Vimeo to automatically mute videos with 'unlicensed' soundtracks

[Quirky]

Read my post, I didn't say crap work, music lifts up any type of work, good or bad. It's a huge part of the cinematic experience and of equal value.

 

And checkout the history of David Lynch- whom you mentioned, and his composer Angelo Badalamentii, they started working together on blue velvet when Angelo was essentially an unknown. That collaboration has produced some of the greatest and most original cinematic moments ever.

 

Likewise Clint Mansell had never written a score when he first began working with Arronfkski, they've been together ever since.

 

Maybe I worded it poorly, but working with people who are accessible to you isn't a derogatory suggestion, just because Angelo was fairly unknown, doesn't diminish his amazing talents! Somewhere on soundcloud there is the next Badalamenti looking for his/her lynch to partner up with and make something new, hope I find him/her first  :)

 

You may not have said crap work literally, but something like that seemed to be implied, and now this topic is drifting even further into off-topic snobbery, isn't it. 

Those two well known names were just two random examples of filmmakers not considered as demi gods of moviemaking by everyone. That's not to say their work is crap, it just means that the crappiness/genius of their work and their distinctive styles is subjective. 

 

The point I was trying to make is that who has access to popular copyrighted music and/or performances depends on the size of one's budget, and who should have access to those depends on one's perspective. Whose work or style is considered crap depends on one's personal taste, and much less on the perceived talent -or opinions- of the artist. 

 

Yes, of course both established Hollywood heroes and aspiring filmmakers at Vimeo could and probably should collaborate with emerging musical talents. No one is arguing that, as it's blatantly obvious. But besides the point. 

 

As we've established in this thread as well as elsewhere, even if one is writing his/her own soundtrack, let alone collaborating with a composer or paying for a royalty-free licence, one can still get into trouble because of the broken system, which is totally unnecessary. 

 

The Vimeo filmmakers who are respecting other people's copyrights may and do get flagged for no good reason and have the burden of proving their innocence to a bunch of lazy bureaucrats because of some dumb bots pestering them online. That is adding insult to injury. So is the notion that we should be worried about publishing our non-profit documentaries recorded outdoors with a few seconds the sound of any copyrighted music audible in the background. All that doesn't even cover the notion of easier access to copyrighted music yet. By common consent, obviously. 

 

There could, and probably should be a better, more reasonable way to sort out all those problems. What Vimeo is doing now with their pestering bots is not solving the problem. It may have the opposite effect in the long run. When you take a bow at one direction, you also stick out your behind to another direction.

 

 

then dont take other peoples work either and use it for free without permission.

 

Who has been talking about using other people's work for free without permission in the first place?

That's a non sequitur, so let's just skip the self-evident platitudes, shall we. 

 

On the other hand, what Bioskop Inc said above is refreshingly relevant and informative regarding the on-topic issue. 

Thanks for the link. 

[Pascal Garnier]

I make 3-4 wedding videos each year.  The couples I shoot choose their own music for very particular reasons, mostly some kind of emotional connection to a song.   It might be the first song they danced to, or a song that was popular when they first met, ...
What matters to them is that it's THAT song.  NOT a song that sounds a bit like it, or has a similar vibe, or a cover version ...

 

What I have been doing until now, is use that music in the wedding videos (including the online streaming versions), AND include proper credits and a direct iTunes link to the song(s). 
This is the best I can do right now, since publishers simply don't care about clearing songs for this kind of use.  Believe me, I have tried, and have never ever received a reply, let alone a quote.

I would be very happy with an easy, accessible online system where you can pay for sync for popular songs.

For all my other work, I find plenty of material at themusicbed or even the Vimeo music store. 

 

[andy lee]

Quirky

its very evident from reading all these posts that people are using other peoples copyrighted work/music for free with out permission - many have mentioned it in this thread .

 

There is a feeling that if you paid for the cd or download you own it and can use it anyhow . Or if its is too complicated to get a syncronisation license - to just use it anyhow .

 

That is why Vimeo and Youtube are having to clamp down as they are finally being pressured by the Music Industry to get their house in order.

And rightly so !

[JohnBarlow]

No disrespect to anyone, but I feel the notion that record labels are only now waking up to whats happening wrt to copyright infringement is lame.

 

The owners are really smart street wise tough business types. Gordy, Branson, Blackwell, Geffen etc 

 

The truth is they have failed to address this issue in the past which started in the early seventies en masse with the introduction of the C90 audio cassette. Even the BBC were encouraging people to send in their mix tapes later in the 80s,

 

The companies tried to get the Japanese to disable the record bias when a copyright signal was detected on the source - they failed

Later with DVDs they tried to get the software burner people to prohibit copyrighted works from being duplicated.- they failed

They even suggested a tax on blank recordable media - they failed.

 

There have been test cases similar to the 'Bob Monkhouse video recordings' lawsuit which again have failed.

 

My point is that if something cannot be policed then the universe is teaching you a valuable lesson. Woodstock and Isle of Wight festivals became free for a big reason - people power.

 

Technology affects many people in this new world, why should record companies be exempt? Are they Gods?. Technology has devastated lives by making millions of typists, drafters, shops, businesses, checkout tills, banks ad infinitum...     jobless.

 

Sure a new business model is required or a pay per view of material containing copyright. But good luck if you can make that work.

 

The notion that artists work is devalued is laughable. The record companies know all too well that any publicity is good publicity, smash your guitar on stage, get busted for substance abuse da da da.

 

Regarding the value of old material which has long since passed its sell by date, you only have to pop into Charity shops to find CDs for a quid DVDs 2 quid Paperback novels 50p. I think this places the value of this stuff into real perspective.- this stuff is one step away from landfill.

 

Anyway meet the new boss - same as the old boss   da dummmmmm dat dat  (oops how much do I owe ya Pete?)

[Quirky]

its very evident from reading all these posts that people are using other peoples copyrighted work/music for free with out permission - many have mentioned it in this thread .

 

Yes yes, yes, I thought we've established that and moved on at least a day and a page ago. I already agreed with you about that on the previous page, so your bringing  it back again was a bit confusing. What we're talking about now is another matter, no longer related to your argument.

 

 

 

That is why Vimeo and Youtube are having to clamp down as they are finally being pressured by the Music Industry to get their house in order.

And rightly so !

 

There has been no argument about why Vimeo are doing what they're doing since page 1. Since then we've also established that their rudimentary efforts involving the online bots are harming the aspiring and pro filmmakers who don't use any copyrighted soundtracks. They get pestered by the bots and bureaucracy for no good reason. Adding insult to injury, getting a sync licence has been made almost impossible for mere mortals.  No wonder people get frustrated.

 

The system doesn't seem to work too well, however well intended originally, and that's the problem. The fact that some people copy and use other people's stuff without permission, anyway, no matter what, is another story. 

[Christina Ava]

###### UPDATE – 5/23/14 ######

This blog post is receiving lots of comments and questions — thanks everyone for the feedback! We will respond to as many as possible, but we can’t get to all of them. So…

• We’ll continue updating our FAQ with answers to common questions: vimeo.com/s/aby
• You can contact us directly here: vimeo.com/help/contact **

Also, some Vimeans have described a use case that they’re concerned will be affected by Copyright Match: Uploading private videos for the purpose of temporary client review.

We want to support the creative process, and Copyright Match wasn’t intended to hinder these efforts. So we’re going to work on changing the system to better support this. While we work on this, we are going to temporarily suspend Copyright Match scanning for private videos in Plus/PRO accounts.

We’ll post another update as soon as we have a longer term solution in place. Thanks again for your honest feedback and passion for making sure that Vimeo remains the best place for artists and creative professionals on the Web! <3

** If you email us, please note that we have limited support over the weekend and Monday is a US holiday. A member of the Vimeo Community Team will respond to every single inquiry as soon as possible!

####################################

 

i was sure my moaning and complaining would acomplish something! YES after the shitstorm look what VIMEO did! yes! :wub:

[varicam]

Now if Vimeo provides the option of paying for a licence fee for sync'ing, say with a minimum flat fee + a percentage cut from tip jar or whatever, that'll make a lot of people happier.

[Damphousse]

this is a good thing as the music industry has been decimated in the past 10 years by internet free downloading.

