Music licensing questions.

[brandondrury]

I am very disappointed in you....

I'm sure this is directed towards me. If you take the high road and say that copywrite owner does have full rights to their material, I can't argue with that. Selling pirated copyies of X music in the strees of New York or Hong Kong is one thing.

However, denying a kid the right to post a cover song he did for school up online is crossing the line. It's clear that this is just another issue of beaucracy being too big to suit it's own purpose.

I have a feeling that Nintendo really doesn't give a damn if people post covers of their music online. They just don't want to have to pay a person to go through the various copywrite applications and make decisions. If Nintendo really has a problem with it, the file will be removed online by the hosting company with no harm down. At least that's what I expect. The lawyers are going after the real bad guys.

Brandon

[bugbrain_04]

Originally Posted by J_Carlo

You got your answer , just not what you wanted.

Consider this:
Let's say you went to a RadioShack to buy a VCR to watch your old home movies. Now the salesman that helps you is a damn good salesman, and you end up walking out of the store with a full VCR/DVD combo home theater in the box system. The next day it dawns on you that the f**ker swindled you, so you want to return it, but you can't find your reciept. Now RadioShack's written policy is to only offer full refunds with a valid reciept. But you're pissed. This assh*** completely took advantage of you, and you'll be damned if you're just going to use all of that money that you shouldn't have spent on other crap you don't need. It's completely possible, depending on that store's manager, that they may understand your situation and give you a refund anyway, regardless of written policy. They have the power to do that, where all any other employee could do is read you off the policy. See what I'm getting at here?

[bugbrain_04]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I have a feeling that Nintendo really doesn't give a damn if people post covers of their music online.

I would agree with this. I mean, look at ocremixes. Technically, (as far as I understand copyright law) every one of those tracks is an illegal derivative work of copyrighted material.

[J_Carlo]

Originally Posted by bugbrain_04

Consider this:
Let's say you went to a RadioShack to buy a VCR to watch your old home movies. Now the salesman that helps you is a damn good salesman, and you end up walking out of the store with a full VCR/DVD combo home theater in the box system. The next day it dawns on you that the f**ker swindled you, so you want to return it, but you can't find your reciept. Now RadioShack's written policy is to only offer full refunds with a valid reciept. But you're pissed. This assh*** completely took advantage of you, and you'll be damned if you're just going to use all of that money that you shouldn't have spent on other crap you don't need. It's completely possible, depending on that store's manager, that they may understand your situation and give you a refund anyway, regardless of written policy. They have the power to do that, where all any other employee could do is read you off the policy. See what I'm getting at here?

Yes. It's called avoiding responsibility.

[richiebee]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I'm sure this is directed towards me. If you take the high road and say that copywrite owner does have full rights to their material, I can't argue with that. Selling pirated copyies of X music in the strees of New York or Hong Kong is one thing.

However, denying a kid the right to post a cover song he did for school up online is crossing the line. It's clear that this is just another issue of beaucracy being too big to suit it's own purpose.

I have a feeling that Nintendo really doesn't give a damn if people post covers of their music online. They just don't want to have to pay a person to go through the various copywrite applications and make decisions. If Nintendo really has a problem with it, the file will be removed online by the hosting company with no harm down. At least that's what I expect. The lawyers are going after the real bad guys.

Brandon

I disagree. Educational institutions are among the top target for the authorities. They have to set a good example, and they tend to get busted if they don't. I think that's reasonable. We have strict policies regarding the publishing, copying and everything else of other people's work, whether it be written, music, or whatever.

[bugbrain_04]

Originally Posted by J_Carlo

Yes. It's called avoiding responsibility.

Call it what you will. I'm done discussing this with you, as I can tell it's not going to get anywhere.

[bugbrain_04]

Originally Posted by richiebee

I disagree. Educational institutions are among the top target for the authorities. They have to set a good example, and they tend to get busted if they don't. I think that's reasonable. We have strict policies regarding the publishing, copying and everything else of other people's work, whether it be written, music, or whatever.

That makes enough sense too, but do you really think there's a high chance of a small community college on the outskirts of Oregon City being charged by Nintendo, a Japanese company (if Nintendo even owns the mechanical rights), for copyright infringement?

[brandondrury]

Probably not. I can see why the professors are hesitant to most your work. For them there is 0 benefit and 0.001% risk. That means the risk, however slight, is infinitely greater than the benefit.

We can speculate all day as to what Nintendo would actually do. I know that the copywrite infringement lawyers can't keep up with the real piracy. Of course, you never know. I could see a lawyers going nuts on a student for posting a cover song even though there may be real money being lost via the typical internet piracy.

Brandon

[bugbrain_04]

The 0% benefit theory is questionable, in my opinion. Someone might be considering taking the music tech program and looking at the website. They find the link, listen to the song, and it's bound to have an effect on their opinion, for better or worse.

Regardless, I think this discussion has really gone as far as it can. At this point, we're just discussing intricacies and technicalities. I will investigate the legal liability of linking to another site, so I'm absolutely certain I won't be putting my school at risk.

Thanks for all your input, guys. I really appreciate it.

~Josh~

[brandondrury]

The 0% benefit theory is questionable, in my opinion. Someone might be considering taking the music tech program and looking at the website. They find the link, listen to the song, and it's bound to have an effect on their opinion, for better or worse.

Maybe. I'm a little pesimistic with people (read too many history books) but I would expect the average person to choose a school based the lighting in the picture or the size of the fountain out front. Just a thought.