Legal issues with wedding videos

F

FatBird19

Well-known member
I'm doing a wedding for some people. Now, i was thinking. Obviously using copyrighted music in the video is illegal, but what if I bought the album with all the songs that were used for the video, and then gave it to them. That should make it legal right? Because now I'm making them a DVD for home use using their own music.

sound good?
 
Your question is probably best asked over at the WEVA forums. If I'm not mistaken, I believe WEVA was trying to get some sort of blanket license deal for their members that would allow their members to use just about any song and pay a fixed fee for it. I don't know if that effort ever really got off the ground, but it'd been discussed...

I'm sure someone here may have an answer too... I just figure that if anyone knows the answers to wedding-related questions, it'd be the WEVA guys 'n' gals.
 
thsi question comes up all the time. I hope that onme day someone like WEVA can nail down a definative answer. It probably comes down to the legalities involving hwo the transaction is handled. In one hand you have biought the album and therefore paid them money for it but then on the otherhand you have reproduced the music and charged for it. What do you do if you make future DVDs for them or if you give them more than one like one for the bride and groom parents. do you buy more albums?

Ultimately If you are reselling a duplicate of the product you're probably wrong. But you're probably better off wondering about the likelyhood of getting prosecuted. While it may infact be prosecutable, attorneys are no different that any other business (even govt attnys) if the pay off is small then the incentive is small. One guy that made a dvd copy that contained one artists song that he in fact paid for is probbably low on the list of priorities. Good Luck!
 
You can't transfer ownership of the music cause you don't own it. What you propose is illegal. Do they sue? Not much but they do on occasion to make a point. Should you worry? It's more an ethical question. If everyone went around "borrowing" your camera without asking you what would you think. Stealing intellectual property hurts everyone.
 
Figure out what is right for you. There are many angles to look at this. Maybe I'll add a few no one really talks about..

-using copyright work can make it more ?difficult? to claim the work as ART. Are you an artist or do you want to be?

-a professional videographer is very limited to the outlets, audiences, and platforms from which he or she can use to share their work if they are violating copyright laws. There will always be someone in the crowd judging, who knows better. MANY, MANY don't think it is that big of a deal, cause it sounds cool and that is what the client (BOSS) wants and is happy about.

-if you ever plan on work beyond weddings, you will surely need to have a music library built up already. It takes a lot of TIME & MONEY to establish that. Conversely, there will be many clients who will not find your work appealing if it they cannot have "music of their choice"---copyright music. I'm sure you understand. "This Year's Love" by David Gray means a ton of me, I would proably want it in any romantic production that involved me and my BF...

-if you buy licensed music, let us hope you actually give a real composer a chance to make money from his-her talent. People who hire me are investing in my talent..so why wouldn't I TRY to pass that on?

2 sad things...

I don't know that WEVA is pursuing this issue much. In fact, I attended their convention this year and I can pretty much guess that every winning entry into their Creative Excellence competition involved a piece with copyright music. Is that bad? well, the music vids were pretty cool...

Definitely, when this issue comes up on the WEVA boards, there is a lot of FIRE from both sides. I would say most would like to pay-license their music, but reported efforts have not been successful. --even laughed at.

and lastly..if you are just starting out in weddings, it can be very unprofitable and financially difficult for you to license or obtain buyout licenses for all the music in your productions.
 
Pooh your points are quite valid. the problem is in fact that if you stand the legal and moral high ground you will either go broke trying to pay for licensed music or you may not attract clients because of your unwillingness to use the music they love.

While thinking about this I got to wondering what do DJs do? I know that bars and other such places that play music are supposed to pay one of the music orginzation money because the music people claim that the use of music is what helps them gain patrons. So does a wedding DJ also have to pay? Clearly of the two of us the DJ is more directly making their money from the use of the artists music. Perhaps most of them are in the same boat as us.
 
smithgallTV said:
Pooh your points are quite valid. the problem is in fact that if you stand the legal and moral high ground you will either go broke trying to pay for licensed music or you may not attract clients because of your unwillingness to use the music they love.
Click to expand...

