1. avatar Lap Dog Shuffle
    A short documentary for a sports charity I work with has just come back with a Snow Patrol song as backing music. I have to make sure Fergal Sharkey won't take the video off youtube half way though our next campaign.

    Meanwhile, PRS website is still a total piece of shit, so can anyone with a bit of experience tell me which license I should apply for?

    The LOEL (Limited Online Exploitation License) looks suitable, however gives no real explanation of what is counted as a 'clip' nor any real guidelines on usage:

    http://www.prsformusic.com/playingbroadcastingonline/onlinemobile/MusicServices/LOEL/Pages/LOEL.aspx
  2. avatar Rocky
    Are you allowed to use an artists' music without a licensing agreement from their publisher, unless you have blanket
    agreements, like at the BBC?
  3. avatar Lap Dog Shuffle
    [quote:0f0a2f48d7="Rocky"]Are you allowed to use an artists' music without a licensing agreement from their publisher, unless you have blanket
    agreements, like at the BBC?[/quote:0f0a2f48d7]I have no idea... Remember I was chatting to you about this a few weeks back? Well, the director wants to stick with Snow Patrol.

    I figure I may as well work as far through the clearing process as I can.

    Google 'aint throwing much light on the subject.
  4. avatar Rocky
    Nightmare!
    It says this on that PRS link you posted:

    "The licence does not cover the rights in commercial sound recordings. Please contact the Phonographic Performance Limited on 020 7534 1000 or the relevant record company"

    I figured. You'll need to contact whoever SP are published by, or someone in the licensing/sync department of
    their record label or management company, who'll be able to guide you through it.
  5. avatar Lap Dog Shuffle
    [quote:f44f75f965="Rocky"]Nightmare!
    It says this on that PRS link you posted:

    "The licence does not cover the rights in commercial sound recordings. Please contact the Phonographic Performance Limited on 020 7534 1000 or the relevant record company"

    I figured. You'll need to contact whoever SP are published by, or someone in the licensing/sync department of
    their record label or management company, who'll be able to guide you through it.[/quote:f44f75f965]

    Dear dear, I'll get on that now. What yr saying is that legally I'd need to pay Fergal a minimum of £54p/y for <250 clips on the youtubes as well as a one off to the publisher? Are there any other trolls under this bridge I should look out for?
  6. avatar DuncanDisorderly
    There's no way out of it really - you pay for what you get.

    Snow Patrol is the most obvious band to use this side of the Kings of Leon - maybe you should consider creative commons - its not free but surely cheaper if it is not being used for broadcasting.

    But I'm no expert.
  7. avatar Lap Dog Shuffle
    [quote:3e7dbec6af="DuncanDisorderly"]There's no way out of it really - you pay for what you get.

    Snow Patrol is the most obvious band to use this side of the Kings of Leon - maybe you should consider creative commons - its not free but surely cheaper if it is not being used for broadcasting.

    But I'm no expert.[/quote:3e7dbec6af]Na, the short has a decent budget - It's about a Northern Irish charity but it's by an American production team for an American audience - using a big local band like SP kinda makes sense.
  8. avatar fastfude
    [quote:ee64654155="DuncanDisorderly"] maybe you should consider creative commons - its not free but surely cheaper if it is not being used for broadcasting.[/quote:ee64654155]
    Shirley it [i:ee64654155]is[/i:ee64654155] free within the constraints of the CC license? Isn't that the whole point of CC?

