copyright

[gman]

I'm throwing this out there for anyone who know more than I do. 15 second samples of a worship team on church's website, yes or no? I believe you can post samples of original recordings when those samples exist elsewhere, such as amazon or walmart, but what about 15 second samples of a worship team doing other people's songs? Whole songs, obviously not unless you have secured permissions and licensing.

GMan

[brent]

Nope. Pay up unless the publishers give permission.

[brent]

Also, if you are posting your own original music, it makes no difference if it is posted elsewhere. I would make sure that it is copyright protected.

If you are posting someone else's music that you are performing, it makes no difference where it is posted. It isn't yours. You have no right to it, unless you pay up or have permission.

Even if you are using someone else's clips with your movies, slideshows, etc on YouTube, that is illegal. Check out YouTube's copyright notices.

The government is moving to treat the internet like radio. Everybody pays for broadcasting, podcasting, streaming, distributing P2P the work of someone else.

[separateunion]

I should tell my sister that. She used a PFR song for a music video she posted on youtube. However, Joel Hanson found it, said he enjoyed it, and didn't sue my sister. *shrugs*

[gman]

Well, what about the fair use doctrine? The way I read that, in regard to podcasts, is if I create a podcast about my church's worship music for the purpose of educating others about the church's worship style and music, I can include portions of copyrighted works. The fact that it's educational would put the podcast under fair use, and then what would be looked at in regard to the copyrighted music, if any is used, is how much is used. I don't remember exactlly where I read this, but it was a fairly lengthy piece on podcasting and copyright issues, inside of a much larger document.

GMan

[brent]

I should tell my sister that. She used a PFR song for a music video she posted on youtube. However, Joel Hanson found it, said he enjoyed it, and didn't sue my sister. *shrugs*

This is typical. Most people are sensible, underdstanding that the exposure keeps their names out there. Some people don't care because even though they are the artist, they no longer make money from that music, so it isn't hurting them any. I was just relaying the law. Copyright holders can go after you. Will they? Who knows.

Fair Use DOES NOT APPLY IN YOUR application. Fair Use is for educators, to be disctributed to students and faculty in limited quanities. A church does not qualify. Churches are NOT educators. It is the classification of the user that determines legality. Not the purpose. I have been through some legal presentations on this stuff. Fair Use does not apply here. I can also provide links for you to read, which all say the same thing, which is good, because we paid thousands for legal consultations.

The issue is this. You want a reason not to pay the artist for his/her work. There isn't one. No matter how the work is distributed, the law is on the owner's side. Copyright law gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to control certain activities in relation to the work. For example, under US law, a copyright owner can control whether another person makes a copy of their work, makes changes to their work, distributes it to the public or makes a public performance of it. So, any person other than the copyright owner who wishes to do any of the protected acts in relation to the work must secure permission from the copyright owner before doing so, unless an exception or exclusion applies.

When you make your podcast, you mess with the rights of the owner by:
1. Copying the work to include it into a podcast;
2. Adapting or changing the work to include it into the podcast;
3. Making a work available as part of a podcast for transmission to members of the public;
4. Authorizing members of the public to make a copy of the podcast and use it according to the terms you apply to the podcast.

So as you can see the amount of the "works" used is irrelavent. The law protects ALL copyright owners regardless of volume.

[gman]

I follow you now. I missed the part about fair use being for educators. That makes sense. Thanks for the info!

GMan