Comments

filmy wrote on 6/15/2004, 3:52 PM
>>>1) Have you used ACID for creating music beds?<<<

No.

>>>2) Is ACID your primary music resource?<<<

N/A

>>>3) Do you prefer to cut picture to existing music beds or do you prefer to create music (or have it created) to match the picture?<<<

I have done it both ways. Cutting for a music video I cut to the music. Cutting feautres I cut what feels right. Sometimes if it is a montage scene - workout scene or fast cut fight scene for example - I will lay down some sort of music. The norm for me really has been locking picture before the composer gets it. I was music editor back in the day for a film that Greg Evegan composed the score for (Yes - *that* Greg Evegan) but he scored to a work print, thusly I had to cut the music to fit the picture. This is not the norm for me - *HOWEVER* - see Question 7 for more.

>>>4) What types of projects do you most often need music for (events, weddings, spots, docs, longform drama etc)<<<

Original music - feature films, documentaries.

>>>5) If you use music libraries, which one do you prefer?<<<

I have not really found one yet that I overall LOVE...well, ok - Freeplay has some really, really great stuff. I don't remember what the other stuff was - I was "forced" to use them on a film that had no budget at all...and I have tried to block it out of my mind. I can say for the current film, and probably the next one I am using the Smart Sounds stuff which I really am loving.

>>>6) What style of music do you use most (so in terms of a music library, "Corporate", "Action", "Atmospheric" etc)<<<

I am a rock and roll kind of guy. This film now I am using, I guess, "industrial" and "metal" type rock. The September 11 film is more somber, and the feel follows.

>>>7) If you use library music, do you typically cut it up or do you use the whole track as-is?<<<

Depends on the scene...as in length. Obviously you need to cut a 2:30 track to fit a 1:45 scene. You get the idea.
filmy wrote on 6/15/2004, 7:25 PM
Just a little note of sorts here -

Overall any CD you buy can be used in the privacy of your own car/house/boat/etc for "free". And you can even legally make a copy of it as well...for "free". So this is not limited to the obvious - I mean Freeplay, yes, does state "3. Private Non-Commercial Use (Non-revenue generating or associated) / 4. Educational, Non-Commercial use (limited to school grounds and classroom - non broadcast)" is really "free" however a bit further, if you read their terms, you will also find that "9. Shareware / Freeware / 12. Religious Use (most) / 13. Non-Profit (most)" will require you to purchase a license. yes it can be argued the "freeware" is a commerical use, even if it is "free" and that certianly many "religious" uses can be done in a "business" sense and PBS and NPR (and Churchs) are "non-Profit" however they are also very much a business. So one has to ask how, for example, one would say that a church who made a video for use in Sunday School was any different from a School that made a video for use in School., or how any PEG station/Producer that creates some sort of show - say a show done by a library that is for Pre-k - first grade children and that is only aired on the very not for profit/non-commercial Educational Access station? According to the license the simple fact that the show is "aired" one would have to pay.

(Big note here - since I made my "Freeplay sucks" post they have actually *updated* things...lol. The power of these forums. Get this - seemingly based on some of the issues I mentioned they have added several price levels such as:
~ Local Market TV, Community Access TV $85.00 per freeplay music title, per year.

Interesting. Lets see what else changes over the next 24 - 48 hours. )


To vegasnewbie -

The issues you mention have been discussed so many times around here. Do a search and you will find more detailed answers to many of your questions. I can't say I disagree with the logic, nor would many of the artists, that you mention. (And me thinks that was/is part of the reason that Scott and Freeplay will allow free use of their stuff in *major studio films* as well as almost any major network - exposure of their music) However it is is never as simple as just one person saying "yeah, cool" because far too many people have their hands out any more. I just heard a few weeks ago the RIAA is looking into going after all the ring tone sites because they now see what a huge money making industry ring tones are. (Matter of fact Freeplay even has that already in their agreement now - use of freeplay music as "11. Ring Tones" "requires a signed license agreement and a license fee payment (in most cases) as described in the Freeplay Music Rate Card.")

