The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 29th, 2020, 1:33am

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
   Copyright Forum
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Re-Recording Music
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Re-Recording Music  (Read 3644 times)


Posts: 9
Re: Re-Recording Music
« Reply #5 on: Dec 31st, 2004, 9:12am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I must disagree with you on this, Mr. Clark.  
Every venue that allows music to be performed, either live or recorded, is required to pay a blanket license to ASCAP, BMI and SESAC that is then divided up among members as royalties.  
That covers the restaurant or meeting hall or banquet center for the music they use for that year. Fair use does not even enter into it.
I have seen dozens and dozens of wedding videos. Not one has ever used royalty-free or pre-paid music. The girls all want the latest recording artists and no, those artists are not getting paid for the use of their music, obviously for the costs reasons you site.  The average wedding videographer most likely does not know the law and even if they do, they almost have to look the other way if they want to stay in business.  
It's hard to argue with a bride to be.
« Last Edit: Dec 31st, 2004, 9:23am by skysthelimit » IP Logged
Senior Member


Posts: 3472
Re: Re-Recording Music
« Reply #6 on: Dec 31st, 2004, 9:51am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I don't think we're disagreeing as much as talking past each
other.  The ASCAP etc licenses covers the performance at the wedding, but
what covers copies of the performance and distributing those
copies to other people?
Secondly, when I referred to royalty free music, I was referring
to music that was synched up to the video by the video taper.
I'll bow to your own experience as to how common it is to
use royalty free music for that purpose, but it's certainly
what was used on my own wedding video 16 years ago.
IP Logged

Senior Member


Posts: 2251
Re: Re-Recording Music
« Reply #7 on: Jan 3rd, 2005, 7:53am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The ASCAP etc licenses covers the performance at the wedding, but what covers copies of the performance and distributing those copies to other people?

The answer to the question differs depending on the source of the music; that is, whether the music source was a DJ playing a recoriding or a band playing live.  In the former case, the copyright holder at issue here is the original recording artist.  In the latter case, assuming the band had valid rights to perform the work, then the band is the copyright holder of interest.  The original author's rights are no more than compulsory mechanical rights, I believe, unless the band's rights are limited by the terms of its license.
- Jeff
IP Logged

Intellectual Property and Technology Law
Brooklyn, USA


Posts: 1
Re: Re-Recording Music
« Reply #8 on: Jan 27th, 2005, 11:16am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Has there been any successful arguments that the use of background music in a video (e.g. wedding) actually does not cannibalize the artist’s sale of their songs.  In other words, the use of the music does not result in a target consumer not purchasing the song for the purpose of listening to it on a CD.  Rather the use of the music in a video is considered a value add proposition, which expands the reach of promoting their songs to a consumer group not yet reached by the artist.  I dabble a bit on putting background music to video.  Some of whom I done some of this for, have for example fallen in love with Yanni’s music and in turn, then went to the local music store and bought Yanni CDs.
IP Logged
Matthew Hansen
Re: Re-Recording Music
« Reply #9 on: Feb 3rd, 2005, 8:35am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

If a DJ legally plays a Pink Floyd song with a blanket license.  The videographer video tapes the dance and the Pink Floyd track ends up on the audio track of the tape.  At the same time that the Floyd track is being played, the bride makes a comment for the camera.
Now - the videographer needs to include the audio with the bride's comment and so he must also include the background Floyd track.
There is no reasonable argument that a wedding couple, for example, should be satisfied with a wedding video that shows them dancing to licensed stock music they've never  heard before.  The video is a documentary of an event, the music is part of the event.
The background Floyd track is slightly distorted because it is recorded with a microphone from speakers across a crowded room - and doesn't do the artist or his song any justice.  So the videographer purchases the Pink Floyd song and overlays it to improve the quality of the backing track.
At some point between the beginning of my description at the end, the artist feels cheated - please could someone clearly indicate where exactly in this chain of events the line was crossed - if indeed it was crossed at all.
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board