Your situation seems to be a very small edge case: it is legal to distribute both the audio and the video for free separately, but it is not legal to distribute them combined (due to synch rights). In almost all other cases, it is either a) legal to distribute the audio and video combined, since the audio is entirely in the public domain, or b) it is illegal to distribute the audio for free whether it is combined with the video or not. With a), there are no problems. With b), you would have to get everyone who downloads/buys your video to also legally acquire the audio separately, which is a huge hassle that few people are willing to do. To alleviate this, you could buy CDs off-the-shelf and distribute them with your movie; this will be legal thanks to first-sale doctrine [1], confirmed most recently by Vernor v Autodesk [2]. Even this way, it's painful and CDs may cost too much to make reselling worthwhile.
>From what I can see of your description, almost all cases are served well by combining the audio and video prior to distribution. If there are more common cases where on-the-fly syncing software would be worthwhile, please let me know. I really do want to understand if this software would be useful. Denver 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine 2. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080523-court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.html On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Nina Paley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Denver, > > THERE IS AN INCENTIVE! > > Independent filmmakers will be all over this, starting with me. Independents > can release content sans DRM, even if corporations won't. If you build it, > they will come. > > "Sita Sings the Blues" is a damn viable way to start this. The film is in > much demand, it's going to over 80 film festivals and more contacting us > every day, it's won major awards. > http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/ > The film already has lots of press (BBC World, WIRED, Variety, Premiere, > tons more around the world) and lots more press opps on the way - so many > I'm turning down interviews for lack of time. But if this player were > available, allowing me to release the film this new way, I'd be promoting > the heck out of the player and release at every opportunity. And I would > only be the first. Lots of other independent filmmakers will jump on this > once they understand. > > I'll release everything sans DRM, of course, like any respectable artist > would. It would be totally legal. > > We CAN do something about this. > > --Nina > > On Sep 6, 2008, at 12:47 PM, Denver Gingerich wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Nina Paley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> I have this crazy idea for delivering a blow against synch licensing. >>> The article has a lot of hypertext, so it's best to read at >>> >>> http://blog.ninapaley.com/2008/09/05/the-bright-side-of-the-dark-side-of-the-rainbow/ >>> This idea will need a lot of help and collaboration to work, but if it >>> does, >>> it has a lot of potential. >>> Thoughts? Ideas? