From: ben d (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Aug 05 2007 - 00:56:20 PDT
I'm in full agreement with Rick on this one.
For folks who would like more information check out:
http://www.appropriationart.ca/
Ben
"It is a society, and not a technique, which has made the cinema like this.
It could have been historical examinations, theory, essay, memoirs. It could
have been the film I am making at this moment." -Guy Debord
>From: Jeff Kreines <email suppressed>
>Reply-To: Experimental Film Discussion List <email suppressed>
>To: email suppressed
>Subject: Re: Film Copyright
>Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:28:08 -0500
>
>On Aug 5, 2007, at 2:06 AM, Rick Prelinger wrote:
>
>>Depends on the copyright status and whether your use is fair. I would
>>strongly advise anyone who sees themselves as a maker of artwork to do
>>their work and avoid worrying about infringement. This is not a legal
>>principle, simply a statement in favor of artistic freedom.
>
>I agree completely with Rick. People go insane worrying about music
>rights, and about tv sets with copyrighted material appearing in shots in
>documentaries, which is just crazy. There was a very depressing report
>about fair use that had instances of people paying thousands of dollars to
>license the rights to a ringtone on a cell phone, or replacing the image
>on a TV set in a scene -- these are non- fiction films, following real
>events -- fair use in my humble opinion. If a song comes on the radio
>when I'm filming, it's not my choice -- I didn't pick the song or turn on
>the radio -- so it's fair use, IMHO. (We once had very expensive lawyers
>say that was the case, but that was 25 years ago, simpler times.)
>
>(The magazine "Seventeen" tried to sue us because we made a film called
>"Seventeen" -- slightly in tribute to Booth Tarkington, whose estate,
>apparently, had sold the word "seventeen" to some publishing syndicate.
>We ignored them.)
>
>It's time for people to stand up and NOT be cowed into paying for this
>stuff. For art films, you probably won't have to worry anyway -- because
>there's no money involved so the lawyers don't get too interested.
>
>Of course, if you are making films of the sort that require errors and
>omissions insurance, you are stuck. So don't make films in that sort of
>system. To hell with releases, too. (The latest trend is to require
>releases if a building appears in a film -- you are supposed to wear
>blinders when looking at the Flatiron building, and, I believe, that
>Transamerica thing in SF.)
>
>Sorry, rant over. Needed a break from designing parts...
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
_________________________________________________________________
Share More On Messenger with a Windows Live Space
http://spaces.live.com/?mkt=en-ca
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.