Home > All Posts > Individual Post
Post #443

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Revogging

By Jay Dedman | Jay Dedman <jay@...> |
July 29, 2004 | Post #443 | Topic #424

>Don't screw copyrights unless you want to get screwed over > yourself. > Not to mention that you would never be able to go beyond the "wee, we're > just goofing around" stage. If you want people to take you seriously, if > you want to have companies build software for you you can't ignore > copyright laws. Basing a business plan on copyright infringement is a > quick recipe for disaster. If you on the other hand is happy to have an > underground phenomena then feel free to ignore copyrights. I'd like > videoblogging to be just a little tiny bit more than that, and that's why > I take copyrights seriously. Fair enough. you make a good argument. here's my confusion. let's say I make a video today. tomorrow i wake up and someone has put it up on their site as their own. what do i do? call the internet cops? i can bitch and moan, but in the end Im not too worried about it. If someone kept stealing my material and calling it his own, Id just get the word out and we'd all hate him. for me, "copyright issues" become an issue when $$$$$$ is involved. Metallica getting angry because college kids arent paying for their albums. This isnt how I see videoblogging. we arent making Movies you buy and sell in stores. videoblogging is expression and documentation and citizen journalism. We are only underground in so far as we dont fit into a corporation's strategy...yet. Let them build around us. In Community TV, people have used copyrighted material for years. Clips from local news, music videos, scenes from movies, songs... It's all "stolen", but it's also put in context. I like the Fair Use laws in the US. And really, no one ever bothers us becasue we make no money from these shows. Videoblogging is goofing around but its also dead serious. we're making something real that has never existed. i can put up video that the entire wired Earth can see. how much does this costs me? 8.95 each month for server space. i dont know what other visions for videoblogging are, but I want to turn on the internet and see everything in people's heads come alive in video. i want someone documenting anything that happens on this planet and posting it without spin. I want to see people's lives. I want to watch someone's studied, personal opinion, not large propaganda. If people have to borrow other work to get their point across or tell a joke, im not sure I see the problem. Quoting Andreas Haugstrup <videoblog@...>: > > Creative Commons dot org. > >> I think it's copyright issues. > > I think something like Creative Commons is definately the way to go. With > a system like that it is very easy for content creators to give up some of > their rights so that others can reuse their material. > > There is of course Fair Use (and it's siblings in the legislation in > non-US contries, YMMV), but relying on your reuse being Fair Use is not > really a good idea. Through my girlfriend I got a hand on a huge book on > US Media Law ("Mass Media Law" by Don R. Pember, I can recommend it, > though it looks expensive) and I've been reading the chapters on Fair Use. > The definitions are so loose that you can't really rely on them for much. > > Which brings me back to my first e-mail. Most content is still not > licensed under a Creative Content license so you have two options if you > want to use the works of others: > > 1) Rely on Fair Use. > 2) Ask the copyright owner for permission. > > No. 1 is not something you can count on with the sketchy rules. I can see > many many cases where you would probably be able to claim Fair Use without > problems (if you give clear and proper attribution). It's still very > unclear and not something I would do myself though. > > No. 2 just takes a lot of time. It could get especially tiresome for > content creators who could be getting a lot of requests. > > Ryan and Jay both want to disregard copyrights. Ryan put it like this (Jay > used stronger language :p): > > > Really? Copyright issues don't stop people from liberally quoting theNew > > York Times in their blogs. And they haven't slowed P2P adoption.Somehow > > I doubt that people are getting revved up to do this kind ofthing, and > > then stopping because of legal fears. > > Disregarding copyright issues is naive when it comes to a concept like > videoblogging. The analogies are not comparable: Liberally quoting the NY > Times is okay in many cases provided it's for commentary, critique or the > like (it's covered more clearly by Fair Use), and P2P is a completely > different matter. > With P2P you are - to an extent - anonymous. You are certainly hidden from > the public eye. With videoblogging you would be the exact opposite: > Actively trying to get an audience for your works. With videoblogging you > are actively trying to distribute the works, where with P2P music sharing > (the only P2P I know about, and the only P2P the media cares about) most > people are only downloading content to their harddrives. There's a huge > difference there. > > Because videoblogging is such a public phemonema (as in everything happens > in public view) copyright issues has to be taken seriously. Comitting > copyright infringement hidden away in your bedroom is one thing, doing it > in the middle of Main Street is just a really stupid idea. > > We need people to be aware that there exist other people who would like to > reuse their work. That way we can get clear rules from content creators > through eg. Creative Commons about what you can and cannot do with their > content. You want people to take your own work seriously, so respect their > work as well. Don't screw copyrights unless you want to get screwed over > yourself. > > Not to mention that you would never be able to go beyond the "wee, we're > just goofing around" stage. If you want people to take you seriously, if > you want to have companies build software for you you can't ignore > copyright laws. Basing a business plan on copyright infringement is a > quick recipe for disaster. If you on the other hand is happy to have an > underground phenomena then feel free to ignore copyrights. I'd like > videoblogging to be just a little tiny bit more than that, and that's why > I take copyrights seriously. > > That was way longer than I intended it to be. And I'm even on vacation. > Lastly I'd like to say that the more I read on copyright legislation the > more I like it (despite the loose definitions under Fair Use). It's pretty > good legislation, it's the musicians who are in trouble because they sign > over ownership of their work. > > - Andreas > -- > Personal: <http://www.solitude.dk&gt; > File Thingie - PHP File Manager <http://www.solitude.dk/filethingie/&gt; > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > -- Jay Dedman Manhattan Neighborhood Network 537 West 59th NY NY 10019 212 757 2670 ext.312 http://www.mnn.org