Home > All Posts > Sort by Profile
vivarey

Legality of adding music?

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 11, 2004 | Post #1357 | Topic #1357

Hi everyone: Like a lot of other people, I'm not new to blogging or producing video - but I'm new to videoblogging. I have a question regarding music clips in videoblogs. Is it covered under Fair Use? Is it illegal? I include music in my own personal home movies, but I've never distributed content like this over the web -- so I'd like to hear your thoughts. Thanks, -Rick [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Wired magazine

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 14, 2004 | Post #1371 | Topic #1367

Good timing on this article. Personally, I believe the Fair Use policy is too ambiguous and narrow when it comes to non-commercial uses of copyrighted material. It needs to be clarified, expanded, and updated. I believe in copyright law, but I also believe the Fair Use policy makes it virtually impossible for the average person to seek out and gain permission to use copyrighted work, even in a non-commercial environment. -Rick > A quickie: I'm writing an article for Wired magazine about permission > culture. I recently asked the studios and record companies for permission > to include a movie snippet or song in a home movie I was creating, and > they all either didn't answer or they said no. > > Which raises the question: Why should we need to obtain permission in the > first place? Historically, we've always borrowed from the culture around > us (as Larry Lessig and others have argued). As we move from a > text-centric world into a world of sounds and images, why should we have > to obtain permission before we're allowed to borrow even the tiniest > video clip or music sample for inclusion in, say, a home movie project? > > So I'm wondering whether anyone wants to be quoted to that effect. You > know, "I don't see why ... etc etc." > > I've got the other POV well represented, so just looking to balance the... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] where to find media feeds

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 15, 2004 | Post #1379 | Topic #1376

RE: Videoblogging.info Hi Jay - I didn't see a feed in your XHTML header. If you do syndicate the site, you should provide a link to the RSS/XML file in the header, so it can be read by browsers and other internet devices: <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="RSS 2.0" href="http://www.videoblogging.info/index.xml&quot; /> The above is an example for RSS 2.0, obviously. It supports enclosures. You should also place a manual link to the feed somewhere on the page itself, so users can copy/paste the link into a news aggregator. I see you do have an "RSS" button, but it doesn't link to the feed. It's great that videobloggers can ping this site. I think the next step would be to provide an RSS feed of the "recent videos" list -- so users can subscribe to a list of recently updated videoblogs, and other directories can incorporate your data. -Rick > > I alerted the Blogdigger guy to our feeds when they started up. > unfortunately, he saus our videoblogging.info RSS doesnt work > (something about the videos are hidden in metadata?).... > but we just put each individual RSS feed of each videoblog.... [View]



Re: Legality of adding music?

By vivarey | "vivarey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 15, 2004 | Post #1380 | Topic #1357

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles wrote: > not in this country in the current climate. We have had uni students > prosecuted... Hi Adrian and others- I agree the current climate is one of caution. But, I think what we're talking about here (adding music onto non-commercial video) is a lot different than students downloading music -- if those are indeed the lawsuits you are referencing. Because videoblogging is so new, I don't think a precedent is set. What would be most analogous thing, then, to videoblogging? Home video production? Public access TV? I wonder, have there been any documented cases of litigation in those areas when music clips were added sans permission? I've been doing some reading on Copyright & Fair Use, and I think it really depends on how you interpret the policy. Fair Use allows for "transformative" use of copyrighted material. What does this mean? According to Stanford University Libraries (link at bottom): "So what is a "transformative" use? If this definition seems ambiguous or vague, be aware that millions of dollars in legal fees have been spent attempting to define what qualifies as a fair use. There are no hard-and-fast rules, only general rules and varying court decisions. That's because the judges and lawmakers who created the fair use exception did not want to limit the definition of fair use. They wanted it--like free speech--to have an expansive meaning that could be open to interpretation. In... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] where to find media feeds

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 15, 2004 | Post #1384 | Topic #1376

> It's not there for a reason. The <link rel="alternate" describes an > alternate version of the page you're on. The Recent Video feed is not an > alternate version of the front page of videoblogging.info and thus it > shouldn't have such a link-element. Hi Andreas, Thanks for your reply. I was thinking more along the lines of including the link in the header of the 'Recent Videos' page (http://videoblogging.info/videos). Not a big deal, though. > The button points to <URL:http://videoblogging.info/ping/?mode=__rss&gt; and > that's the URL of the feed. Is the feed not working for you or? After Jay replied to my message, I re-checked the link. You're right, the RSS feed is there. I was misled, because my browsers (Windows: Firefox, IE6) won't actually open the feed. However, I discovered that I can download the feed and open it in a text editor. The source of the problem, I think, is how you linked to the RSS file. Most of the time, the browser can see the .xml or .rss extension, so it knows that it *can* open the feed. Again, this is not a big deal, because the link is readable by news aggregators. It's just different than what I normally see. Thanks again, -Rick [View]



Re: [videoblogging] you keep the file that you want to share using BitTorrent

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 17, 2004 | Post #1396 | Topic #1389

> This is the part of BitTorrent that keeps me from joining in. > > I don't really want may machine to be open to the net for people to > download files. It shouldn't be the users responsibility to distribute files. It's great that the option is available, though, and I think we should move to streamline the process as much as possible. There are a lot of obstacles to overcome to become a videoblogger. I think some of the more fundamental are related the process of creating original content and publishing it in a web-friendly format. Bandwidth and storage, in my opinion, are secondary concerns (but still very important). -Rick [View]



Re: [videoblogging] you keep the file that you want to share using BitTorrent

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 18, 2004 | Post #1400 | Topic #1389

> my cable company gives me an always-on connection. > could they stop me from sharing files...as long as they are not > copyrighted? Some providers are starting to put a cap on the amount of data you can transfer per month (e.g. 25-30GB). > i spent the better part of the day using iPodder to download > everything and listen. > most of it sucked. This is an important point. We can learn a lesson from this. If podcasters are more concerned about technology and ease of use than content, people will lose internet and the trend will die. Don't let that happen to us. We should think beyond the technology and focus on content issues too. Video has an advantage over audio. It's more engaging. People consume it more readily. Podcasting is a stepping stone to videoblogging. The bandwidth is there. The storage capacity is there. Compression technologies are there. But, we still need to tackle fundamental issues. e.g. What makes a "good" video blog? Why are we drawn to it? What can we offer that people can't get from other mediums? How should we organize our videos? How should we package them? How should we distribute them? From what I've read, a lot of progress has already been made in these areas. But as someone who's still new to all this, I'm still struggling with a very basic problem: I don't know which direction to take with... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Vipodder.002

By Rick B. Rey | "Rick B. Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 19, 2004 | Post #1438 | Topic #1437

> Requires Mac OSX, Cellulo 2.0.0 Beta, and a few Perl modules as > described in the INSTALL section of the script. You really know how to make the Windows people jealous! :p -Rick [View]



Re: [videoblogging] vogfeed

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 27, 2004 | Post #1523 | Topic #1469

> is it becasue so few servers support them? Not servers, the blogging systems. None of them support enclosures out of the box yet (except maybe Radio?). > how do the audio people throw around enclosures so easily? There are plugins out there to add this functionality - like the MTEnclosures plugin I use with MovableType. But, the way it's implemented is sloppy. Basically, every media element you link to is included in the RSS feed as an enclosure. This does the job of adding your podcasts/videoblogs to the feed, but it doesn't solve the problem of differentiating between the media elements you WANT to spread via RSS. How does this lead to problems? Well, let's say I like your latest videoblog and I link to it from my site. If a person is subscribed to both of our feeds, they've just downloaded your video twice. Oops! That's costly bandwidth. And, it just doesn't make sense. Things are getting better, though. For example, the MTEnclosures plugin can now differentiate between internal and external (i.e. not hosted on your site) elements. > my iPod is filled with audio posts that were automatically placed on > my iPod very beautifully. Yes, and if you had a video player equivalent to the iPod, you could pretty much do the same thing with videoblogs. We're past that stage. Now it's time to create a system that allows users to tag SPECIFIC elements as enclosures,... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Tech talk – was: no video iPod?

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 29, 2004 | Post #1577 | Topic #1552

> i like the tech talk. > what does everyone else think? I like it too, for the most part, but I'd like to see the discussion more balanced. I want to hear more from the people who are producing original video. We can talk tech until we're blue in the face, but I think it's easy to get caught up in that and ignore the larger picture. After all, nobody is going want to subscribe to our feeds unless we can deliver quality content. Also, I think we have to be careful not to turn people off, especially new members. The videoblogging process is daunting enough as it is. -Rick [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Tech talk – was: no video iPod?

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 29, 2004 | Post #1580 | Topic #1552

> we once talked about this a while ago.... > should we split the group into DEVELOPMENT(videoblogging) and > EVERYTHING ELSE(videoblogging)? If a division does happen, I think we need to be careful how to distinguish between the groups. After all, this thing we talk about -- videoblogging -- is a very technical thing. There's a fine line between a "development" issue and a "general" issue. Topics like production, non-linear editing, storage, encoding... these are all issues at the forefront of the videoblogging process. I don't want people to miss out on those discussions, because they are put off by technical talk about RSS feeds, enclosures, etc. Because most of the recent tech talk is focused on one particular area -- the development of distribution/syndication technologies -- why not just create a new group focused specifically on that topic? This really wouldn't create a huge divide in the community, but it would allow those developers to do their thing without turning people off. -Rick [View]



LA Video Bloggers

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
October 29, 2004 | Post #1599 | Topic #1596

