![]() ![]() The thing is: if these companies, youtube for example, applied these rules to EVERYONE, fairly, the same way, at least i could say, "Well thats just how they are" So it can argue, that as it has a policy to 'demonetize' repeat offenders, it shouldnt be liable. A service provider cant really be sued for the copyright infringement of its users if it receives no monetary benefit from them (which in most cases Vimeo will.) Youtube, for instance, would seem in a better position here as it relies on advertising. A key condition is that the service provider 'must terminate' repeat copyright infringers from their system (and inform their customers of this policy.)Ģ) A secondary problem for Vimeo is its underlying business model which relies on 'subscriptions' from its users. I thought it was interesting that Vimeo would institute a policy that seemed (at first sight) so evidently against the best interest of their customers (who clearly are looking for a reliable content provider) and therefore against the interest of Vimeo itself.ġ) Service providers (ie vimeo) can avoid liability under copyright infringements from their users/customers so long as they meet 'safe harbor' conditions under DMCA. ![]() There is a problem - not so certain what the solution is. I think it also allows my viewers (the crowd of four) better opportunity to experience (see and hear) the holistic work rather than focus on a well known piece of music. That - in a trivial way - rewards and hopefully motivates the musicians to keep exercising their artistic expression. My own experience is irrelevant because only a handful of people will ever see my videos but that notwithstanding I enjoy the process of finding new music to suit (using Audio Network) and paying to use it. I think your point about the freedom of artistic expression is valid - but plagiarism, copyright infringement or pirating detract from that. And even tho’ there was neither a financial component nor a formal legal agreement it certainly had the most basic and important element: respect. That is essentially you granting a licence/permission to use your cinematography. I was recruited by the DJ Paul Van Dyk once and he wanted to use my footage over his music. If I wanted to set some cinematography to a Pink Floyd track in the privacy of my own edit suite at home, and not release it, I am free to do that. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |