The truth always comes out in the wash ...

[snyderman]

spent a lot of time shooting my local high-school's basketball program last fall/winter. Put about 175 shots of the players, coaches, crowd and a few band and cheerleader pics into a beautiful 10.5 minute Photoshop presentation.

Had my HS soph (plays football but not basketball) help me with music for the presentation. Stuff like Green Day, Blink 182 etc. Delivered one heck of a nice presentation to the Varsity HS coach and Athletic Director.

Fast-forward from Jan to two weeks ago: Ran into 2 of the players while the kids were doing physicals for fall sports next year. Seems they got to see the presentation, but without the soundtrack. Struck me as kind of odd.

Told both kids that I wanted them to have the version I intended for them to have. The deal with the school was I'd provide a master copy and they'd dup and pass them out to the kids.

Fast-forward to last night. Get a call from a mom of one of the boys I saw at school 2 weeks ago. She spilled the beans that the school didn't approve 100% of the music so they decided to show the presentation without sound--pics only.

That parent and student are dropping by my home this evening to pick up a copy of the presentation in original form that they can upload, dupe and share with any team player that wants a copy.

I understand the school's stance. If ONE parent raised an issue about the line in one of the songs about 'drinking in the back of an El Camino,' it's one too many. They don't want to accept that kind of risk.

The reality is that this is what kids listen to. The music was chosen for the presentation by a peer of the students who were IN the presentation.

Kind of upset that my first complete body of work was revised by the people representing the subjects of the work. Worse yet, I did this for free.

Oh well. Live and learn.

dave

[tracknut]

This is one of the more ironic posts of the day, it seems.... did you have a license to use the music, or did the school end up removing something they had no license to use anyway?

Dave

[snyderman]

This is one of the more ironic posts of the day, it seems.... did you have a license to use the music, or did the school end up removing something they had no license to use anyway?

Dave

Dave,

Nosir, no license to use the music. But actually, the tracks used were uploaded from CDs that were purchased. The presentation was not sold and I received no compensation for the work, either. It was also not made available for sale to students and/or parents either.

The message I received from the parent was that a line in a song about 'drinking in the back of an El Camino' and another song contained the word 'BS.'

If they feel it was too objectionable to distribute to the kids, that's fine. They should have said so. I would have been fine with that and could have made some adjustments as the coach and A.D. had the finished product weeks before the winter sports banquet.

Just a bit miffed over the whole situation. Thanks for reading and listening.

dave

[Karl Johnston]

It's probably because you were infringing the rights of the musicians, and not the content of the songs.

No license to the music = they could be liable to be sued. Just because you purchase the CD doesn't mean you own the music's rights.

Monetary or not for profit, doesn't matter, sadly, that's probably the reason why they took the music down...one would hope, anyway. If not then perhaps it's against their terms set by the Department Of Education not to solicit music with certain lyrics to their students. Tough, but hey nothing to lose sleep over.

They probably should've contacted you first, but oh well.

Same thing goes for images too, should be noted. If you were to take one of my images and copy it to your commercial (gov't is also classified as commercial where I'm at, so I'm told) website with no credit to me...I could come after you for infringement.

[S.Horton]

I'm pretty sure ASCAP isn't going to care that a private slideshow to students contained the songs.

I think the point is that someone censored it.

[Mike R]

I had the oposite problem, I sell a slide show to the teams I shoot and had to explain why i couldn't use music that the kids listen to and why I pay $40-$60 per song for stuff I could use. (Suddenly my price for a slide show seemed even more resonable.)
The fist response from them was "Who's going to know?" My resposne was "Doesn't matter who will know, It's illegal" they respect that. But Im still careful when using a song with lyrics that someone may be offend with. It only takes one parent for you to lose a job.

[Sauk]

that really sucks, but I believe it is their right to edit what they feel might be offensive :(

[ryant35]

spent a lot of time shooting my local high-school's basketball program last fall/winter. Put about 175 shots of the players, coaches, crowd and a few band and cheerleader pics into a beautiful 10.5 minute Photoshop presentation.

Had my HS soph (plays football but not basketball) help me with music for the presentation. Stuff like Green Day, Blink 182 etc. Delivered one heck of a nice presentation to the Varsity HS coach and Athletic Director.

Fast-forward from Jan to two weeks ago: Ran into 2 of the players while the kids were doing physicals for fall sports next year. Seems they got to see the presentation, but without the soundtrack. Struck me as kind of odd.

Told both kids that I wanted them to have the version I intended for them to have. The deal with the school was I'd provide a master copy and they'd dup and pass them out to the kids.