Anybody here from the Los Angeles area? I'm moving there in one week. If there are enough of us, maybe we could arrange a meet-up. I have this picture in my head of a group of us sitting around, all recording the meeting, and then going home to edit the footage in our own unique way. This could be a good way to get more people involved, too. I know there are a lot of videographers in the LA area looking for an outlet. -- Rick Rey rick@... Rey Online Web Design - http://www.reyonline.com RickRey.com - http://www.rickrey.com [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey Everyone

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
November 1, 2004 | Post #1626 | Topic #1616

> We've got a really good thing going here, so we want to be really careful > about involving politics. It will be interesting to see what happens to all the political blogs after the election frenzy has subsided. -- Rick Rey rick@... -- RickRey.com - http://www.rickrey.com Rey Online Web Design - http://www.reyonline.com [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: RocketBoomSucks

By Rick Rey | Rick Rey <rick@...> | vivarey
November 22, 2004 | Post #1914 | Topic #1830

> ah, but the best model for what a videoblog is is not tv shows but the > commercial. which are typically 30 seconds to 2 minutes :-) I disagree. It might be best for you, but why dictate how other people should express themselves, how other people should blog with video? Is it that important that we separate ourselves with television (a medium that has already gained mass acceptance). For the time being, shouldn't we just be happy that more people are doing this, period? Adrian, you are an academic, right? I went to grad school myself, and I would never get away with making a blanket statement like such-and-such is the best course of action -- without any research/empirical evidence to back it up. You are making a hypothesis. For the sake of argument, I can just as easily make a hypothesis that the best model for us *is* television -- since we know it works. Once we get off the ground, get people on board, get people to notice us -- then we can begin to distinguish ourselves. There's no set agenda here. We're not on autopilot. We need to experiment with different things before we tell people what's right and what's wrong. Is RocketBoom "different" than TV? Who cares! It's a blog with video. It meets criteria for this group. Let's not get caught up in the terminology. At this state in the game, bickering over... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: Amanda Unboomed…

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 5, 2006 | Post #44134 | Topic #44059

------=_Part_6584_580670.1152123915975 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline [ Attachment content not displayed ] ------=_Part_6584_580670.1152123915975 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline [ Attachment content not displayed ] ------=_Part_6584_580670.1152123915975-- [View]



Calacanis decimates RB's audience

By vivarey | "vivarey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 7, 2006 | Post #44571 | Topic #44571

I just listened to Jason's recent podcast interview with Ewan Spence and he= makes some interesting comments about Rocketboom and videoblogging. He be= lieves only 20-30% of the site's 300,000 daily downloads are actually "open= ed" on the other end. He puts their daily audience closer to 25,000-50,000 = viewers. It's pretty obvious there is some "animosity" between him and And= rew Baron from reading recent posts and watching the TWiT interview, so my = question is... are his estimates based on anything in reality or are they j= ust an attempt to devalue Rocketboom? I think this type of a statement nee= ds empirical justification because it has sweeping implications on the stat= e of videoblogging, particularly from a business standpoint. -Rick Rey Li= sten to the podcast here: http://gdayworld.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/07/07= /gday-world-140-with-jason-calacanis/ [View]



Re: Calacanis decimates RB's audience

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 7, 2006 | Post #44573 | Topic #44571

In interviews Andrew has stated his numbers are based on "full downloads" o= f the show from the various distribution sources. --- In videoblogging@yah= oogroups.com, "David Howell" <taoofdavid@...> wrote: > > Without agreeing t= o anything this guy (Calacanis) says, He *may* be > correct on his speculat= ion as to how many episodes are actually > "opened". He could be basing thi= s soley on the fact that RB episodes > autoplay on hitting the site. > > N= ow, not knowing anything about how RB measures their stats, and not > in an= y way questioning their stats, I'd hypothesize that they may be > simply co= unting "page hits" as "daily downloads". > > I could be wrong. Andrew woul= d know the true stats. > > David > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: Calacanis decimates RB's audience

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 9, 2006 | Post #44737 | Topic #44571

------=_Part_35597_3268135.1152479992882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline [ Attachment content not displayed ] ------=_Part_35597_3268135.1152479992882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline [ Attachment content not displayed ] ------=_Part_35597_3268135.1152479992882-- [View]



Re: [videoblogging] RB divorce reported on CNN.com

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 9, 2006 | Post #44798 | Topic #44743

On 7/9/06, B Yen <byen@...> wrote: > > Why there isn't an established, organized *distributed Architecture* news-reporting service by "ant-like" reporters all over the world..is beyond me. > Can you imagine the logistics of organizing an army of reporters from across the world? I don't want that job! [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: Ad Rant

By Rick Rey | "Rick Rey" <rick@...> | vivarey
July 11, 2006 | Post #44842 | Topic #44839

On 7/10/06, Enric <enric@...> wrote: > > OK, but I really don't like ads before my video -- and I don't think > I'm the only one. > > -- Enric I agree with you... we can do better than that. -Rick [View]