 

No.  The industry has been "decimated" because they were forcing you to spend $15 on a CD that had at most 2 good tracks on it.  The music industry screwed over talent and fans.  That's why when the opporunity to circumnavigate them appeared consumers embraced it whole heartedly.

 

The music industry never should have had the profits it had in the past.  You are starting the analysis off at a greatly inflated base line.  I mean lets say there was no piracy.  Well in today's world I can still go out and pay $2 for the two actually good tracks on an album as opposed to $15 for two good tracks and eleven wastes of time.

 

You guys want to talk about music and video well my advice is to look at photography where people got really screwed and the quality has nose dived.  I sell some of my photographs.  I don't do royalty free unless the fee is really high.  For the majority of my work I do rights managed.  But you know what?  I don't mind selling an image for $5 if someone wants to use it for school project.  If it's noncommercial and not for a newspaper or magazine I am willing to deal.  I don't see that with a lot of music for use on vimeo videos that only get a handful of hits...  I certainly have bookmarked a few places that sell generic stock music.  I don't mind paying a few dollars, but don't charge me $1,000 to add music to my little home movie.

[Quirky]

i was sure my moaning and complaining would acomplish something! YES after the shitstorm look what VIMEO did! yes! :wub:

 

Good job. Carry on moaning.  :P

[Andrew Reid]

Quirky

its very evident from reading all these posts that people are using other peoples copyrighted work/music for free with out permission - many have mentioned it in this thread .

 

There is a feeling that if you paid for the cd or download you own it and can use it anyhow . Or if its is too complicated to get a syncronisation license - to just use it anyhow .

 

That is why Vimeo and Youtube are having to clamp down as they are finally being pressured by the Music Industry to get their house in order.

And rightly so !

 

 

There is the Fair Use disclaimer though don't forget. Complicated and no guarantee, but some work can use copyrighted material with no permission.

[Andrew Reid]

Now if Vimeo provides the option of paying for a licence fee for sync'ing, say with a minimum flat fee + a percentage cut from tip jar or whatever, that'll make a lot of people happier.

 

This will be a necessary move for Vimeo if they are to keep hold of their users. I won't be on Vimeo unless they improve the system. Already looking at alternatives.

[dafreaking]

This will be a necessary move for Vimeo if they are to keep hold of their users. I won't be on Vimeo unless they improve the system. Already looking at alternatives.

 

Please let us know when you find some reliable ones. Cheers!

[Quirky]

This will be a necessary move for Vimeo if they are to keep hold of their users. I won't be on Vimeo unless they improve the system. Already looking at alternatives.

 

One alternative for YouTube and Vimeo is Wistia. It's a bit pricier than Vimeo, though, and aimed more towards business clients. Probably not an ideal alternative for a filmmaker but still, it's  one alternative for sharing online videos.

 

Although I don't see how would any of the existing alternatives be able to chance the system. That needs more than just a new service, doesn't it. 

[dafreaking]

Wistia is hideously expensive just to showcase work/showreel etc. Seems good for client previews though. But, why would one use it for client previews? Vimeo, even with it's new terms, one shouldn't be in breach.

[Danyyyel]

The music can almost always be licensed, it's not that hard. But for the most part record companies don't really give a shit about the odd few hundred dollars from some student filmmaker who wants a festival licence so there is no point building some huge infrastructure to make it easy for someone who for the most part they cannot afford the music they want to licence. You have to play with toys that are in your league.

 

If you are working on a big budgeted film there are people who handle getting quotes, even if you aren't you can just contact the publisher. I've done it and gotten fair quotes, but mostly they are outrageous.

 

Sites like music bed are there to fill the gap, music that is affordable and easy to licence, the downside is the quality is hit or miss.

 

But I think to say fast, cheap licencing is always win win is missing a crucial point. Successful music artists don't necessarily want you piggy backing off their work and a small licencing fee may not worth having their art and reputation likely devalued. I don't want adverts on my shorts and it bothers me when they pop up with new scores without my permission. It devalues the original

 

The attitude that other peoples art should be yours to mix and mangle lift up your own work with for free or cheap, on a public platform, is outrageous. There are lots of up coming artists who are happy to collaborate with you if you ask though! Like Andrew said, search bandcamp or soundcloud, you might find a future collaborator. 

