Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

Rock Videos- okay to share?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 of 19 OFFLINE   Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor



  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted January 17 2002 - 02:50 PM

I 've always wondered about this. I noticed many rock videos, many from the 80's and 90's are being shared through the usual pipelines on the internet. The question is: are these files subjected to the same piracy laws as the songs by themselves? I know you cannot sell them or use them as a means for making profits, thats a given. But unlike MP3s, music videos have always been regarded as promotional, in short advertising. This seems to make sense since very few of the total music videos are actually for sale and they really don't sell them in the record stores like CDs. The fact is, the record company essentially don't sell the videos, except maybe to MTV and the like. So, if they are copied, it's not really taking any money from sales. And if it's viewed, so people wnat to buy more CDs, who is it hurting? The makers of the video must have already got paid.

#2 of 19 OFFLINE   MikeAW

MikeAW

    Second Unit



  • 456 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 29 2001

Posted January 17 2002 - 03:01 PM

Anthony....You've got to be kidding, right ? Where do you and this question, come from...Disneyland or someplace like that ? The RIAA would love you, you are soooooooooo honest. I guess all of their promotion about piracy worked...at least with one person !

#3 of 19 OFFLINE   Chris V

Chris V

    Extra



  • 21 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 19 2001

Posted January 17 2002 - 03:46 PM

Geez Mike....it was just a question...and not a bad one. My question is, where would you buy these videos? Can you go to Wally World and buy a copy of Mr. Roboto? However, my guess would be that they are protected, but like I said...where in the world would I buy them if I wanted to?

#4 of 19 OFFLINE   Graeme Clark

Graeme Clark

    Screenwriter



  • 2,181 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 05 2000

Posted January 17 2002 - 03:55 PM

Besides the fact that you didn't even attempt to answer his question Mike, you response makes little to no sense. Why exactly would the RIAA love him? Because he's trying to figure out exactly what is and isn't legal? That doesn't automatically make hime a boy scout. I'm somewhat curious also. Like you say, they really are litte more than advertisements, but yet we don't see sites like adcritic.com for music videos. My guess is that there is some lagal issues with free sharing them.

#5 of 19 OFFLINE   MikeAW

MikeAW

    Second Unit



  • 456 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 29 2001

Posted January 17 2002 - 04:00 PM

Search the internet guys...it's out there !



How about searching Yahoo groups as your first stop, and become a member of an egroup there!



http://groups.yahoo.com/



Trust me...you will find one there for ANY music choice ! Hundreds of choices...REALLY! Lots of trading !!!!!

#6 of 19 OFFLINE   Martin Fontaine

Martin Fontaine

    Supporting Actor



  • 628 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2001

Posted January 17 2002 - 06:58 PM

As far as my moral ethics go: It's wrong to download MP3s, listen to them/burn them to audio CDs instead of buying the album if I like it unless it's out of print or not available at all (I have nothing againts paying 40-50$ for an import album if it's good) But this all goes down to the fact that I *CAN* buy the music that is available on MP3. But you *CAN'T* buy a music video (Except sometimes, there's a MOV/AVI/MPG file on the album) So to me, there's nothing wrong with trading MPGs of music videos online.
My DVDs | My Equipment
No OAR = No Sale!
If you don't want black bars, then you don't want DVD!

#7 of 19 OFFLINE   Jeff_P

Jeff_P

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 209 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 2000

Posted January 17 2002 - 09:29 PM

I find this to be a good question, as I have been downloading some videos lately. I do download mp3's but only of music that I would not have bought anyway so no one is losing out. If I like it I will buy the CD. Someone has to support these artist, they need food on the table too. But music videos is a good question. I am sure it would be considered wrong because then someone might not buy that video collection that will come out on video someday.

#8 of 19 OFFLINE   Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor



  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted January 18 2002 - 09:32 AM

I knew I would get flamed on this question, but its a valid point. Everytime I see promotional material, it usually has the description "NOT FOR SALE". I know this implies vendors not to sell them as retail, but fine, let's say people have no interest in selling them. But what about exchanging them without changing money? It's not like these MPGs are the real deal, they are small windows, not full screen 640x480. So the quality is already diminished. My theory is the music industry is out of their element with videos. They are marketing tools, but selling them has never been addressed. I suspect many videos that are for sale (like Prince, selling his on DVD) are done independently by the artist (formerly named of course). They may get their act together eventually, but MPG rock videos are just as pervasive as MP3. Again, I don't see the damage. Rock videos are not sold in stores or on-line, they only help promote the artists for people to seek out their material.

#9 of 19 OFFLINE   Vince Maskeeper

Vince Maskeeper

    Lead Actor



  • 6,504 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 1999

Posted January 18 2002 - 03:21 PM

BUt, by the same logic- radio broadcasts of music are offered for free as a promotional tool... wouldn't this also be available for trading- since it was distributed for "free" over the airwaves? Technically MTV still has to pay publishing to the artist to show videos-- just like radio pays for airplay. Although videos are "promotional" tools- they are still product. -Vince PS; Mike, your posts are a bit out of line. Not only rude, but in violation of forum policies about pirating-- and not even close to answering the question (hey didn't say he was having trouble FINDING files, rather he was wondering how legal they were). This person asked a simple question- and you treated him as if he were an idiot for being an honest person. Please be a bit more careful about your posts on this issue in the future.
Need an introduction to home theater? Check out our FAQ and Primer!!