ABSOLUTELY. I think I touched upon that above, but you hit it.

smithgallTV said:
While thinking about this I got to wondering what do DJs do? I know that bars and other such places that play music are supposed to pay one of the music orginzation money because the music people claim that the use of music is what helps them gain patrons. So does a wedding DJ also have to pay? Clearly of the two of us the DJ is more directly making their money from the use of the artists music. Perhaps most of them are in the same boat as us.
Click to expand...

I think they or the venue is supposed to...similar argument..though their ability to deliver what the client wants rests almost ENTIRELY on their music repetoire.
 
We're going through this right now. A corporate client wants to use movie clips that will be edited into a piece that will be presented to a fairly large audience. And they want some copyrighted music in there as well. This is a large consulting firm, with a lot of exposure. We have had to tell them we won't be able to do it because of the legal reasons. They do not have the budget to obtain all the rights they would need. It puts us in a strange predictament because we may lose the work if the client decides they don't want to do the video any other way. But the fallout from doing it might be worse than not taking the work to begin with. That's our approach to it, but I'm sure others would have no problem doing this for a client. I guess it depends on how much risk you want to take.

Steve
 
It's copyrighted, it's not yours to use and/or resell. Period. Wait until you have something you worked hard to create gets stolen and used for the benefit of others- it's not a good feeling.

Common excuses for theft include the justification that it's too expensive or that nobody will know. Does that make it right? I would certainy know if I did it- a little integrity, anyone?

DJ's wedding bands, fitness clubs etc should be paying fees to ASCAP, a central pool of licensing for such uses.

{picture the martain from warned bros cartoons} Oooo copyright violations make me sooo angry!
 
Until the rules change, we have to live by them. There's just no way around it. Small companies like ours would be wiped off the map if we went to court over something like this and lost. It's just not worth the risk. You're better off hiring a musician to compose something with a similar feel, or creating something yourself if you are musically inclined. With programs like Soundtrack and Sonic Fire, that's not too far outside the realm of possibility.

These types of threads are very useful to for people who are just starting out, because they may not realize the extent of the copyright laws. Awareness is half the battle.

Steve
 
stevesherrick said:
These types of threads are very useful to for people who are just starting out, because they may not realize the extent of the copyright laws. Awareness is half the battle.
Click to expand...

The copyright laws need to be trimmed back a bit. Their purpose is/was to prevent the creator from losing revenue and/or credits.

Using a song in a wedding video does not do either of those things...especially if the couple already owns a copy of the music in question.

Strangers out on the street are not going to buy Bill & Mary's wedding video to avoid buying a Whitesnake album...no revenue lost to the band or Geffen.

No one is going to think that Bill & Mary wrote and sang the songs...no credit lost.

The videomaker...it's in the sync rights area...but...the final product is not a really distributed (much), so it's a helluva lot closer to some hormone infested teenager making a mix tape for their sweetie than anything else. That's illegal, too, but I'd like to see anyone show actual damages. In either case.

All that being said, yes, it's illegal. But the laws should be changed.

Easy to change them? I think there are enough people who get married to represent a big enough block of voters to tweak Congress' nose about it. Especially since folks in Congress get married themselves, from time to time.

At a minimum, wedding videographers should be able to get a blanket license on the cheap, or pay a (small) fee to the RIAA for each project.
 
I agree with GenJerDan to an extent, but I think that there should just be a blanket payment for video of, let's say, up to 25 copies. The payment should also be affordable.

If they want people to play ball, we have to be given the chance!
 
Sooo..let's say you shoot a beautiful opening shot of a St Someone's church. You get it at the perfect time of day, a nice crane shot (you had to rent a crane), you brought in 12 10k HMI's and towable generators to run them, and 5 grips to set them up- it's so beautiful, nobody will ever be able to shoot something as good. It's unique and it's perfect.