    That's assuming you find a CC'd song to use first, which Snow Patrol's certainly aren't. Maybe some Nine Inch Nails - the last few albums are CC licensed:
    [quote:ee64654155="nin.com"]Ghosts I-IV is licensed under a [url=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/]Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license[/url].

    the slip is licensed under a [url=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/]creative commons attribution non-commercial share alike license[/url].[/quote:ee64654155]
  9. avatar Elms
    You can get quotes to license a lot of Snow Patrol tracks through : [url]http://www.ricall.com[/url]

    They also have the option to give you a list of similar sounding tracks, many of which are available to license straight away for a set fee (I think its £495 for web use). So if something [i:efb0f9af1f]that sounds a bit like[/i:efb0f9af1f] Snow Patrol would do you could always look for a similar track that has a long enough intrumental section or an in instrumental version available.
  10. avatar DuncanDisorderly
    I'm no expert on CC licenses but didn't want to put my foot in it - I always thought you paid to use the footage / music if it was being used for commercial purposes - there are many different CC licenses which doesn't help matters!
  11. avatar fastfude
    A CC license is about setting the conditions under which others can use your material for free, but without completely waiving your copyright control.

    Standard copyright prevents someone using it at all without explicit permission from the copyright holder.

    CC provides a bit more flexibility by setting out some ways in which you can use material without having to track down the holder and get permission in writing.

    For example, you can take a track from NIN's albums above, remix it and release it as your own. The CC license gives you freedom to do this, so long as [b:cc5e095119]a)[/b:cc5e095119] you state the original was made by NIN, [b:cc5e095119]b)[/b:cc5e095119] you don't sell it or use it in a commercial project, and [b:cc5e095119]c)[/b:cc5e095119] if you distribute it, put it under the same kind of license as the original.

    If you want to do something with NIN music that's outside those terms, you still have to knock on Mr Reznor's door with a suitcase full of money.
  12. avatar DuncanDisorderly
    [quote:14c92375cd="fastfude"]A CC license is about setting the conditions under which others can use your material for free, but without completely waiving your copyright control.

    Standard copyright prevents someone using it at all without explicit permission from the copyright holder.

    CC provides a bit more flexibility by setting out some ways in which you can use material without having to track down the holder and get permission in writing.

    For example, you can take a track from NIN's albums above, remix it and release it as your own. The CC license gives you freedom to do this, so long as [b:14c92375cd]a)[/b:14c92375cd] you state the original was made by NIN, [b:14c92375cd]b)[/b:14c92375cd] you don't sell it or use it in a commercial project, and [b:14c92375cd]c)[/b:14c92375cd] if you distribute it, put it under the same kind of license as the original.

    If you want to do something with NIN music that's outside those terms, you still have to knock on Mr Reznor's door with a suitcase full of money.[/quote:14c92375cd]

    Thats what I was sort of trying to get at - I assumed that in this case the songs usage would be considered a 'commercial' venture and therefore they would still have to pay to utilize a CC license - maybe a charity falls into a different category though.
  13. avatar Nocarsgo
    In a related point, is NI Podcast (well, Panic Dots) licensed? Are most local bands signed up to the Musicians Union? I'd like to put up a few more downloads of local bands and instead of having to wait for forever for them to give me permission, I'd like to stick it into a podcast. However, unless the local bands are signed up to PRS, there's no point is there?
  14. avatar my-angel-rocks
    [quote:8f06d1dc35="DuncanDisorderly"]I always thought you paid to use the footage / music if it was being used for commercial purposes[/quote:8f06d1dc35]

    No, it just tells you that you have no automatic right to use it for commercial purposes, even though you may have obtained it for free and you need to ask the licenceholder

    The person may not mind you using it and let you use it for free (maybe its a charity close to their heart?), they may want you to pay, or they may tell you to fuck off.

    Is there a definition of what constitutes non-commercial?
  15. avatar fastfude
    [quote:9865ae5892] and therefore they would still have to pay to utilize a CC license[/quote:9865ae5892]

    Nah, it would mean their intended use is not covered by the CC license and they would have to negotiate a separate agreement with the owner, possibly involving money. You never pay with CC.
  16. avatar fastfude
    [quote:a9a4361175="Nocarsgo"]However, unless the local bands are signed up to PRS, there's no point is there?[/quote:a9a4361175] I suppose technically unless the bands explicitly give you permission, you shouldn't be using any of their music in a podcast. Which is why the traditional copyright model can be a lose-lose for small/independent musicians trying to get their music heard and for the small/independent media outlets trying to play their tunes.

