Copyright Music in Demo Reel-Let's Discuss

[Jeff Anderson]

Profits don't have anything to do with rights, as a rule. And yes the scope of distribution does matter (though legally I don't think it gets you off the hook). The costs of rights are almost always based on the scope of distribution.

Your reel goes to a very limited and selected audience. Generally at there request to demonstrate your abilities. A national ad goes to everyone and you have no control over who sees it and it's trying to convince someone to buy your product. It doesn't demonstrate your abilities and is put together by people who had nothing to do with the product. I don't have any problem making the distinction.

Well so my Toyota argument has some holes in it FWIW I've got a lot of demo dvd's that were never intended for to me have from other clients. And if its on the web its out there. You dont necessarily have control on who sees your reel. At the end of the day both an ad and a reel are meant to sell something or someone's services. I know plenty of people who dont cut their own reels. And why should they, they arent editors. Now if you're an editor you probably should be cutting your own For me the distinction is rather gray.

 

[Sad Max]

I don't do it because I dislike having something in my reel that I don't have clear rights too.

Since you are (a) not distributing or exhibiting the reel for profit (or even to the general public, at all) and (b) not representing the musical underscore as your own work...what difference would having "clear rights" to the music make? Do you believe that you are legally exposed, in any realistic or serious way, by cutting a reel of your work, to an un-cleared music track?

 

[Noiz2]

I still want to know what company you thought sounded alike just so I'm aware.

You were correct in your first guess which was why I admitted to getting a bit carried away (Max factor). Your not close enough to get in trouble. Though if you look at the companies that Starbucks has gone after, some were started before Starbucks was even a brand??? Deep pockets trump right all too often.

M

axo-Facto is an LLC which I believe protects me to a certain extent.

I think that does protect everything that isn't directly connected to the business. That's actually a smart move that more of us should probably make.

I also must admit that we are only able to protect ourselves as a company to the extent that we do because of what we do (corporate business to business work). Every new client means everyone sits down and trades contracts that contain all sorts of NDA's and some really stupid things (edit - I dont think NDA's are stupid just to make that clear). Most of our work is in house and we are able to use very few vendors. All of our vendors sign contracts protecting our work and allowing us to use their work for our own promotion. If we did major work on television commercials (we've done a few smaller spots a long time ago before I was working) or anything involved in the film industry I doubt we'd ever be able to protect ourselves like this just from the sheer number of people involved.

There are probably a few different correct answers depending on exactly what you do and who you do it with. I'm pretty paranoid my self. I was a bit surprised at the amount of leeway people thought was perfectly fine with reels. But these were film and TV producers so????

However my grandmother also constantly reminded me she'd rather be wrong than dead right.

Good quote.

I can see where it places alot of people in sticky situations. Especially in films. If you include just a short clip of a major motion picture, I couldnt even fathom the number of releases you would need to cover yourself completely.

Which I think was sort of my point. The law as practiced is more important than the law as written.

And while some like to go crazy with the "steal your camera" analogy it's a false comparison. There is in fact no income loss because NOBODY is going to pay to have music created for their reel. If anyone actually cared (and it seems nobody who has the deep pockets to go after people does care) and enforced the letter of the law either the law would be changed or people would find other music or sound. And that might actually cost the composer some money. Just about anyone I send a reel to is going to be looking for a composer also. Now as I said I don't currently have anyones music on my reel. Mostly because I have some nice rhythmic action scenes that do the job for me and keep my sound out in front and that is what I'm trying to get work doing. But I would not be worried about using music for a montage sequence.

Second and maybe more to the point. You steal a camera you deny the use and ownership of that camera to it's rightful owner and you now have a camera. With the music it's more like you cloned the camera to use for a short time then destroyed the clone. Nobody is out money, there is no wear and tear on the item and the owner never was denied use or ownership.

I hope you never quote anyone at a job interview with out permission. That must be like stealing their car and setting it on fire. Did that quote make you seem more hip, smart, etc? Did it help get you a job? Did you look up their agent and pay in advance? Don't you feel like a criminal...

 

[Huy Vu]

I'm not worried about getting sued, the chances of that happening are miniscule. I just preferred that when I show a client my work, that I own or have permission to display such works, down to the music. It's a personal preference. A good song obviously contributes to my reel by giving it a pleasant flow, and as such I'm not comfortable with using someone else's work without permission. It's like using their labor to enhance my own. I put myself into the composer's shoe, and my conclusion is that I wouldn't be happy if I see one of my songs being used without permission so someone can find work, especially when I'm never even consulted.

 

[Huy Vu]

With the music it's more like you cloned the camera to use for a short time then destroyed the clone. Nobody is out money, there is no wear and tear on the item and the owner never was denied use or ownership.