Should any wedding video shooter use, withour compensation, that segment in their own video for any couple married in St Someone's? You'd be willing to post the file in hi-res on the internet for anyone to use and call it theirs? Perhaps wedding planners who use St Someone's could use your segment, without compensation, in their promotional commercials? The architect of St Someone's ( a contemporary church) will use your segment when distributing their portfolio? Maybe ABC picks it up for the opening credits of the next high-rated sitcom- runs every time the program airs. Maybe it should be used as the opening segment for a kiddie porn or snuff film- you'd have no objection to that, right?

After all, you need to "give them a chance" to use YOUR work for whatever they see fit at a price THEY choose, right?



Bottom line, it belongs to the person who created it. If it costs too much for you to use it, go somewhere else. If your work is to be used out of context, you should have the right to say NO. And if your work is used for profit by some other party, you have the right to be compensated at the rate YOU choose.

fn
 
Fake Name said:
Sooo..let's say you shoot a beautiful opening shot of a St Someone's church. You get it at the perfect time of day, a nice crane shot (you had to rent a crane), you brought in 12 10k HMI's and towable generators to run them, and 5 grips to set them up- it's so beautiful, nobody will ever be able to shoot something as good. It's unique and it's perfect.

Should any wedding video shooter use, withour compensation, that segment in their own video for any couple married in St Someone's? You'd be willing to post the file in hi-res on the internet for anyone to use and call it theirs? Perhaps wedding planners who use St Someone's could use your segment, without compensation, in their promotional commercials? The architect of St Someone's ( a contemporary church) will use your segment when distributing their portfolio? Maybe ABC picks it up for the opening credits of the next high-rated sitcom- runs every time the program airs. Maybe it should be used as the opening segment for a kiddie porn or snuff film- you'd have no objection to that, right?
Click to expand...

Can I just point out that we are just talking about wedding video here, not child snuff porn or broadcast, that has nothing to do with this. There is no point in making up other examples that are completely different to the question at hand, which is: Is it okay to use copyright music on wedding videos?

The answer is legally no, but if a couple loves a song so much that they want it on their wedding video and first dance, then you can be pretty sure that they will have purchased the song. I can't see then why they shouldn't be able to listen to the song that THEY BOUGHT whilst watching their wedding video. As the editor, I think that, as you are making money, it is only fair to pay a fee for syncing up the music to their video. This needs to be a flat charge though, individual negotation isn't viable. If you put a song in the public domain, you have to expect to loose control of it, it is entirely different to the example you give. Radio play, discos, pubs, clubs - you expect every person to negotiate a individual rate with YOU every time they want to play your song? It'll never happen... well, no one would play your song.

If you use the song in a non-routine way for a feature film or big TV show, then fair enough, that should be specially negotiated.

Fake Name said:
After all, you need to "give them a chance" to use YOUR work for whatever they see fit at a price THEY choose, right?
Click to expand...

If you are quoting me there, that is a complete mis-quote, put totally out of context!

I wrote "we have to be given the chance," meaning we have to be given the chance to PAY, not they should give us the chance to rip them off!! It is completely the opposite. I can't see that paying a small fee for syncing music to wedding videos harms anyone at all.
 
Fake, I agree with you 100%. That is in fact the bottom line. I think Im pretty consistant in my feelings that right now we are the little guys looking to use the work of someone else for cheap. However i do not want to stay a little guy. I want to be one of the big guys, and when i do reach that level i dont want you using my stuff for free either. anyone that reads this should make no mistake. Almost any thought you have on how to use someone elses work without paying for it for that specific use is probably illegal and wrong......BUT here again is the fact of life. Like most things in our society, its all about the money. The money lost and the money it costs to recover. Three copies of a wedding video with "Endless Love" playing over the dance sequence is not a big loss. Does the loss of that revenue outweigh the cost to sue and is the chance of winning high enough? Probably not. Its like cheating on your taxes. The IRS looms over you with the threat of audit but the number of audits conducted is in the single digits. So statistically speaking you're probably ok. but if you get caught.. dont say you didnt know.
 
With all respect, no, we DO NOT need to be "given a chance to pay" for it's use. Just as nobody else has to be "given a chance" to MY work. It's MY decision as to who uses MY work- not someone elses, and not at any price set by anyone else but me, the owner of that work.