As for Sony including music with Vegas - not currently, unless you include some of the bundles they offer every now and than. However users have reported, and asked, about the license agreement that comes with AcidXpress (or was it Screenblast Acid?) because it supposedly states that you can not create any music with the software that will be used in anything business/for profit/commerical related. Only "private" use allowed. Again - do a search on the subject. Not the same, but sort of - one of the CD's I have in front of me is from Sony Music Entertainemnt - it is called the "CBS Sound Effects Library." It does not say overall use but it does say "Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable law." Ok...how vauge is that really? Logic tells me that means don't copy the CD and try to sell the copy...however it could also mean don't use any of the sound effects on the CD for any reason, such as cutting them into a film.

And on the question of Are there any known cases where the music industry has taken a videographer to Court for using music extracts on film where less than a dozen copies of the film were distributed on a non profit basis to other people? Probably there are - a good starting place would be to subscribe to Entertainment Law Digest and do a full search. The link I provide just gives you an overview of cases such as:

Christopher W. Ballew, Theodore Hutchinson v. BMW of North America, Crispin Porter & Bogusky Songwriters known as “Chris and Tad” claims BMW of North America used two of their songs beyond the terms specified in licensing agreements. New Filing CD California.

Herbie Hancock v. Old Navy, Rocket Music. Jazz great says music company "licensed" song that infringed on one of his to Old Navy for TV ad for track pants.

Randy Adams v. Metallica. Plaintiff injured in “mosh pit” incident at heavy metal concert cannot gain access to sealed videotaped depositions of band members from earlier concert injury case, in part because of band’s “legitimate and commercial interests” in keeping depositions sealed. Ruling Ohio Court of Appeals.
vegasnewbie wrote on 6/16/2004, 12:49 PM
Thanks "Filmy" for a very interesting reply. I had a browse through the Entertainment Law Digest, and I'm pretty sure that all the film producers who have been sued are those who produced films commercially. It is interesting to see that, in September 2003, in Keith Barnhart v. Sony Pictures, it is alleged that Sony included songs in the movie "Darkness Falls" without prior permission or knowledge. So Sony will certainly be aware of the problem, and if they could arrange for some royalty free music to be included with Vegas products (for a modest fee of course) this would really help the situation!

For people who have made say, 6 copies of a film for private use and not paid any music royalties, I would suggest that if they are sued, then they would probably make more out of selling their story to the media than they would ever have to pay in damages. Is a songwriter in this example really going to say that he could have sold 6 extra copies of his CD and that he is suing for lost revenue of $120? I think you can only be compensated for likely lost revenue on sales of your music, but I may be wrong on this point?

Regards, Fred

dvdude wrote on 6/16/2004, 1:01 PM
Don't anger the gods.

<addendum>
Sorry for being flippant - it's been one of those days.....

>"For people who have made say, 6 copies of a film for private use and not paid any music royalties, I would suggest that if they are sued, then they would probably make more out of selling their story to the media than they would ever have to pay in damages. Is a songwriter in this example really going to say that he could have sold 6 extra copies of his CD and that he is suing for lost revenue of $120? I think you can only be compensated for likely lost revenue on sales of your music, but I may be wrong on this point?"

But what if each of those 6 is so completely dumbstruck by what you created, they simply can't help themselves but to make 6 copies each to give to 6 of their buddies, now there's 42 unlicensed copies floating around.

Don't get me wrong, I think the way things are here in the US is just plain flat out SILLY - they seem to have solved the problem in other countries and are actually make money from it - so what's so different here I wonder?

I'm all for change - if I ever figure out a way to be effective in making change, you can bet your sweet <insert favorite body part here> I'll be there. Right now though, the law is the law. We all must obey the law. But that doesn't mean we should accept it blindly either, so if all this irks you somewhat - let it, maybe it'll be useful later.

</addendum>