|
|
Post by Metalbrat on Feb 1, 2009 20:16:25 GMT -5
Big surprise. lol They gotta 'sensationalize' everything. Its like the online 'Enquirer'. I don't even bother reading the comments because those people are complete idiots with nothing better to do than rant at people. Wait, let me write the Enquirer to tell them about all this. ROFL Another day in the life of the internet.  |
|
|
|
Post by Metalbrat on Feb 1, 2009 20:24:51 GMT -5
I was wondering about that too!! They should NOT be able to pull stuff off of an artist board. What a mess!! Baz made his statement in a public forum. Anyone can join. Who is to say that a member of Blabbermouth is not also a member of this forum. We have a lot of readers who never post. Blabbermouth gets most of their materials from artist's message boards or tips sent in by fans. I am sure they have employees who are paid just to surf the music message boards. It is a fact of the internet, if you put something up there, someone is bound to take it for their use. As far as this goes, there are a lot of people over at Blabbermouth who are agreeing with Sebastian. As for the controversy, there is no such thing as bad publicity. It has put Sebastian's name out there. Yeah, there's 'spies' everywhere.   |
|
|
|
Post by brmslash on Feb 10, 2009 21:38:22 GMT -5
I just received this friendly email from YouTube:
Now, I understand and agree with the other opinions stated previously, but this was video I shot myself at a concert on my compact digital camera. I am not copying or using an officially released video or music, so how am I infringing on copyright? I am not using the video for personal gain or leaking any sensitive information. Just about every one at concert's take videos and photo's with their mobile phone's etc, so I can't see a problem in posting it on-line for others to enjoy. No one has lost or made any money from it. The only thing I can think of is it may been seen to compete with Baz's new online blip.tv show, with some of the video's being of the Perth show as well. But those are also free for everyone to view on the internet.
What does everyone else think? Does this seem a bit over the top or am I actually breaching America's extreme copyright laws.
Cheers,
BRMSlash
|
|
|
|
Post by Metalbrat on Feb 10, 2009 23:03:07 GMT -5
If you were told before the show there was to be no video, cameras, etc. either on tix or by announcement, then u can be sued by someone for copyright. Some club shows we were allowed to take photos or videos during the first 3 songs. But that 'disclaimer' at a show is an automatatic thing to where u 'can' be prosecuted because there was a warning. No matter if people are using their phones etc. (just because 'everyone' is doing it doesn't make it legal. Some don't get caught, some do). If it was for 'personal' use, (not put online, etc.), no one would have known. Once its online, people can take it from you and use it on something they can sell. So although u didn't have the 'intention' it can be used by others to make money off of. Its not 'extreme' its to protect the rights of people who are paid and own the rights to it. Its not over the top. Its just that with the internet, they are only now starting to figure out how crack down on things that if people did in 'reality' they'd automatically know they would be sued. Copyright, is copyright. And without consent from the one that owns that copyright, (image, name, etc), you can't use it. (example, Sebastian ownes the SEBASTIAN BACH name, after dealing with stuff like Skid Row and 'THEY' owned the name so he wasn't entitled to things associated with it, and after being burned, he learned quick, how 'not' to get screwed over in business) When I took a video years ago after Jekyll and Hyde with Sebastian outside with fans, and with his Mom, we asked him to make sure it could be put up online. It was cool by him so it went online.  |
|
|
|
Post by accept40 on Feb 11, 2009 0:37:10 GMT -5
Don't bother doing any favors. It will end up in failure anyhow no matter what anyone does. They are all going down the tubes. I just received this friendly email from YouTube: Now, I understand and agree with the other opinions stated previously, but this was video I shot myself at a concert on my compact digital camera. I am not copying or using an officially released video or music, so how am I infringing on copyright? I am not using the video for personal gain or leaking any sensitive information. Just about every one at concert's take videos and photo's with their mobile phone's etc, so I can't see a problem in posting it on-line for others to enjoy. No one has lost or made any money from it. The only thing I can think of is it may been seen to compete with Baz's new online blip.tv show, with some of the video's being of the Perth show as well. But those are also free for everyone to view on the internet. What does everyone else think? Does this seem a bit over the top or am I actually breaching America's extreme copyright laws. Cheers, BRMSlash |
|
|
|
Post by butts on Feb 11, 2009 7:48:47 GMT -5
Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people??
Alley Music Corp., Bienstock Publishing Company, Edward B. Marks Music Company, The Rodgers & Hammerstein Organization, and Stage 3 Music.