Well, a few months ago I found out that a CEO of a music company was using one of my videos to promote a music event that she profits off. In essense, she didn't steal the video, didn't incorporate it into any of her ads or commercials. She just links to it and tells people to check out her event. I've worked with her before and we didn't part on such good term, and she knew that I would deny her permission to use the video if she had asked, that's why she didn't. So she profits off of my work without my permission and that's okay because I still controls the video?

 

[Noiz2]

Actually I'm a sound editor. But I or my wife did all the editing on my reel.

I'm totally with you on the grey area. What's not very grey though is enforcement. As I said if I EVER hear of a problem I would change my assessment. But at least in the film and advertising world nobody seems to care or have any problem with it.

As more stuff get spewed on to the web the situation might change or at least get more codified. Personally I think material for your reel should be covered under some sort of fair use law. It isn't, but it is (at the moment) "covered" in a de-facto fair use agreement. One big law suit could change that and I would not like to be the test case but I don't think anyone is ever going to push it because it would be a killer for reels in the entertainment industry. And I think it would have a very good chance of loosing. Loosing the case would open the industry up to a bunch of people testing the edges and that isn't in anyones interest. So I suspect that the status quo will be around for a while.

Well so my Toyota argument has some holes in it FWIW I've got a lot of demo dvd's that were never intended for to me have from other clients. And if its on the web its out there. You dont necessarily have control on who sees your reel. At the end of the day both an ad and a reel are meant to sell something or someone's services. I know plenty of people who dont cut their own reels. And why should they, they arent editors. Now if you're an editor you probably should be cutting your own For me the distinction is rather gray.

 

[Noiz2]

That is really stretching the "theft" argument. Someone links to a place you put a video for the public to see and your calling that theft? If you put out for the public and some one is sending people to your work, presumably on your site, I would thank her for the exposure. If you don't want people to see your video don't put out in public. I can't roll with your problem there. Just pull the video. That's like walking around nude and complaining because people looked.

Well, a few months ago I found out that a CEO of a music company was using one of my videos to promote a music event that she profits off. In essense, she didn't steal the video, didn't incorporate it into any of her ads or commercials. She just links to it and tells people to check out her event. I've worked with her before and we didn't part on such good term, and she knew that I would deny her permission to use the video if she had asked, that's why she didn't. So she profits off of my work without my permission and that's okay because I still controls the video?

 

[Huy Vu]

As a matter of fact, I did have to pull that video. My point is simply this: I worked hard to produce that video, only to find that somebody is profitting off it without even bother to ask my permission.

If you go to the famous artist (or their label) and ask for permission to use a song for your demo reel, do you think that you'll be able to get release for it for free? I doubt it. The label or whomever will likely charge you a fee for the use of the song. Why? Because the implicit understanding between both sides is that the artist deserves compensation for his/her contribution to the demo reel that you're going to make money on. This is why nobody bothers to go get release for their use of copyright music, because they acknowledge this fact but refused to name it. Someone puts a lot of work into the song and if you're going to make money off it you need to compensate them. It's basically a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy that you're talking about here. "As long as the artist doesn't ask me to take it off I'll continue to use it because it doesn't hurt anyone."

 

[Jeff Anderson]

Yeah I'll give you that so far there is no legal precedence to support why one should only use music that is clear to use. But there isnt alot of legal precedence for wedding videographers either. Still wouldnt do it if I were doing weddings. Thats a pretty different argument in a lot of ways but still just because it doesnt have legal precedence doesnt make it with something I can sleep at night about. Remember when those kids got nailed for downloading mp3's? While they were clearly in the wrong and definitely hurting sales they werent thinking it would ever happen because there was no legal precedence in the music downloading arena, which I guess is my point. I'd rather not be the example if they ever decide to start going after small prod co types like myself. I'm just one to cover my butt to the nth degree. Overboard, perhaps, but it works for me.

I agree with you on the fair use thing. That would be nice. I also wish there was some more legal precedence in fair use and that it was a little more cut and dry. Right now in my mind it seems somewhat dangerous to rely solely on fair use as a backup in lots of situations like this one.

Funny thing about the whole Max Factor thing is that we actually wanted to name him that but AKC registered names cant contain copyrighted or trademarked work. The red tape is everywhere...

Actually I'm a sound editor. But I or my wife did all the editing on my reel.

I'm totally with you on the grey area. What's not very grey though is enforcement. As I said if I EVER hear of a problem I would change my assessment. But at least in the film and advertising world nobody seems to care or have any problem with it.