Fast-forward to last night. Get a call from a mom of one of the boys I saw at school 2 weeks ago. She spilled the beans that the school didn't approve 100% of the music so they decided to show the presentation without sound--pics only.

That parent and student are dropping by my home this evening to pick up a copy of the presentation in original form that they can upload, dupe and share with any team player that wants a copy.

I understand the school's stance. If ONE parent raised an issue about the line in one of the songs about 'drinking in the back of an El Camino,' it's one too many. They don't want to accept that kind of risk.

The reality is that this is what kids listen to. The music was chosen for the presentation by a peer of the students who were IN the presentation.

Kind of upset that my first complete body of work was revised by the people representing the subjects of the work. Worse yet, I did this for free.

Oh well. Live and learn.

dave

That's pretty funny especially here in South Orange County, CA, republican, christian family land at our elementary school's carnival the DJ had play Kid Rock's 'All Summer Long' where he signs something like 'we where drinking different things, we where smoking different things.'

It's a shame they didn't just ask you to change the song.

[jgrussell]

Nosir, no license to use the music. But actually, the tracks used were uploaded from CDs that were purchased. The presentation was not sold and I received no compensation for the work, either. It was also not made available for sale to students and/or parents either. The reason the parent told you (about the content) is silly. But it was illegal, and copyright infringement for sure. Doesn't matter that the CDs were purchased; your purchase doesn't give you the right to republish and redistribute. Doesn't matter that the presentation wasn't sold. Doesn't matter than you weren't paid. Copyright protection means the artist (or artist's agent) and ONLY the artist gets to choose who, how, when, etc., in permitting (or refusing to permit) copying.

So you can feel better now... and I would definitely NOT give the student and parent the CD with the copyright-violating music on it.

[snyderman]

I'm pretty sure ASCAP isn't going to care that a private slideshow to students contained the songs.

I think the point is that someone censored it.

Bingo and exactly. The word from the parent was the sound track was eliminated due to questionable lyrics as initially stated, not that I used songs by Green Day and Blink 182.

dave

[snyderman]

that really sucks, but I believe it is their right to edit what they feel might be offensive :(

Agree and understand. They had 3 weeks to ask for changes/edits. I gladly would have listened to their concerns, understood their position and maybe slipped in music by Barry Manilow and Carpenters in place of Green Day. Not a problem.

dave

[Sauk]

So none of you use music for your slideshows and what not?

I use them for family stuff but that is about it. I have never sold anything with music on it so whatever I guess.

[christyjo2]

Then i have many photographers in my area that are probably violating the law seeing as how they do senior dvd's with music that is popular at the time. A lot of them have done it for years. Either way....Sucks that they edited it without giving you the know about firsthand.

[Faolan]

In the UK you can purchase a licence for film/slideshow DVDs that will allow you to do limited runs of CD/DVDs. It doesn't cost much, I'm sure America would have something similar.

In the UK it's called PRS for music, but the site is down for maintenance.

[birdman59]

I don't want to disrespect what the OP did for the kids at school. He seemed like his heart was in the right place and put a lot of thought into his work.

However...
If you look, you can find loads of posts right here on this forum complaining of exactly the same thing except that it's photos that are used without permission. I mean even the FBI warning on DVD's says "without monetary gain".

Using a photo on a website without permission is the same as using a track from an album and passing it out on a disc. Remember the lady who got fined 1.9 mil for sharing 24 songs?

It seems like an innocent mistake and I'm sure the OP didn't mean any harm. Perhaps some of the incidents reported here are just as innocent. Maybe not.

I'm just saying...

[Thalagyrt]

It's probably because you were infringing the rights of the musicians, and not the content of the songs.

No license to the music = they could be liable to be sued. Just because you purchase the CD doesn't mean you own the music's rights.

Monetary or not for profit, doesn't matter, sadly, that's probably the reason why they took the music down...one would hope, anyway. If not then perhaps it's against their terms set by the Department Of Education not to solicit music with certain lyrics to their students. Tough, but hey nothing to lose sleep over.

They probably should've contacted you first, but oh well.

Same thing goes for images too, should be noted. If you were to take one of my images and copy it to your commercial (gov't is also classified as commercial where I'm at, so I'm told) website with no credit to me...I could come after you for infringement.

That doesn't apply to any form of private performances, which this clearly is. That strictly applies to public performances. In the case of the school using this for a video for the school's internal usage it was private usage and as such a license is not necessary.

Edit: I should clarify, the recording industry only limits performances to the general public, not private. This isn't copyright law, it's the licensing set forth by the industry under their rights through copyright law. They explicitly allow usage in private performances, which grants you an implicit license to use it in such a manner. Public performances are a different beast entirely.