So the RIAA is suing wedding photographers...

[DMKA]

For having taken wedding videos with copyrighted music playing in the background...

How does this make you feel?

[Jessweeee♪]

I makes me feel sad.

[Old Manus]

It's no different to any video on Youtube with copyrighted music playing over it. In fact, it's exactly the same thing.

[chionos]

It makes me feel justified. And it makes me appreciate bands like Radiohead all the more.
I understand that businesses have to protect their vested interests, but the recording industry has always been pretty heavy handed and sometimes quite silly about how it treats its customers (like 1. suing a mom for "vicariously" downloading music that her daughter downloaded through kazaa. 2. contacting a little girl at school by impersonating her grandmother. 3. Threatening a dead Vietnam War vet's family within a week of his death that their suit against him would be continued with the family 4. Suing a homeless man 5. Suing a dead 82 year old woman who had never owned a computer. etc etc etc etc etc). It's karma at work. If the RIAA doesn't figure out a better way to interact with consumers, it will end up crippled in just a few years. This photographer bullcrap is just another example of how they're not getting it.

[Shlup]

Allow me to be the one to state the obvious: smurf this.

[Miriel]

As much as I think the RIAA are a bunch of dicks, Joe Simon, the videographer who was sued, used a coldplay song for Tony Romo's wedding video. And that video got picked up by a bunch of news outlets and blogs. The RIAA has gone after people for much less, so I can't believe how careless he was with such a high profile client. And the guy isn't just a nobody, he's a pretty big name in the wedding industry and he charges like $10,000 for his work. He shoulda been waaaay more careful, because you know, RIAA are dicks, or he should have just used licensed music.

[Shlup]

Are you suggesting that I should've actually read the article? Because it looked kind of long and the video was already stupid.

[chionos]

No no,
RIAA: gripe
is sufficient.
Reading's for the nerds.

[Mirage]

This is actually entirely fair, I think. These persons are using copyrighted works to actually make a product that they profit from. It only makes sense that they should be paying royalties for it.

[chionos]

This is actually entirely fair, I think. These persons are using copyrighted works to actually make a product that they profit from. It only makes sense that they should be paying royalties for it.

Perhaps. However, the RIAA doesn't sue and ask for royalties. The RIAA's suehappy even if they're sometimes justified in making claims. I am quite surprised that the photographer would so blatantly use the music in this way though, especially an established one with someone like Romo. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.

[Del Murder]

The RIAA is dicks, but their business model is pretty sound. By suing over every little thing you learn not to mess with them. This videographer should have known better, especially with a high profile client like Tony Romo!

[chionos]

Except people still download more music than they actually buy. They just don't use Kazaa.

[Del Murder]

They'll get you all eventually.

[NorthernChaosGod]

They'll get you all eventually.

Nope.jpg

[Mirage]

This is actually entirely fair, I think. These persons are using copyrighted works to actually make a product that they profit from. It only makes sense that they should be paying royalties for it.

Perhaps. However, the RIAA doesn't sue and ask for royalties. The RIAA's suehappy even if they're sometimes justified in making claims. I am quite surprised that the photographer would so blatantly use the music in this way though, especially an established one with someone like Romo. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.

So you're saying you agree, right? The photographer was a retard for using copyrighted materials in his own for-profit works. I can be lenient when it comes to non-profit use, but this is everything but non-profit.