AMVs getting Banned?

[trythil]

Yeah this also requires a lot of money from the record label. A lot of money no record label would EVER spend. Sorry to disappoint, but anime music videos are not significant enough to matter.

[economics]

You, as well, have missed the point. I'll go over it again:

Copyright comprises exclusive rights with a few obvious exemptions, none of which, in my opinion, are applicable to the case at hand. (If you think you can make that case, I encourage you to present it here AND go tell EFF's lawyers, Dr. Lawrence Lessig, the executive board Creative Commons, free-culture.org, and so forth. I would love to know, and I'm sure they'd love to know. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but a good number of the entities I named are either lawyers or have lawyers, and I'm pretty sure they'd give you some great debate.)

Fair use is not an obvious exemption, and U.S. copyright law makes that clear by integrating into fair use criteria the nature of the infringing work. It is therefore an exemption that must be decided on a case-by-case basis.

The copyright holders of the music involved in this case have already demonstrated that they do not approve of the activities being done with their creative properties. (They can let some infringements slide, for they are entitled, not required, to pursue remedies.) If pressed, they most likely will reinforce this position, and the only real way to change that is by legal force.

This costs money. Irrespective of how much it costs the record label, it is almost certainly prohibitively expensive for e.g. Phade to take it on.

This is part of the reason why the fair use argument is irrelevant. (If we had a legal team, it might not be that way, although I think any sane lawyer would agree that there just isn't really a defensible case here.) The other part is that people have already pointed out numerous times that there exists a critical split between the activities of creation and distribution. We are not in the former; we are in the latter.

I do not approve of the C&D order. I have made this clear several times.

However, irrelevant arguments just don't do anything. That's what I'm getting frustrated at.

===

Yeah the embedded thing wouldn't work if the AMVs were truely persecutable... which they arn't...

You have failed to distinguish the problem of distribution. I'll show how this makes things quite thorny.

Not only are the producers and distributers of said works doing such with no monitary gain, there is no proven effect upon the work's value.

There is indeed no proven negative nor positive effect, which...really does nothing for the legal status of AMVs.

Distribution exacerbates the problem in at least the following ways:

- The music in the AMV may very well be a derivative work of its own; say, the AMV creator has made some audio edits. This can easily affect the value of the original work when distributed: for example, an editor may edit the audio to fit his or her artistic vision, which may distort the original work. (Note that section 107 leaves the definition of "value" quite open, which makes your statement

Remember again that the artist's work loses no value because its product is not being replaced.

questionable.)

- Both unmodified copies and derivatives do compete with the original work when distributed. Can you prove that there is zero or negligible negative effect?

- Distribution of transformative works like AMVs that may otherwise fall under "fair use" is neither explicitly mentioned nor hinted at in section 107, so that may very well blow the entire fair use defense out of the water. Without that, you are guilty under (at least) section 106(2).

[Keeper of Hellfire]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Which gives us the exact definition of "Fair Use" ....

Wikipedia can't give an exact definition of fair use. A definition can only be given by the law and the courts. The law defines nothing, it gives only some hints what to consider if is judged on a copyright infringement if it is fair use or has to be sued. At least the US copyright law states that such thing as fair use exists. German copyright law doesn't know such thing as fair use.

Yeah this also requires a lot of money from the record label. A lot of money no record label would EVER spend.

It's much money for one of us or organizations who fight for a change of the copyright law. It's peanuts for the major record labels, or like we Germans say:"Die bezahlen das aus der Protokasse." (rough translation:"They pay it out of the petty cash.") In case of AMV, they need only one positive (for them) desicion from the highest court, to sue all AMV-creators.

[Keeper of Hellfire]

Protokasse.

Damn Typo. Must be "Portokasse"

[808-buma]

woah guys, chill a bit...

this thread is sorta getting out of hand and it doesn't need to be. Step back a bit, take a breath, and relax...

okay, now back on topic.

I think that the crux of the matter is the fact that unedited, popular music is being distributed without consent from the copyrights holder. True, most people will not download an AMV just to demux the audio track, but it can be done, and with very little to no loss in sound quality and with very little knowledge on anyone else's part (and the programs are free too).

Radio broadcasts, streaming audio, or any other legal means or methods of distribution pay a fee to the copyright holder. By us AMV-makers distributing digital copies of the whole music without paying the copyright holders leaves the community open to these types of actions (i.e. not being able to host certain AMV's with certain song artists work).

Fair use has little to no bearing; artistic use (in this digital media we deal in) vs distribution rights is the key - and I think that distribution rights of the copyright holder will most probably win, regardless of who has the deeper pockets (which I assume the recording labels have the advantage of).

[Jesus|Fael]

Aber AMVs sind kein Problem ^_^.

As for Section 16.2: AMVs wouldn't classify as derivative works as they arn't "deriving" from the copyrighted material but rather using the copyrighted material. An example of copyright infringement off section 16.2 would be if I were to create a song called Another Brick in the Wall pt 4 derived off the three part song off Pink Floyd's The Wall.

- Both unmodified copies and derivatives do compete with the original work when distributed. Can you prove that there is zero or negligible negative effect?

I don't have to. Burden of proof lies in the hands of the prosecuting attorney. Really, the defense would be that the record label could not prove a negative effect. In its distributed form, AMVs do not compete with the actual product sold by the label. That being CDs and audio files. AMVs do not replace either. While it is true that the sound file can be muxed from the AMV, this is a seperate illegal action and no fault of the AMV distributer or creator. This is true of ANY video file, including standard music videos easily obtainable online both legally and illegally. And section 17 very clearly states...

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

We're talking market, not some intrinsic value or perversion question (as protected in 106.A.2 and covered for fair use questioning in 17.1).

Also I was agreeing with you that embedding would not protect a site were distribution of AMVs deemed illegal.

I understand that legal action would greatly overwhelm the site. I am greatly doubting, however, that the record label would actually move very far forward on this. With so much REALLY effecting label profits nowadays, a practice as monetarily obscure and really fiscally irrelevent as the distribution of AMVs is a strange thing to fight. You don't see the RIAA putting any focus into it. To be honest, it sounds like the label just thought they'd have some fun with you. With so much to fight now that is noticably effecting their profits, no company in their right mind would start shifting resources to screw around with a case like this which has a lot more ground to stand on then, say, napster did and far less market effect.

[Jebadia]

Here's something to keep in mind when posting on forums...

Hey All,

Here is the collection of site forum rules. This list will be modified as rules are added and/or changed.

The AnimeMusicVideos.org Code of Ethics:

<ol><li> <b>Thou shalt be courteous at all times</b> including visiting conventions, forum posts, opinions given, and opinions received. Respect other's judgment though you may disagree with it. <b>If you have nothing good to say, don't say anything at all.</b></li><li>Thou shalt not use downloaded video footage to make AMVs.</li><li> Thou shalt not use downloaded music to make AMVs.</li><li> Thou shalt not use pirated software: No warez, No serialz, No crackz.</li><li> Thou shalt only have one user account.</li><li>Thou shalt not put false information into the video catalog. </li><li>There shalt be only one catalog entry per video. </li><li>Thou shalt enter only the videos you created.</li><li>Thou shalt not steal other video creator's ideas.</li><li>Thou shalt not try to impersonate other video creators.</li></ol>The forum-specific rules:<ol><li>Do not abuse your site and forum privileges. Abuse will have them taken away.</li><li> Forum signature images shall not be larger than 40 pixels tall or 600 pixels wide; any sig image exceeding these limits will be removed from the sig file without warning. </li><li>Forum signatures shall have no greater total dimensions than 600 pixels wide and 80 pixels high or four lines of normal-sized text (font size 12). You may have multiple images in your signature, but no single image may exceed 600 pixels in length or 40 pixels in height or be greater than 100 kb in size. Any signature exceeding these total dimensions or any single image that goes beyond the aforementioned limits may be removed or altered without warning.</li><li> Linked forum avatars shall not be larger than 80 pixels tall or 80 pixels wide, and no larger than 80kb in file size; any avatar image exceeding these limits will be removed from the sig file without warning. </li><li> If a member (most likely a newbie) posts to the wrong forum, you as a knowing member must 1) answer the question they posted and then 2) point out which forum is the most approprate one to post to about such items. The forum moderator will (most likely) soon move the thread. </li><li>If you post images in forum threads, you should own the bandwidth that is providing those images. If you steal bandwidth by linking to images you do not have server control over, those images will be removed from the post. </li><li> There shall be no posts containing or on how to obtain warez, crackz, serialz, emulators, porn/hentai, bootlegs, or illegally obtain downloadable anime episodes, music, or any other sort of copyrighted material. You will be banned <b>without warning</b> for such posts.</li><li> The forum will not be used for any kind of personal attacks. </li><li> The forum will not be used for any unsolicited posts - advertising or self-promotional posts that are off-topic will be removed and the user banned.</li></ol>Phade.

[Image removed.]

[MOD22: Thread has been locked for being beaten in to the ground 1,000,000,001 times previously and for flames. Please search the forum before posting. If you think someone is being a jerk don't call them out on it publicly on the forum as you will only exacerbate the problem and is considered rude in itself. Instead, talk to the members in PMs or post in the mod drop box.]