Anything there from Sebastian or is it all to do with the song being 'Back in the Saddle'. If so, it's not just Sebastian doing this, is it. Does anyone know?
|
|
|
|
Post by southernkitty69 on Feb 11, 2009 9:32:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure either.. it's confusing.. maybe Baz will write on this topic so we know what's going on..
|
|
|
|
Post by rocknrollmom on Feb 11, 2009 14:48:44 GMT -5
The people mentioned, own the copyright of the music that was used.
|
|
|
|
Post by butts on Feb 12, 2009 7:55:45 GMT -5
The people mentioned, own the copyright of the music that was used. Thanks rocknrollmom. So these people could be claiming copyright breach for their companies, or they could be claiming it on behalf of one of their clients do you think? And that could be for the song, or for their images being used, if I'm understanding this copyright business correctly. So if it's for the song, it could be on behalf of Aerosmith or Sebastian, and if it's due to their images being used, it could be on behalf of any member of the band on stage. Do you think that's right?? And we'll never know who unless someone puts their hand up? |
|
|
|
Post by rocknrollmom on Feb 12, 2009 14:54:11 GMT -5
From how I understand it, you've got it right. I doesn't necessarily mean the performer of the song, it could be the songwriter or the musicians or even the owner of the rights to the sheet music. For a long time, Michael Jackson owned the rights to the Beatles catalog. The song publishing company was sold on the stock exchange in Britain and he bought out the majority shares. So when you hear Beatles music on commercials, you can thank or curse Michael Jackson.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogface on Feb 12, 2009 18:16:44 GMT -5
Correct R&RMom. In Australia, we have an agency called APRA / AMCOS (Australian Performing Rights Association) and every single business, pub, club, shop, radio station, TV show etc etc pays fees for the use of copyrighted music to this agency so they can have use of it and play it. In the U.S the same agency is called ASCAP. Songwriters sign Publishing contracts with Publishing companies, and those companies collect the revenue from APRA (or AMCOS) and then distribute that money in the form of royalty cheques to the actual Songwriters....after everyone has taken their cut (the Publishing Company, record company blah blah blah so the artist ends up with a COUPLE OF DOLLARS if they are lucky!) If you look at the Angel Down CD there is a company on there called "Get Off My Bach Promotions" (or Productions, I cant remember) and I assume (and I could be wrong but anyway...) that this is Sebastians Business that is set up for his Publishing, Promotion...basically everything that he does musically that earns him an income. Through that Company, Baz would have a Publising Company looking after the publishing side of things, the record company (Merovingian Music, which is in conjunction with Get Off My Bach) and all sorts of other people involved....its like a Machine...there are MANY MANY wheels in the cog....I guess depending on how "big" you are... For instance, I am a member of APRA here in Australia and I had to set up my Business name and register it. At the end of every Financial Year, I have to fill out a return and send it in of all the songs I have written and played live, with dates, venues...its a VERY drawn out process and then APRA distribute the fees from the venues....I get no money...I think I remember getting a cheque for $20 bucks back in 1999 when one of my old bands had a few songs on the radio, but thats about it LOL. SO....in a nutshell....say if a Skid Row song was written by Rachael and Sebastian, then they both receive royalty for that song if it is used in ANY form....but this is all done through the Publishing Company and Record Company they have signed to, and its THOSE companies, or any "branch" companies that are linked in some way (such as sheet music owner, etc etc) that can lodge the "cease and desist" order on someone for using the song without official permission from THEM. Ummm....im confusing myself here....Baz if im wrong here, my apologies, and if you feel like explaing it to us please do!! Anyway thats my feeble attempt at understanding how this crazy business works....  |
|
|
|
Post by bachfan20 on Feb 12, 2009 22:53:48 GMT -5
Wow Rocknrollmom & Dogface thanks for this it helps to see it all in writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocknrollmom on Feb 13, 2009 1:24:12 GMT -5
Thanks Dogface for clearing it up better than my feeble attempt.
|
|
|
|
Post by butts on Feb 13, 2009 7:42:37 GMT -5
Yeah thanks Dogface and Rocknrollmom. I'm finding this all very interesting. One more question. Do these people only have the power to sue those who breach copyright in their own countries, or all over the world? If it's the latter, sounds like they are the ones who really have the power to shut down nearly every music video on YouTube and such sites, and maybe even the torrent sites if they were serious about exercising their rights (doing their job?). Then everyone would just have to hope the artist put something up on the Net to view his/herself and they'd definitely HAVE to go back to buying CDs, wouldn't they. |
|
|
|
Post by brmslash on Feb 15, 2009 21:40:35 GMT -5
Thanks for clarifying things Metalbrat and Dogface. Guess I should get the content authorised next time (probably not that easy). I didn't really think about others making money from a free video clip or photos. It was good while it lasted, hopefully a few people got to enjoy my clips.
|
|
|
|
Post by Metalbrat on Feb 19, 2009 0:56:43 GMT -5
Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people?? Alley Music Corp., Bienstock Publishing Company, Edward B. Marks Music Company, The Rodgers & Hammerstein Organization, and Stage 3 Music. Anything there from Sebastian or is it all to do with the song being 'Back in the Saddle'. If so, it's not just Sebastian doing this, is it. Does anyone know? They own rights to the material in one aspect or another. (I know I'm usually last on these things after all have cleared it up. lol) |
|
|
|
Post by Bazerrk on Feb 20, 2009 20:45:14 GMT -5
ok. I have to put my two words in here. I was making my videos (three which have been banned by Baz) What I did write in the video's were that NO INFRINGEMENT INTENDED...ALL SONGS BELONG TO SEBASTIAN BACH. I thought that would have been enough... Do you think I should cut down the songs or not use them at all. Many people have come to my YouTube site and asked me where to get the Bach CD's. Of course I let them know where to get them...So I thought I was PROMOTING his music...not stealing from him...Man, I didn't mean to piss anyone off, especially Sebastian...
|
|
|
|
Post by southernkitty69 on Feb 21, 2009 12:40:05 GMT -5
Bazerrk: A ways back on this thread Sebastian posted a statement about how feels about his music and video material being posted on the internet. He seems to indicate that bootleg material is not that much of a big deal to him because it is of poor quality, but that anything he himself has released shouldn't be used on the internet. I've bolded and underlined the part of his statement that pertains to this problem specifically: this is so crazy to me. i kwow you dont mean any harm in using my music for your videos, but what every person under 30, it seems like, doesnt realize: we make our living by making music. noone has the right but us , the musicians, to upload our music to the internet! it is so insane to me that anyone even wants to be in a band anymore sometimes. if you upload our song to your site why would someone go buy the cd? if they can go to your site & hear it for free ? its absolutely unbelievable. its also like beating your head against a wall. if i see any roadrage, angel down, forever wild, jcs, j &h, anything that i did not consent to be on the internet, i have it taken down. its nobodys right but mine to put my art on the internet. bootlegs are different. they are not supposed to be professional looking or sounding, so i dont really care so much about that. but if i put a cd out or a dvd , & put my name on it, it makes me furious to see it all being given away for free & there is next to nothing i can do about it. [/font][/b] ace, you know that countdown you got goin ? add about another 10 years onto that because its shit like this that make me & alot of other musicians say "fuck this". noone has intentionally done anything wrong, its just assumed these days if you make music than it should be free. this does NOT exactly make us all run skip & jump into the studio as quick as we can. its like the dude in the white stripes said : "playing music now is like being a carpenter & all the work has left town". i would suggest if you want music for your video game videos, learn how to play an instrument, write a song, record it , & use it in your video. Because i have to feed my children & pay my bills with mine. thanks. [/quote] The problem is very difficult for him, as he needs to be able to sell quantities of his CDs and his DVDs. The solution in your case is a little difficult, if peole are writing you asking you where they can buy the full DVD or CD version... I'm not a business manager, I'm only a bartender but I would think to honor Baz's wishes out of respect for him... Maybe you could overhaul/change up some of your videos... like maybe include ONLY concert footage that you filmed or shot yourself while you were at one of his concerts and put a statement in the video that people can buy the full length, high quality DVD versions and CDs of his great performances on Amazon.com (indicate the titles(s) of the CDs/DVDs) That would still promote interest for new fans to want to buy his CDs/DVDs without giving out footage of his copyrighted material for free... ? It's only a suggestion... the only other suggestion (the best one in my opinion) would be not to do it at all. Or you could write him and maybe he or one of his managers could approve certain things that you'd like to do with video. There's flip side to this, a really bad side... that when people put clips of his CD's and DVD's on the internet for viewing and/or download, statistically it's PROVEN that Sebastian loses profits for all this hard work. No profits not only hurts him. It hurts his fans too because if he doesn't reap in enough profits... he may not be able to release more albums and videos... and I don't want that.. I want him to keep releasing more of his art that we can all listen to, enjoy, and see. |
|
|
|
Post by newbachfan123 on Feb 21, 2009 21:12:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bachfan20 on Feb 23, 2009 13:54:51 GMT -5
Okay I have a question and yes its going to sound stupid. I got my first mp3 player about a month ago. I've always insisted on paying for my music so I get my mp3's through amazon or the artist site's that sell mp3's. You know sometimes you just want a few songs and not the whole album.