As more stuff get spewed on to the web the situation might change or at least get more codified. Personally I think material for your reel should be covered under some sort of fair use law. It isn't, but it is (at the moment) "covered" in a de-facto fair use agreement. One big law suit could change that and I would not like to be the test case but I don't think anyone is ever going to push it because it would be a killer for reels in the entertainment industry. And I think it would have a very good chance of loosing. Loosing the case would open the industry up to a bunch of people testing the edges and that isn't in anyones interest. So I suspect that the status quo will be around for a while.

 

[Sad Max]

As a matter of fact, I did have to pull that video. My point is simply this: I worked hard to produce that video, only to find that somebody is profitting off it without even bother to ask my permission.

If you go to the famous artist (or their label) and ask for permission to use a song for your demo reel, do you think that you'll be able to get release for it for free? I doubt it. The label or whomever will likely charge you a fee for the use of the song. Why? Because the implicit understanding between both sides is that the artist deserves compensation for his/her contribution to the demo reel that you're going to make money on. This is why nobody bothers to go get release for their use of copyright music, because they acknowledge this fact but refused to name it. Someone puts a lot of work into the song and if you're going to make money off it you need to compensate them. It's basically a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy that you're talking about here. "As long as the artist doesn't ask me to take it off I'll continue to use it because it doesn't hurt anyone."

No one makes money off the underscore they use for their demo reel.

They make money off the employment offered to them, on the strength of their work which makes up the relevant content of the reel, to which the underscore is useful but ancillary. You will never be hired on the strength of the music to which you set your reel, regardless of its origin or ownership.

 

[Huy Vu]

They make money off the employment offered to them, on the strength of their work which makes up the relevant content of the reel, to which the underscore is useful but ancillary. You will never be hired on the strength of the music to which you set your reel, regardless of its origin or ownership.

Then why not set your demo reel to play in silence? Why use music at all? This applies to film as well as demo reel. Music also only plays a supporting role in a narrative (unless we're talking musicals). You can have a film with no score and relies on the strength of the story, the acting and cinematography to carry it; but then why do composers have a job? Because sometimes you need music to create mood and to underscore emotional moments. Same deal with a reel. It helps gives it rhythm, intensity and flow that's an important part of how you package your work to potential clients.

 

[Sad Max]

They make money off the employment offered to them, on the strength of their work which makes up the relevant content of the reel, to which the underscore is useful but ancillary. You will never be hired on the strength of the music to which you set your reel, regardless of its origin or ownership.

Then why not set your demo reel to play in silence?

See bolded, above. The fact that underscore is useful in the presentation of the work which gets your the deal, doesn't mean that the underscore is what makes the deal.

In any case, I have had to present my reel in silence more than once (office environment, non-functional sound system) and on both occasions the meeting led to the deal. So I think I can suggest without flattering myself, that the music isn't key, for this specific application.

Why use music at all?

Because it's useful in reinforcing a tempo, and providing some auditory stimulus to accompany the visual content, mostly.

This applies to film as well as demo reel. Music also only plays a supporting role in a narrative (unless we're talking musicals). You can have a film with no score and relies on the strength of the story, the acting and cinematography to carry it; but then why do composers have a job?

Since my demo reels are not usually edited to form narratives, I don't believe that the role of musical score in a narrative, can be legitimately compared to its role in an individual's demo reel.

Because sometimes you need music to create mood and to underscore emotional moments. Same deal with a reel. It helps gives it rhythm, intensity and flow that's an important part of how you package your work to potential clients.

Package your work to potential clients.

It seems to me that we are in agreement. In the case of a demo reel meant to showcase your non-musical work, the content of the piece - that is, the image cues - is just packaged together with the music. Which could be any one of a number of possible cues, without affecting the central content of the reel, same as a birthday present remains the same gift, regardless of the pattern of paper in which you choose to wrap it.

 

[Huy Vu]

Without affecting the central content of the reel, same as a birthday present remains the same gift, regardless of the pattern of paper in which you choose to wrap it.

But it is wrapped, yes? Kinda strange to give an unwrapped present isn't it? I've yet to see one person make the conscious choice of editing a reel entirely in silence, because they know that it's a disconnect to have videos play for one or two minutes without anything accompanying it, and that can put the client off. Those times that you had to present your reel in silence, your prospective client understands that it's extenuating circumstances, so it's not the same thing. Music plays a supporting role, that we both agree on, but I say that it's an indispensable role, much like the gift that has to be wrapped to complete the form.

Even if music is unnecessary, I ask again, why use copyrighted music? If you don't think it's that important, don't use it. Don't borrow someone else's work to do it for you.

 

[Mattykins]

I've tried the no music one before. And I got an email back asking if there was a problem. I then needed to explain there was no music to the demo reel...it left the potential employer confused, and I assume thinking I was an idiot. And I felt like one.

I use a precomposed song in Garageband for my stuff now. Sometimes Reason too.