Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Jesus gideongallery. You get stupider and stupider.
I AM a musician. I have played clubs since 1978 and know for a FACT you can NOT use music like that. You have to pay BMI/ASCAP just to have a freakin' dj or a jukebox in the club.
|
i know that, hense why i mentioned the promotional use licience.
Quote:
If you think for one second that anybody can make a porn movie and put an artists music as the backing track to it...I don't know what to say to you.
Don't you understand that the artist has to be paid for that?
|
i never said they didn't it if the music studios licienced the content for porn videos and RK took it it would be a completely different issue.
copyright is being used as a censorship tool here, not to protect the income of the copyright holder
Quote:
|
Not only that...but they can also decline their work to be used in a project that they don't want to be associated with.
|
commentary, and parody make fun of the copyrighted work, they rarely get permission
prince didn't want his music used in the baby dancing video
do you think micheal moore could make fun of george bush if he need to get permission to use his news clips to do it.
or make fun of the nra when he used parts of charlton hestons speaches in his movies
you clearly want copyrght to have censorship power, the lenz vs universal proves that it doesn't
Quote:
|
Fuck. Do you think Iron Man the movie just used "Iron Man" the Black Sabbath song without obtaining permission first and then paying for it?
|
wow trying to use an example where the action would cause economic loss (because muscians do licience the music to movies) to justify using copyright as a censorship tool (no use in porn)
Quote:
I said it once, and I'll say it again...gideongallery is the dumbest person I've ever tried to have a conversation with. Instead of taking each thing on a case-by-case basis...he just has the kneejerk reaction to defend EVERY case of stealing another person's work.
Loser.
|
i do take cases on a case by case basis (see above)
you clearly want copyright to give you absolute control which it never intend to be (hense fair use )
you twist everything to fit this stupid view.
hell you tried to argue that disney snow white was based on the "traditional" snow white stories, even though even wikipedia showed that original printing had evil mother as the villian. The step mother aspect was a change made in a later revision BY THE BROTHERS GRIMM.
disney admitted they used the grimm fairytales, there was no way that used the original stoires since that had the mother not the step mother as the villian and yet you keep argueing your bogus statement to try and justify your bogus position.