Meteo Xavier Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 Don't do it or you could go to jail and pay a 250 000$ fine. Come on, just do it, nobody will notice/investigate/care at all. May I frame this post as the craziest I'm likely to see on here for months to come? Still not quite sure what everyone's LOLigagging about, this topic seems pretty civil right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelCityOutlaw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 lol this thread too.Don't do it or you could go to jail and pay a 250 000$ fine. Come on, just do it, nobody will notice/investigate/care at all. Most likely this. I highly doubt anyone at all would care about you using chiptune sound effects. This thread is more or less a reason for the legal buffs to come out of the woodwork and throw around all the lingo when all you want is a simple yes or no answer. The oldschool chiptune sound fx have been used in remixes, some songs on the radio and have even been available for download on countless sites for over a decade...notice that Nintendo etc. doesn't seem to care? Go to youtube (or even here) and you will find countless covers, remixes, dances and such of VGM. If Nintendo, Sega etc. are willing to let things like OCR and youtube carry on using their music, something far more important, what makes anyone think they give two shits about 20 year old sound effects that serve them almost no purpose today? EDIT: I realize this sounds kinda hostile in a way. Not supposed to be hostile, just the way I see it. Edit 2: Another question is..are you famous enough for them to even notice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelCityOutlaw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 The best thing you can do I would think is to phone and/or email the companies who own the sounds. Ask them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederic Petitpas Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 [........] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteo Xavier Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 The best thing you can do I would think is to phone and/or email the companies who own the sounds.Ask them. My experience with big companies are they're impossible to get a hold of, and even if you do, business these days will copyright the vagrant dog shit on the lawn of their accounting office if they think it protects their brand, so even if it's perfectly legal, I will get a resounding NO and they will know to look for me to do it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlouge82 Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 My experience with big companies are they're impossible to get a hold of, and even if you do, business these days will copyright the vagrant dog shit on the lawn of their accounting office if they think it protects their brand, so even if it's perfectly legal, I will get a resounding NO and they will know to look for me to do it anyway. True story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 olrouge82: Let me just say I'm really enjoying this conversation. I went to school for music business and I like honing my knowledge with this kind of academic discussion, especially when the result of the exchange can potentially help someone! Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but I don't really understand your opposition to remixes on OCR being labelled as "derivative works," since that actually affords them copyright protection. You may be misinterpreting me. What I mean is that I don't believe ALL OC ReMixes would qualify as derivative works. As you mentioned later in your post, a compulsory license is contingent on the licensee creating a version of a song that doesn't change the basic melody or character of the work. I would say that many ReMixes do not, in fact, change the basic melody or character of the work. Some are more on the conservative side and could be considered adaptations of this kind as opposed to derivative works. If you think about all the great cover songs you know, how many of them stick 100% to the original and how many actually deviate a bit with some new flourishes, rhythm, harmony, instrumentation, etc.? There are certainly ReMixes that could be argued either way. In any case, OCR remixes are indeed derivative works, meaning that the original aspects of their arrangements are copyrightable, but they are non-infringing because (as mentioned earlier), they fall well within fair use protections. Well, fair use is always on a case-by-case basis and very subjective... while we strongly believe that what we do falls within those protections, it is impossible to say with legal certainty due to the lack of a bright-line rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlouge82 Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 You may be misinterpreting me. What I mean is that I don't believe ALL OC ReMixes would qualify as derivative works. As you mentioned later in your post, a compulsory license is contingent on the licensee creating a version of a song that doesn't change the basic melody or character of the work. I would say that many ReMixes do not, in fact, change the basic melody or character of the work. Some are more on the conservative side and could be considered adaptations of this kind as opposed to derivative works. If you think about all the great cover songs you know, how many of them stick 100% to the original and how many actually deviate a bit with some new flourishes, rhythm, harmony, instrumentation, etc.? Gotcha. I was operating under the assumption that straight up covers were generally frowned upon here, but now that you mention it, there are some very conservative mixes that would probably not qualify as derivatives. Well, fair use is always on a case-by-case basis and very subjective... while we strongly believe that what we do falls within those protections, it is impossible to say with legal certainty due to the lack of a bright-line rule. True enough, especially with how unpredictable judges are. However, the non-profit aspect of the website should all but convince 99% of judges that this is fair use. That last factor is typically considered the strongest in determining whether something is fair use (although the other three are certainly necessary). Considering that OCR is a non-profit organization that seeks to transform and expand upon copyrighted material, not compete with it, I would say that it embodies the spirit of what fair use was designed to protect and encourage. EDIT: olrouge82: Let me just say I'm really enjoying this conversation. I went to school for music business and I like honing my knowledge with this kind of academic discussion, especially when the result of the exchange can potentially help someone! Ditto. I don't have an undergraduate degree in a hard science (engineering, chemistry, etc), so I can't get admitted to the patent bar, but I've taken several courses in IP law, and I find it very interesting. I don't practice in it (I'd apparently rather deal in the most toxic and soul-crushing of all areas of law -- family law), but I do enjoy academic discussions and studies of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelCityOutlaw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 Well, I just shot an email off to Nintendo about the subject. I'll let you know if I get any answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteo Xavier Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 Well, I just shot an email off to Nintendo about the subject.I'll let you know if I get any answers. ***dammit, this is what I was trying to avoid. You didn't mention me by name did you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlouge82 Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 Well, I just shot an email off to Nintendo about the subject.I'll let you know if I get any answers. Seriously, are you just trying to be an ass? Nintendo's going to respond the way any content owner would - MINE MINE MINE!! You can't get a factual or fair answer on the issue from them or any other major content owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelCityOutlaw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 ***dammit, this is what I was trying to avoid. You didn't mention me by name did you? of course not I'm not THAT stupid. I just wanna see if they say anything. You wanna know if and how you can use the FX right? Basically I just asked if there was a person wanting to use their oldschool sound effects in the artist's original music, what is required to do so? They have a specific email section where you can ask these copyright kinds of questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelCityOutlaw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 ""Nintendo" is a registered trademark of Nintendo of America Inc. Nintendo owns extensive intellectual property rights in all of its products, including video game systems, game titles, characters, game software, graphics, artwork, and screen shots. Nintendo also retains rights in content on Nintendo's web sites, including articles, artwork, screen shots and other files. Trademarks and copyrights for third-party games and characters are owned by the companies that market or license those products. While we are grateful for all the requests for permission to use Nintendo properties, we are not able to grant such requests. We receive thousands of requests and we do not have adequate staffing to review them all. Therefore, our general policy is to decline requests for permission for the use of Nintendo properties. Although we are not able to grant permission, use of Nintendo's properties without formal permission by Nintendo may still be allowed under the relevant laws of the particular jurisdiction involved. Thus, we encourage you to seek your own legal counsel if you have any questions about whether your particular proposed use is permitted without Nintendo's authorization. Nintendo cannot provide legal advice. We appreciate your support. That's on their site. I have a feeling I'll be hearing nothing back. Oh well, I tried. Good luck with the music though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XZero Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 As a lawyer, I'd probably argue that the use of sound effects is transformative in nature and thus not a violation if they are used non-extensively in the context of an original track. However, I am (a) licensed in only one state, ( unable at present to represent private clients due to working for a judge, and © unable to provide any true "legal advice" as a result of both of the above. My gut feeling is that if you used it, unless it was something hugely popular, Nintendo wouldn't notice and even if it did, it has infinitely better things to do than worry about that. You want to use the Ocarina of Time Hyrule Field Theme as the primary backing track of your top-40 song? Yeah, they'll be all over you. You want to use some old sfx for a song designed for a smaller audience? They probably don't give two shits. Legally, I'd suggest you don't just because I don't know if there's any real precedent to say my legal theory for why you could would even work, but pragmatically, there's unlikely to be any backlash if you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteo Xavier Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 I would've preferred you didn't jump the gun there and just leave the discussion here, but your helpfulness and enthusiasm is appreciated all the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.