#10 of 19 OFFLINE   Misha Scott

Misha Scott

    Auditioning



  • 9 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998

Posted January 19 2002 - 12:01 PM

I can't touch this from a legal standpoint. But as far as I know it's always been pretty much "OK" to video tape a commercially broadcast TV program, and then let somebody else borrow the tape. Right? Or am I off the mark. Seems like we've all done it for years and years, and nobody ever raises an eyebrow. I suspect any corporation that actually tried to file charges against an individual for doing this, would be laughed out of court. No? If the above assumption is in fact true, then how the heck could it possibly be illegal to share a commercially broadcast TV program via the internet? Music videos are, indeed broadcast over normal, commercial TV channels, are they not? It seems to me that the ONLY difference with the internet is the media - a different method is used to share the same commercially broadcast content. Please help me see the difference. Regards, Meesh

#11 of 19 OFFLINE   Vince Maskeeper

Vince Maskeeper

    Lead Actor



  • 6,504 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 1999

Posted January 19 2002 - 03:15 PM


Need an introduction to home theater? Check out our FAQ and Primer!!

#12 of 19 OFFLINE   Misha Scott

Misha Scott

    Auditioning



  • 9 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998

Posted January 19 2002 - 04:04 PM

Vince, you said:



[quote]

"...it would take someone with seriously convoluted logic to be able to not see a difference...

[quote]


Well gee, thanks Vince! Same to you buddy. I haven't posted in this forum in probably a year. Now I remember why I left in the first place. Condescending damned Administrators.



Regards,



Meesh

#13 of 19 OFFLINE   Vince Maskeeper

Vince Maskeeper

    Lead Actor



  • 6,504 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 1999

Posted January 19 2002 - 05:04 PM

Quote:
Wooooooh, slow down partner.



Reread my post understanding this: those comments were not intended to be "targeted" at you. When I composed that reply, it was under the impression that the questions you had posed were ACTUAL QUESTIONS- that you really wondered what the difference between the two examples you listed were.



I didn't realize that, in fact, you already had a cemented opinion on the topic and were asking the question as more of a rhetorical bait to argue with you. If I would have realized, I wouldn't have responded.



Again- when I read your post, I thought you were seriously and honestly asking the queestion "Please help me see the difference" that you actually realized that you might have overlooked an issue in the process of making your conclusions. I went ahead and explained to you the difference.



If you disagree that those are "differences"- I guess that's certainly your option. I don't think they were unclear, so if you don't see the difference between consumption and distribution then we simply disagree.



I would still say, again with no intended offense to you, that it is a bit of a conceptual stretch to use "loaning a single tape I made to a friend" as analogous to "offering infinite digital copies to strangers". But, if you disagree - that's fine.



My intent was not to debate the issue with you, as I have little or no desire to change your mind on it. Rather, I was offering a genuine and [I had hoped] helpful answer to your specific question.



-vince
Need an introduction to home theater? Check out our FAQ and Primer!!

#14 of 19 OFFLINE   Colin Jacobson

Colin Jacobson

    Producer



  • 5,354 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2000

Posted January 19 2002 - 06:58 PM

Whew - all this talk about sandwiches is making me hungry!
Colin Jacobson
http://www.dvdmg.com

#15 of 19 OFFLINE   Misha Scott

Misha Scott

    Auditioning



  • 9 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998

Posted January 19 2002 - 08:21 PM

I should be ashamed of myself for getting back in this thread. I can't let the accusation stand that I ignored what Vince wrote; after all I imagine that he put a lot of thought into what he had to say.



[quote]

Wait, I'm rationizing? LOL! You're saying that legally and conceptually that me letting my friend Ryan [borrow] a videotape of this week's WEST WING is the same thing as me allowing infinite strangers download the file from me on Gnutella? I'm rationalizing?

[quote]


Yes, it should be considered the same. I don't see any reasonable, logically defendable difference. The ONLY difference that would be posed by storing my legaly recorded (not pirated) music videos on a hard disc, connected to the internet, is that it offers greater access to others than a VCR cassette does. People other than me can still access my VCR cassettes - heck, even you have confessed to loaning a copy of "West Wing" to Ryan - it's just not as easy. In fact, I'll extend an open invitation for anyone willing to fly over here - you may borrow any VCR cassette in my collection. That's the part that pisses the corporations off, that's the REAL sticky wicket - it's EASIER using the new medium. They agreed to make home recording legal, now they can't put the genie back in the bottle. I say tough! Either it's legal or it's not legal. Media is media - analog, digital, or bio-chemical. If I give someone access to my hard-drive, it shouldn't be any different than giving someone a key to my video cabinet. I say, unless they're willing to try to outlaw home recording of the RF spectrum, they should let it lie.



Regards,



Meesh

#16 of 19 OFFLINE   Jeff Ulmer

Jeff Ulmer

    Producer



  • 5,593 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 23 1998

Posted January 19 2002 - 09:07 PM

I was actually agreeing with you Vince until:

[quote]

A solution like Napster takes the importance off of recorded creation of music (and singles specifically) and places it back on the live performance of music.

[quote]

I think you are way off base here. All Napster provides is an easy way for people to steal recordings. Nothing more, nothing less. This whole notion that musicians should be forced to perform live because people will steal their recorded work is simply wrong. You don't have the right to tell me or anyone else how they can exploit their talents. If I want to perform live, fine, if I don't that is my choice. If I prefer to work alone and make records, who are you to tell me that I have to get a band and live in a bus playing in smokey clubs to a bunch of drunks to get paid for my work? It is not up to you to dictate how anyone should make their living. If you prefer to experience music in a live setting, that is your perogative, and there are certainly a number of artists to serve you.



Some people like to listen to music without having to go to a live venue, put up with bad mixes, and obnoxious audiences. They would rather enjoy it in their car, or in the privacy of their homes, where they can appreciate the art that goes into making a great record.



Posted Image

#17 of 19 OFFLINE   Vince Maskeeper

Vince Maskeeper

    Lead Actor



  • 6,504 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 1999

Posted January 20 2002 - 06:52 AM

Jeff,



Don't think that I don't understand what you're saying- and you are exactly right. I can't say I can justify the use of Napster, as I pointed out in my example above-- living in a violent neighborhood precipitates change, but no one would call the violence a just act.



However- that little side rant was just a personal one- my beliefs about music, art and creation. Selfish really, without a doubt, but still I find myself silently rejoycing to find artists to be forced to come around to my way of thinking. Posted Image



As a person who pretty much makes his living making records, I can assure you that very few amount to "great art" going into the process. Most times, an album ends up being great DESPITE the process. I'm not saying great records don't happen- but I (again personally) feel that the affordability of recording equipment makes it completely possible for a band to make an excellent sounding album, free of outside influence, for very low prices. At that point, the music could be- in theory- given away without any serious loss.



I'm not suggesting doing away with albums- quite the opposite really. I'm just privately entertained by the idea of modern "musicians" being forced to "put up or shut up" so to speak. The idea that the money in the business and emphasis would be placed back on the Live end of things. Just a reversal of priority-- emphasis on Live with album as promotion for live as oppose to the other way around (as it is now).



Again- just my selfish notion of how, in "Vince World version 1.0" the music "industry" would be structured. Music would return to its roots- the idea of live performance of music being the purpose, rather than performance being simply a promotional tool for album sales.



-Vince
Need an introduction to home theater? Check out our FAQ and Primer!!

#18 of 19 OFFLINE   Jeff Ulmer

Jeff Ulmer

    Producer



  • 5,593 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 23 1998

Posted January 20 2002 - 09:53 AM

I don't know Vince, but rejoicing that someone's livelihood is being threatened, and advocating the theft of their income seems pretty cold to me.



As for the lower cost of recording equipment allowing people to make great sounding albums, it is still skill and experience that are required to make truly great sounding records. Sure, you can fluke out and get a great sound on occasion, but you can't learn how to engineer and produce from a book. Thankfully these lower prices will allow true artists who otherwise couldn't afford to create that opportunity.



That goes nowhere towards the development of the craft of songwriting, which seems to be an overlooked part of the whole industry of music. The focus now is merchantability, how well you fill out a pair of jeans, and whether you'd look good on a billboard, and very little to do with talent or content.



My version of the industry would be a bit different. It would be a place where creative talent was nurtured and developed, where artists weren't treated as widgets, and where those who did the work actually got paid for it. It woudln't be ablout coddling people's egos, but more of challenging their creativity.



I certainly wouldn't be supportive of depriving them of the rewards of their labor. Posted Image



As for sharing videos, Vince is right, it is not legal. He's also right that unless you are making a commercial enterprise of it, chances are the FBI won't be knocking on your door any time soon.

#19 of 19 OFFLINE   Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor



  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted January 22 2002 - 11:41 AM

Hey, I'm surprised this thread to this direction. Too many complexities here, and I think the question still remains no closer to an answer than when it started. It did bring up some important thoughts on this subject. Home taping was a problem for the industry (music and film), but tolerated it because home taping was slow and takes time to do without spending alot on duplication equipment. Out of the hands for 80 of all home tape people. The internet provides a different method of distribution. No handing out of a real object. Just a computer file, only now, people are coming to you and finding the video. It's almost more like broadcasting than anything else. You aren't doing the copying, you are posting the video file, others are copying it off you. But again, how is it a loss for the record industry to allow the copying of rock videos? They can only be seen on computers in good quality, and they promote the sale of a record. Even if you can distribute the videos, who would buy them, when you can watch them for free on MTV or VH-1? The numbers just aren't there. It doesn't hurt the artist to have their video distributed because they are not selling it directly as a product, and people viewing them might get people to buy their records, the real product.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users