Copyright law infringement

[lbbb]

This is for the State of Connecticut.

I am getting married this year, and one of the things that I am looking into is wedding favors. Something that I came across in the magazine is the creation of wedding CD's. These CD's supposedly contain wedding music from the ceremony and the reception. A DJ will create a master disc and using the state of the art CD burners, you can create your own CD using other artists' material.

I have been checking some legal sites and haven't gotten a clear answer. Is it legal or moral to distribute these CD favors to guests? Is it infringing on the rights of the artists who created this music?

 

[racer72]

Distributing free CD's of copyrighted music would be considered beyond the scope of personal use and it technically illegal. But then you would have to consider the odds of getting caught, probably pretty small. As long as someone doesn't try to sell the CD on Ebay, you should be safe.

 

[T-DESIGNER]

I am not an attorney, and RACER72 did not address the moral
issue. If I understand copyright laws, it is illegal to copy and
reproduce artwork for nonpersonal use. It is especially frowned
upon when such copying/reproduction is used for financial gain.

Your situation is akin to speeding. RACER72, in effect, is saying:
"Going 5 miles per hour over the speed limit in a 70 MPH speed
zone is technically illegal, but the police are most likely not going
to stop and ticket you." Is it moral to drive 5 miles over the
speed limit, but not 10 miles over?

Let's go back to copyrights and your question. The first thought
that came to my mind was: "What is the definition of copy and
reproduction?" In America, it is a tradition of the bride's parents
to "foot" the wedding bill for the couple being married, and many
of those weddings pay singers and musicians to "reproduce"
copyrighted lyrics and/or musical compositions via musical
instruments and/or voice. However, the U.S. Copyright Laws
state the definition of "copies" as:

""Copies" are material objects, other than phonorecords, in
which a work is fixed by any method now known or later
developed, and from which the work can be perceived,
reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or
with the aid of a machine or device. The term "copies" includes
the material object, other than a phonorecord, in which the work
is first fixed."

The definition of "copies", as defined by the U.S. Copyright
laws, seems to indicate wedding musicians and singers are
not in violation of U.S. Copyright laws. However, what about
wedding videos? Are the musicans, singers, and/or "
videographers" infringing on copyright laws, especially when
several copies are made and sent to various family members?

I find it difficult to distinguish between wedding videos and
wedding CD favors!

I'm not finished. Are weddings strictly legal in nature? Many,
if not most weddings, are held in churches/synagogues/etc,
and weddings can be viewed as a religious ceremony. What
about receptions? Are they a religious ceremony? Are wedding
vows the only part of a wedding that can be considered as
religious in nature? If weddings are not performed in a
church/synagogue/etc and/or not performed by a clergyman/etc.,
can they no longer be considered a religious ceremony? If a
non-clergyman prays outside of a church, does the prayer have any less meaning?

If one believes in the concept of "separation of church and state",
one might argue it is morally okay and legally okay to do what
you are asking. But, you must ask yourself this question? Do
you feel you will be asking anyone, on your behalf, to steal what
is not rightfully theirs/yours?

Just before Christmas, my brother posted, on his personal
website. a photograph he had taken of our cousin. I down-
loaded the photograph to my computer, and added cartoons
and captions, and printed the results to give my cousin and
my brother. At the time, I did not feel guilty about doing so,
until I saw the reaction on my brother's face when he saw the
"doctored" picture, and after I started learning about copyright
laws.

Next Christmas, if I see another picture on my brother's website,
should I ask him, "Hey Good Brother, can I download a picture
off your website to give you for Christmas?"

Hope your wedding is beautiful!

 

[reboog]

A few comments to T-Designer's posts:

It is true that many weddings may pay singers / musicians to reproduce copyrighted music.

The part you left out that any venue that has live music such as this must pay a licensing fee to BMI and ASCAP. That licensing money, in turn, goes out to the people who wrote the songs and the companies that publish the songs.

The same applies if the wedding has a DJ.

I'm not sure how wedding videos fit into the picture. A video definitely constitutes a fixed object and is therefore open to copyright laws. So, whether or not the video is violating any laws would depend on what is on it and its distribution.

Assuming that the video includes footage of the band / DJ and includes music that the Band / DJ was making, it should fall under copyright laws. ( If it has no music, none of this applies).

Making 'several' copies of the video and giving it to family members probably falls under the fair use clause. Making a copy of the video and giving it to all 200 wedding guests probably won't.

J

 

[T-DESIGNER]

The definition of "publicity" in the Copyright Laws says:

"A public performance or display of a work does not of itself
constitute publication.

To perform or display a work "publicly" means-

(1) to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any
place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal
circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or....."

The above means to me that musicans and/or singers performing
in a wedding ceremony and/or wedding reception do not have to
receive permission from the BMI or ASCAP. You would think
the same applied to playbacks of pre-recorded materials, even
if the playbacks were done by a professional rather than an
amateur. Someone else may disagree with my interpretation.

I don't think weddings fall under fair use guidelines because
of religious purposes; i.e., it appears religious purposes do not
fall under fair use guidelines. I don't see anything in the
Copyright Laws about the definition of personal use and that
personal use falls under fair use guidelines. Therefore, the courts
must have decided that personal use falls under the fair use
guidelines.

If wedding videos do fall under fair use guidelines and since
a non-public performance extends to acquaintances, the
courts could rule (or have ruled) that wedding videos could be
distributed (and even sold to recover costs) to family and any
social acquaintances, where such wedding videos were done
to record the ceremony and reception rather than for the
purpose of recording and distribution of any incidental musical
performances or playbacks. You would think the issue of
wedding videos, with "The Sound of Music", has already
been brought before the courts.

As RACER72 stated and REBOOG has implied, I suspect the
courts would disallow the distriubtion of wedding CDs, which
contains copyrighted songs and/or music. Theoretically,
you are taking away from possible sales and/or royalty fees,
which brings up another question. Can a copyright licensee
(one who does not own the copyright, but has been granted
permission to sell copyrighted material) claim infringement
and/or be awarded damages for infringement?