Anime Expo 2011 Anime Music Video Contest rules are up!

[madmallard]

For those of you doing the math the cash prizing comes to 10K. This is in addition to that crappy Naruto figure you didn't want.

It has taken us many many years, to get this contest the respect it deserves and to be treated as more than the black sheep. Now we are the cool Black Sheep.

I'm troubled by implication that cash is supposed to equal manifesting respect.

[outlawed]

For those of you doing the math the cash prizing comes to 10K. This is in addition to that crappy Naruto figure you didn't want.
It has taken us many many years, to get this contest the respect it deserves and to be treated as more than the black sheep. Now we are the cool Black Sheep.

I'm troubled by implication that cash is supposed to equal manifesting respect.

I actually took his statement to mean the contest had no respect from AX management and now does. This new respect by AX management has resulted in cash money prizes.

[madmallard]

Which means that at least in part, the symbol currency of respect to AX management is in fact monetary. If having their respect means they grant you cash, that means to them respect manifests itself in the form of cash.

[outlawed]

Which means that at least in part, the symbol currency of respect to AX management is in fact monetary. If having their respect means they grant you cash, that means to them respect manifests itself in the form of cash.

Ah we're on the same page. I thought you were talking about them trying to buy creator respect ...probably because it just looks bad to me personally especially with the legal rights clause in their rules. I once legitamtely thought about entering AX but once they started getting that much lawyer biznas up in the rules I can't be involved. I just can't risk that something goes wrong and I get thrown to the wolves. IMO if a con is going to run an AMV contest then they should be willing to bear the burden if a guest goes apeshit about content (which is the most likely thing to happen). I guess my personal feeling is if lawyers are concerned about legal implications for the con to this extent then it's probably best not to have it at all. That said I'm glad there are conventions out there that don't have as much to lose as something like AX and thus don't have lawyers heavily involved in the con operations.

This is my personal take on the rules. If that rules clause is something that doesn't concern people then by all means enter the contest. They definitely have a badass viewing based on what people say. I won't take that chance though.

[madmallard]

nah, i recognise your devil-advocacy, its cool. Seperate issue for me.

But the overall vision I have of fandom and its appeal is being surrounded by compulsive talent, not necessarily solicited talent. (At least not by money) My view may be colored by the length of time I've been involved in AMV fandom tho...

It just doesn't sit well with me that either or both the judges/organizers of the contest and AX management are making the connection of cash monies to respect. Beyond that, I'll just have to wait and see.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Between this sort of thing, the thing over fan art @ Otakon a few years back, and the big brouhaha at an international cosplay summit event about 4 or 5 years ago (where the creator of a manga flipped their shit over cosplay infringing on their copyrights), I'd say there's a point where a con can get so big that it implodes with the weight of :tinfoil: from the legal team.

I've heard this is why most cons only ever consult legal advice for looking over their contracts and leave them out of the rest of it.

[outlawed]

So what are you asking? Is it that you want AX to indemnify you or something? Because no convention will do that.

Not hold us liable? That's how I see it now and that means if something happens regarding an entry I sent then it's on my head and AX is indemnified.

That doesn't alleviate 100% of the legal issues, but it's closer to being legal than posting on YouTube or even the org.

Illegal distribution/screening of copyrighted content is not my worry and I don't see a way a creator could be held liable for that at a convention. Illegal derivative work is what I'm worried about with that rule. Everyone here always assumes creators like AMVs. What happens when one of them is highly offended by what you did with their footage?

At any rate there are only a couple cons I know of for sure that involve lawyers in their rules or have clauses similar to this. The AX one is the strongest I know of especially because as BasharOfTheAges pointed out we all know we are lying to that rule and this includes the people running the AX AMV contest.

I like how everyone gets wound up about mostly meaningless bullshit or drama like last year but when it comes down to the elephant in the room the masses just don't get it.

[Castor Troy]

2500 dollars can buy a lot of peanuts.

[XStylus]

So what are you asking? Is it that you want AX to indemnify you or something? Because no convention will do that.

Not hold us liable? That's how I see it now and that means if something happens regarding an entry I sent then it's on my head and AX is indemnified.

So you are asking for AX to indemnify you.

If you're uncomfortable with the fact that a convention is not willing to eat a bullet for you over your video, then you're doing the right thing by not entering, but you might want to think twice about entering any other convention's AMV event because the story is the same with them as well.

This rule is nothing new, by the way. It's been in place for as long as I can recall.

Michael said he'll review the rule for future years, but what do you expect it to say? I don't expect the gist of it to change, that being that your video is your responsibility.

[madmallard]

regardless of what either your positions are, AX can't indemnify for broadcasting it, its their responsibility when they exhibit materials.

Some may argue that an ASCAP will cover that indemnification, but the point of the matter is to screen it shifts the burden to AX unquestionably as the screener.

If a problem arose, and a copyright holder demands retribution, AX's arguement that their 'rules' state their 'submissions must conform to certain copyright standards, and its not their fault the creator didn't follow them' won't hold up to scrutiny.

-----

The editors can't indemnify their distribution of the video to the contest, but unless they are directly part of the production team of AX that actually screens it, they are not part of the other side of the equasion that a con would be.