Mine. You have no right to it, no "chance" to use it. Unless I say so, in writing.

I stand by my point about out-of-context use, because we can't have this discussion without including the underlying principals: copyright and intellectual property. I believe (and it's the LAW) that I control the use of my intellectual property. If I were to record a song, I might not want it appearing in a wedding video- I may hate weddings, I might be opposed to nuptials on religious grounds. I have the right to that, and I have a right to restrain the use of my property to promote something in which I do not believe.

Yes, you can probably get away with it. Just like the IRS. But I don't believe in my right to do anything I want as long as I don't get caught. I believe in ethical, lawful conduct and respecting the rights of others. As I expect others to respect my rights.

If the bride and groom want to listen to their favorite song while watching their video, that's fine. But if I include their favorite song in my video that I subsequently sell to them, I'm a thief. Just like someone using an image or clip of mine in their production.

Is Ayn Rand off the bookshelves??? Has Atlas, in fact, Shrugged? Did somebody shut off the Fountainhead?

fn

PS: Public Domain is a legal term- it means one has legally released copyright. Public Domain does not mean mass publication, nor does it convey rights for that property to be used by the public.
 
Fake Name said:
If the bride and groom want to listen to their favorite song while watching their video, that's fine. But if I include their favorite song in my video that I subsequently sell to them, I'm a thief. Just like someone using an image or clip of mine in their production.
Click to expand...

But to issue individual copyright clearance for every song is not viable at all. May be you don't want a song played in pubs because you disagree with alcohol - then don't release the song. I am not saying we should rip artists off, but that there should be a realistic way to gain copyright clearance. I have done it in the past for fictional drama, sometimes it is easy, and sometimes a real pain, but the time taken is not viable for regular work.

I remember when a particular black band stated that they didn't want their music bought by white people - tough, you released it, it's public. I make films, but I can't control who sees them once they are out of my hands. I would only argue this point for wedding videos because I consider that personal use, which hardly anything else that I edit is. I don't see how personal use can be controlled. Fair enough, the editor should pay for the right to sync. You deserve to be paid for use of your property, but I can't see how or why control could be implemented for personal use. Maybe we'll have to just agree to disagree about that.

PS
You're right about that public domain statement, wrongly phrased - sorry. :embarasse
 
The compromise between your two guys' position is what WEVA was trying to arrange -- a blanket license fee to let you use any song that's covered in that blanket. Like playing music on the radio -- radio stations can play whatever they want, whenever they want, however many times they want, they just play anything that's in the BMI or ASCAP library, and pay a fixed fee (probably based on overall listenership). BMI or ASCAP takes in the licensing fee and doles out some cash to all the artists in the library.

So where Fake_Name's issue comes in is: he can choose to enter his song in the library or not. If he doesn't mind his song being played on the radio in every coffee shop and mechanic's shop in the country, then he can count on some money coming in from the licensing fees. And if he doesn't want to do that, he doesn't have to: he won't get paid, and the stations won't play it.

That's the kind of thing WEVA was supposedly working on, or at least I thought they were: a library of songs that would be covered by a blanket licensing agreement. Enter your song in the library, and you're eligible to make a dime or a nickel or a dollar or whatever every time your song gets used in a wedding anywhere in the country. Don't want your song in weddings? Don't put it in the library.
 
Barry_Green said:
That's the kind of thing WEVA was supposedly working on, or at least I thought they were: a library of songs that would be covered by a blanket licensing agreement. Enter your song in the library, and you're eligible to make a dime or a nickel or a dollar or whatever every time your song gets used in a wedding anywhere in the country. Don't want your song in weddings? Don't put it in the library.
Click to expand...

Would it be a separate wedding video library? Also I suppose that it would only apply in the US?

Maybe we won't have to disagree after all Fake Name - this way we would both be happy :beer:

I was never really interested in Wedding Videos until I did my sister-in-laws wedding as a wedding gift a few weeks back and quite enjoyed the edit. I didn't think that there was much money to be made from them until I realised how much some people spend on their weddings. That's why I've suddenly got into this debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top