The Law and AMVs

Undertow · Post by **Undertow** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:05 pm

Kalium wrote:Don't neglect to mention that:
A) we don't make money from this (with a few rare exceptions).
and
B) AMVs do not cause lost sales.

I know, it would even improve sales, i got hooked on about 10 different anime, and that's only because i've seen them in AMVs. And buying anime for making AMVs would only improve the income of the distributors

TaranT · Post by **TaranT** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:18 pm

VegettoEX summed it up, but if you need more:
EFF Fair Use FAQ
EFF IP Issues Page

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:34 pm

Just so everyone knows, according to international copyright law, when using motion based imagery it is illegal to alter the image in any way unless you own the domestic rights. This includes editing. Haven't we been through this? It's stated plainly at the beginning or ending of all tracks on most DVDs or within the packaging.

-N

Wheee_It's_Me! · Post by **Wheee_It's_Me!** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:59 pm

Boy there seems to be a lot of confusion around here. First of all, CONTEXT plays a VERY important part of copyright law. For example, what you were saying Nightowl, that applies more to like plagiarism than what we do. (ie altering a work and then calling it your own). A very good example is that one Russian writer who started writing these books under the title "Harriet Grotter" that, hrmmm, bore a striking resemblance to Harry Potter.

Furthermore, it's not really "against the law". It's not something you can go to jail for per se (at least in the US), you can get SUED for it, however that's entirely up to the copyright holder and even then it's no guarantee. The biggest problem for any copyright holder is that they have to prove that it somehow damaged them. And it's NOT about the sheer numbers, although the news media loves to parade those numbers around. Most of the time to come up with those numbers they simply take the number of presumed pirated copies and then multiply them by the retail price to come up with the figure for how much financial damage has supposedly done. THAT DOES NOT HOLD UP IN A COURT ROOM! Simply because you do not have a right to MAKE money, you only have a right to TRY and make money. In other words if no one is willing or has any intention of paying for your crap, then their right to TRY and make money hasn't been infringed upon.

The way the media often tries to portray copyright law is the equivalent of pissing in a can, standing out around the park and then DEMANDING that every person who walks by and looks at it pays you $5. They're not taking the original can, they're just looking at it, however not one of them is gonna think that the experience is WORTH the $5.

BOOTLEGGING is the REALLY bad thing and it is the easiest to prove. Simply put, ANY money you make off bootlegging is money that the original copyright holder SHOULD have made (barring advertising and production costs). If you're bootlegging, you're fucking up. If you're making AMVs without the intent to try and:

a. call the work your own (beyond the editing)

or

b. trying to use the work to make money

then you are not really breaking ANY laws. Granted you ~could~ in theory get sued, however the likelihood that the copyright holder would actually win is not very high. In most cases they try and use scare tactics in order to settle out of court. That's why they like to go after college kids, cause it's easy to scare the administration with bad PR and then it's either settle or get expelled (although if they're not careful one of these days someone is gonna counter sue them like that one lady did, the one who accused the RIAA of racketeering).

The biggest problem for any copyright holder regarding AMVs is that, simply put, they boost sales. It'd be WAY too easy to prove in court that AMVs are basically free advertisement for not only the anime but for the music as well. At the very most they might be able to sue the .org and force them to say include a link to the official sites of any music artists or anime series used in submitted AMVs, but that's about the best they could do.

Mr Pilkington · Post by **Mr Pilkington** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:16 pm

Wheee_It's_Me! wrote:Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaakoopaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasputnikaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaI'm Tony Hawk, accept me! whaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Who gives a shit? If you gonna edit amvs you obviously don't give a rat's ass for the law anyway. There is no point in trying to argue this fact. And arguing against it is twice as dumb. If you don't like the whole "legality" of it leave. No one has a gun to your head telling you to stay. Simply put, no need for a long drawn out whine-fest.

Pyle · Post by **Pyle** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:33 pm

The Fair Use Copyright Rule of 1976 allows us to use them as long as they don't bring in profit, I believe.

But, as Dokidoki put "Research: It's what's for dinner".

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Hopefully I didn't just make a complete fool out of myself.

x_rex30 · Post by **x_rex30** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 7:07 am

AMV creators need source footage witch makes them more tempted to go out and buy DVDs. That's a good argument right there. If they started cracking down on AMV creators, anime sales would drop dramatically.

XspitfireDemonX · Post by **XspitfireDemonX** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:43 pm

Correct me if i'm wrong, but we'er not violating any copyright law when we give credit to the audio, and anime in the credits. If we give that then we arn't calling any of it our own, and not breaking any rules

Jnzk · Post by **Jnzk** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:44 pm

XspitfireDemonX wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong, but we'er not violating any copyright law when we give credit to the audio, and anime in the credits. If we give that then we arn't calling any of it our own, and not breaking any rules

You're wrong.

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:17 pm

Pyle - that was created for educational use and does not apply to re-edited material (i.e. use a scene from a copy-written DVD in a short film, edited in, it's illegal and cannot be shown at festivals - technically, this this is what AMVs do to a lesser extent). It always has been and always will be illegal. The only difference is we, as creators, and they, as manufacturers, could give a shit.

Most fair-use argument does not hold up in court. However, I doubt any of us will be taken to court any time soon (at least for that).

-N