 

So true, I cannot comprehend that on a creative site people are advocating copyright theft. Some seem so entitle  by them self that they think that there holiday video have to have the music that they want (some multi million dollars production) and that the 20 views from there family and friends is going to magically make a big promo for the artist. Others it is right to pillage the work of fellow artist because either way the money is not going to them but to the big corporation. So lets steal more from them so that they even get less from what they were getting.

 

I comprehend that the implementation, like errors from a bot etc can cause problem but the copyright is something fundamental to protect the rights of artist. If your ambition is just doing some cat, holiday, family and even wedding videos, I can understand that the concept of the sweat and tears that go into the creative work is a bit abstract. But to all those that aspire to create and that the word film maker and not cat maker is appropriate, then copyright should be defended at all cost.

 

Some people on this discussion are just lazy, if you are a genuine creator, either go out and meet and collaborate with other artist. Or take some time and go on the site that have been listed or the web and search for the music and artist and either buy or find venues of collaboration. If your work is of some value, I am sure that you will find other talented people to work with you. With the combination of digital, internet and globalisation it is harder and harder to live out of your art, so if even artist start to question the fundamentals and pillage other fellow artist work in not so long we will have on one side the big corporation producing mostly just mass market shit for only money and on the other side doctors/accountant/lawyers cat shooting film makers and all the artist will be dishwashers/cleaners, because there will be no more way to make a living out of your art.

[Nikkor]

Laaa laa lah la la la la la la la la la lahh, la la laa...

 

Do I have to pay now?

 

Da da da dada da daaaa

[Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47]

What about all of the Vimeo "Staff Picks" that use what I assume isn't copyright-cleared music? What will happen to these "Vimeo approved" films? Vimeo may have had these rules in place for a long time but not only have they been lax about enforcing them, it's arguable that they have condoned - even encouraged - the practice. Now those videos will all be handicapped too?

 

E.g:

 

 

I'm not taking any stance here - I think this is a complicated issue and in general I fall on the side of believing that what Vimeo are doing is right. But I think that a lot of content that has already been created using non-copyright-cleared music was made specifically for Vimeo in the knowledge that it will not be a real life problem. It's a shame they can't say "starting today, no more" and leave the existing stuff up. 

[andy lee]

So true, I cannot comprehend that on a creative site people are advocating copyright theft. Some seem so entitle  by them self that they think that there holiday video have to have the music that they want (some multi million dollars production) and that the 20 views from there family and friends is going to magically make a big promo for the artist. Others it is right to pillage the work of fellow artist because either way the money is not going to them but to the big corporation. So lets steal more from them so that they even get less from what they were getting.

 

I comprehend that the implementation, like errors from a bot etc can cause problem but the copyright is something fundamental to protect the rights of artist. If your ambition is just doing some cat, holiday, family and even wedding videos, I can understand that the concept of the sweat and tears that go into the creative work is a bit abstract. But to all those that aspire to create and that the word film maker and not cat maker is appropriate, then copyright should be defended at all cost.

 

Some people on this discussion are just lazy, if you are a genuine creator, either go out and meet and collaborate with other artist. Or take some time and go on the site that have been listed or the web and search for the music and artist and either buy or find venues of collaboration. If your work is of some value, I am sure that you will find other talented people to work with you. With the combination of digital, internet and globalisation it is harder and harder to live out of your art, so if even artist start to question the fundamentals and pillage other fellow artist work in not so long we will have on one side the big corporation producing mostly just mass market shit for only money and on the other side doctors/accountant/lawyers cat shooting film makers and all the artist will be dishwashers/cleaners, because there will be no more way to make a living out of your art.

 

 

very well said - this is totally true - create your own - do not steal !

[Andrew Reid]

What about all of the Vimeo "Staff Picks" that use what I assume isn't copyright-cleared music? What will happen to these "Vimeo approved" films? Vimeo may have had these rules in place for a long time but not only have they been lax about enforcing them, it's arguable that they have condoned - even encouraged - the practice. Now those videos will all be handicapped too?

 

 

Theft or inspiration?

[Julian]

Neither. Copyright infringement.

 

You can agree with it or not, but it's the law. Can't blame Vimeo for enforcing it.