90 replies to this topic

[decosnapper]

What I mean by hobbyist is someone who is 100% hobbyist, never sells ANY of their work or uses their video/photo to promote a business. Typical example of what I call hobbyist are vacation videos with music posted on the net to share with family and friends. I consider myself a hobbyist.

At risk of repeating myself.......

Ron, you enjoy the same legal protection with respect to your material that the pros have. You may well consider yourself a hobbyist but the law is on your side as much as those who earn their living from creating copyright protected works. Copyright must not ever make a distinction between amateur and pro.......

Why? Consider this:-

14 year old photographer wins $130k damages

A 14 year old schoolgirl found one of her self-portrait images being used to sell porn DVDs.......

Now ask yourself, what would you do if one of your images/music was used in this way? Sit back and say.....well I'm only an amateur......or would you call a lawyer? Copyright allows you to say "no" to requests you consider offensive or inappropriate whatever the fee the user is willing to pay.

Hobbyist or not, you have the full protection of the law. It is therefore only reasonable that you treat the works of others with the same respect.

[ronscuba]

I know, I know, I know.

I must have a problem with how I write.

My question was, do artist/labels charge less for what I call "hobbyist" videos vs. what I call "commercial" use ? Someone then asked what I mean by hobbyist.

[decosnapper]

I know, I know, I know.

I must have a problem with how I write.

My question was, do artist/labels charge less for what I call "hobbyist" videos vs. what I call "commercial" use ? Someone then asked what I mean by hobbyist.

Ok ok!

Perhaps the best method of pricing up intellectual property use is charging according to the benefit of the user/client.

Based on that, the rights to use a pop track on a worldwide product advertising video across satellite & terrestrial media should be considerably more expensive than a single use of a small run of DVDs (for example). I have no idea if record labels use this pricing model....but its a good place to start negotiating from.

[TheRealDrew]

My question was, do artist/labels charge less for what I call "hobbyist" videos vs. what I call "commercial" use ? Someone then asked what I mean by hobbyist.

Labels and publishers will charge different amounts based on what the use is, as Simon described. For limited uses, sometimes labels and publishers will offer a gratis licenses or de minimis amount if there is something they think to be gained by having the song. And many requests will simply be ignored due to the fact there are many requests and limited resources to negotiate a deal with anyone who comes to them with a request to license the material. Unless you know someone at those places, or can have it walked in by an attorney or manager, you probably will not hear back from them. It was me asking about hobbyist and trying to get a sense of degree. Assuming you get in the door, what Simon mentioned is what is used. It also depends on the label and artist. A small indie with a cool track is going to be easier to get rights from in terms of what they get from it. For example, using the small run of DVDs, if you go to a big label and say you are pressing 2,500 copies of a DVD, it probably is too small for them to even think about unless somehow you can show them it is a special market that will open up doors for the artist concerned, while a small label would love to have the music on 2,500 DVDs.

[Autopsea]

Did't read everything, but just a question to the original author :

If Sting would use 18 seconds of your video without asking for one of his clip, and then you see that on TV, would you be happy and do nothing? : )

[RWBrooks]

Hi Autopsea,
I would prefer Sting or his record label to contact me and ask my permission, if my work was used in conjunction with one of his productions I would be very happy as long as I got credit in some way.
It's a bit different though between me asking him to use a part of his work and him asking me when his work is so much better known than mine.

[decosnapper]

I would prefer Sting or his record label to contact me and ask my permission, if my work was used in conjunction with one of his productions I would be very happy as long as I got credit in some way.
It's a bit different though between me asking him to use a part of his work and him asking me when his work is so much better known than mine.

Just curious, but why would it matter if you are unknown and Sting has a higher profile when it comes to asking permission?

[RWBrooks]

You get me wrong, you should always ask permission, I'm just saying that practically everyone will know it's Sting's music as opposed to hardly anyone knowing my stuff. Just a difference in value of exposure. Sure I would stand to gain a lot more by Sting using my footage, than visa-versa, simply because of respective positions on the fame ladder.

[John Bantin]

I haven't read all of this thread but it is reflected in a thread about CS5 on another forum. Someone was asking for a pirate version of the software. I suggested (tongue-in-cheek) they go into a company that has it and steal the discs. People could not understand the similarity of the action. CS5 may be expensive - just as diamonds are - but it's no excuse to steal it - is it?

[Andy Morrison]

I haven't read all of this thread but it is reflected in a thread about CS5 on another forum. Someone was asking for a pirate version of the software. I suggested (tongue-in-cheek) they go into a company that has it and steal the discs. People could not understand the similarity of the action. CS5 may be expensive - just as diamonds are - but it's no excuse to steal it - is it?

Related news - link

[Steve Douglas]

In the old days we would just go to Bangkok or any place in that area and pick up bootlegged software for a buck a piece. Glad I don't have to do that anymore.
Steve