is millions of dollars at stake. It is only a matter of time one of these artists steps in and goes after a deep pocket and they will win.

Brock, you are a full time employee of your school. I would hate to see you loose at this one. If I were in your position I would make it very clear to your supervisors it is an outright illegal process. Your the video producer for your college. The artist will go after the schools money but you will be the fall guy for sure.

Kind Regards,

Steve

[Kevin Balling]

Many universities like the one I worked for, pay blanket ASCAP/BMI music rights that cover a variety of uses like events, stage shows, student and university produced videos, etc. These usually cover on campus uses that include certain internet and broadcast outlets. This license at my university was separate from the one used by the campus radio station. This MIGHT explain the music use on the videos you mention, depending on what type of license the university owns.

[Steven Digges]

Kevin,

Good point, and very true. It is even possible that Brock's school has such a subscription and no one told him. I think he has only had the job for a few months.

Steve

[Gabe Strong]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

That guy might do it 50 times a year for the rest of his career and never get caught.

You might do it tomorrow and get caught immediately.

If you work for a big organization, you can educate your boss and let them decide.

I work for myself and so I do my best to educate the client, but at the end of the day it's me who will go to jail/pay the fine, so I don't do it.

Flying a quadcopter is also illegal. While I try and keep it both safe and low-key, I do that all the time.

I personally think the quadcopter thing is of greater risk than the music thing, and yet I choose to do one and not the other.

Consider your risk tolerance and make a decision.

From what I understand, flying a quadcopter is not illegal. Certain actions,
such as flying within 3 miles of an airport, or over 400 feet, are deemed to
be prohibited. Furthermore, the FAA (in the U.S.) is claiming they have jurisdiction
over UAVs. They claim that the exact same flight, in the same area, is legal
if done as a hobbyist, but illegal if done for commercial purposes. Which is
enough to tell you what this is really all about $$$$$$$$. However, the FAA, has
up to this point, actually lost in court when it has attempted to fine commercial
UAV operators......which seems to put their claims at least a little, in doubt.
Not that I'd want to test them, but it seems that those who have, have won.
I've heard from lawyers who specialize in this, that the FAA is wrong on this,
until they develop new regulations governing safe, commercial UAV use.
Which they are in the process of doing. Hopefully it will all be sorted out
soon and we will be able to pay a modest fee, and follow some common sense
safety rules, and be licensed by the FAA. But even on the FAA's own site, they
never claim that flying a USV is illegal. If done as a hobby, they have a few safety
guidelines and end with 'have fun and fly safely!'

[Tim Paynter]

This one is easy, turn them in for the illegal use! If we all don't have to play by the same rules then some people will use their advantage to get a leg up. We play by the rules but others flaunt them and profit from it?

The Quadcopter for what are obviously commercial purposes is over the top for me. Maybe if everyone breaks the rules the FAA will give up on enforcement, but I doubt it. The entire drone industry has been hobbled by an over-zealous administrative agency.

But rules is rules, either we should all follow them or we should all break them. I do my part by following the rules and bitching loudly about it.

[Paul R Johnson]

UK education does the same things. They assume they are exempt, but they aren't. Some of their staff ( I was one twelve years ago) know better, but the bean counters insist that payment isn't required because we're education. Then they have a panic, as we did, when the photocopying police descend and they discover that there was a limit on how many pages from a book could be copied, or certain maps cannot be copied at all, and in the department I worked in, they discover that they cannot copy sheet music or even use the purchased music books in a show with paying audiences. Me smiling and saying I told you so, wasn't received well!