    If more local bands licensed a song or two each under a CC license (eg [url=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/]BY-NC-ND[/url]), it would free up podcasters to include those songs without worry, thus opening the possibility of their music being played all over the world. Jonathan Coulton goes [url=http://www.jonathancoulton.com/store/downloads/]several steps further with his CC endeavours[/url].
  17. avatar my-angel-rocks
    [quote:4e9913a45d="fastfude"]If more local bands licensed a song or two each under a CC license (eg [url=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/]BY-NC-ND[/url]), it would free up podcasters to include those songs without worry[/quote:4e9913a45d]

    Does a podcast not constitute a derivative, thereby breaking the ND clause?
  18. avatar fastfude
    Not sure really, the FAQ only confuses me further
    [quote:7fc9d6bbd0][b:7fc9d6bbd0]What is a derivative work?[/b:7fc9d6bbd0]

    A derivative work is a work that is based on another work but is not an exact, verbatim copy. What this means exactly and comprehensively is the subject of many law journal articles and much debate and pontification. In general, a translation from one language to another or a film version of a book are examples of derivative works. Under Creative Commonsí core licenses, synching music in timed-relation with a moving image is considered to be a derivative work.

    It's important to note, however, that the Creative Commons licenses allow the user to exercise the rights permitted under the license in any format or media, even in the NoDerivatives licenses. This means that, under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license, for example, you can copy the work from a digital file to a print file consistent with the terms of that license.[/quote:7fc9d6bbd0]

    I [i:7fc9d6bbd0]think[/i:7fc9d6bbd0] that would make podcasting a tune OK, so long as you didn't apply effects to it, talk over it, etc.
  19. avatar DuncanDisorderly
    [quote:0ca4bb99e1="fastfude"][quote:0ca4bb99e1="Nocarsgo"]However, unless the local bands are signed up to PRS, there's no point is there?[/quote:0ca4bb99e1] I suppose technically unless the bands explicitly give you permission, you shouldn't be using any of their music in a podcast. Which is why the traditional copyright model can be a lose-lose for small/independent musicians trying to get their music heard and for the small/independent media outlets trying to play their tunes.

    If more local bands licensed a song or two each under a CC license (eg [url=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/]BY-NC-ND[/url]), it would free up podcasters to include those songs without worry, thus opening the possibility of their music being played all over the world. Jonathan Coulton goes [url=http://www.jonathancoulton.com/store/downloads/]several steps further with his CC endeavours[/url].[/quote:0ca4bb99e1]

    I would go as far to say that bands should have one or two CC tracks linked to their myspace etc to download as it would no doubt encourage more exposure for them - most people aren't taking advantage of what is an awesome resource.
  20. avatar Lap Dog Shuffle
    [quote:ae24856bc3="Elms"]You can get quotes to license a lot of Snow Patrol tracks through : [url]http://www.ricall.com[/url]

    They also have the option to give you a list of similar sounding tracks, many of which are available to license straight away for a set fee (I think its £495 for web use). So if something [i:ae24856bc3]that sounds a bit like[/i:ae24856bc3] Snow Patrol would do you could always look for a similar track that has a long enough intrumental section or an in instrumental version available.[/quote:ae24856bc3]Cheers Elms, I'll check it out.
  21. avatar my-angel-rocks
    [quote:3953eeea6a="fastfude"]Not sure really, the FAQ only confuses me further[/quote:3953eeea6a]

    Hmm, indeed. I shall have to ask my lawyer friend who specialises in CC licenses and other issues when i next see him.
  22. avatar DonkeyZSP
    regarding the guy asking about the panic dots podcast...

    i was talking to rik and he said "if you wanna know about it email richard.crothers@gmail.com "

    just lettin ya know :)
  23. avatar Nocarsgo
    I was actually going to email him tonight, but thank you very much :D