My sister was talking about how I should get music through Limewire. So I checked it out and the music is free (which I flat won't do) so is this a torrent site or one that should not be used? I was suprised to find a site like that, the artist's don't get paid right?
|
|
|
|
Post by rocknrollmom on Feb 23, 2009 16:59:18 GMT -5
The artists do not get paid from Limewire. It is a file sharing site. Like Napster used to be. I kind of think it is a "grey area" I bought and paid for all the music I have. I still buy CD's and DVD's, but if I want to make a copy of somehting and give it to my friend, haven't I purchased the right to that? Other than the technology involved, isn't it the same as when you went to the store with a friend and you bought one cassette tape and she bought a different one, and then you made copies for each other. It was a way a few broke teenagers could afford our favorite albums and nobody sued us. I really don't know the answer here, I'm just speculating.
|
|
|
|
Post by newbachfan123 on Feb 23, 2009 18:58:27 GMT -5
You have the right to make yourself back up copies for private use.So if you give your friend a copy it is being done in private among friends.The INTERNET is a public place.Lime wire is like file sharing they take bits of files from different place's and glue them together called bit torrents so they can't be traced back to the original source.a sneaky way to distribute thing's for free thus stealing monopolies from the artist  the only one's making any profits are the site owners { Lime Wire} through traffic being generated to there site. |
|
|
|
Post by bachfan20 on Feb 23, 2009 19:50:05 GMT -5
That's what I was thinking. I do buy Cd's and all that from the store or net if I can't find it in the store. Its kind of a rare thing for me not to want the whole CD. lol Anyway thanks for helping me understand that one, I'll be staying away from sites like that. I would rather pay $20 a CD to know its going to the artist than to have it for free.
|
|
|
|
Post by Katkick on Feb 25, 2009 19:11:41 GMT -5
That's just freaky ... lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogface on Mar 10, 2009 20:23:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogface on Mar 10, 2009 20:31:51 GMT -5
YOUTUBE will block all music videos from being viewed by users in Britain after it was unable to reach a deal with a royalty collection group.
The world's largest video sharing website said PRS for Music, a British collection society that collects royalties on behalf of nearly 50,000 composers, was asking it to pay "many, many times" more than the previous licensing agreement that expired.
"The costs are simply prohibitive for us – under PRS's proposed terms, we would lose significant amounts of money with every playback," the company said.
The move is the latest sign of the tension between YouTube and the music industry.
It also indicates that YouTube is resolving to keep operating costs under control as it strives to generate profits for owner Google.
YouTube said PRS was unclear about which songs would be included in the renewed license.
"We've been talking to them for a long time and we're still talking to them," said Patrick Walker, YouTube director of video partnerships for Europe, Middle East and Africa.
|
|
|
|
Post by AussieGirl on Mar 10, 2009 22:08:57 GMT -5
YOUTUBE will block all music videos from being viewed by users in Britain after it was unable to reach a deal with a royalty collection group. The world's largest video sharing website said PRS for Music, a British collection society that collects royalties on behalf of nearly 50,000 composers, was asking it to pay "many, many times" more than the previous licensing agreement that expired. "The costs are simply prohibitive for us – under PRS's proposed terms, we would lose significant amounts of money with every playback," the company said. The move is the latest sign of the tension between YouTube and the music industry. It also indicates that YouTube is resolving to keep operating costs under control as it strives to generate profits for owner Google. YouTube said PRS was unclear about which songs would be included in the renewed license. "We've been talking to them for a long time and we're still talking to them," said Patrick Walker, YouTube director of video partnerships for Europe, Middle East and Africa. Very interesting thanks for posting dogface... I still do not understand some of this... and I know a very touchy subject... So will keep trap shut cause all though alot I agree with some I still do not understand.. |
|
|
|
Post by butts on Mar 11, 2009 8:23:52 GMT -5
|
|
the only one's making any profits are the site owners { Lime Wire} through traffic being generated to there site.
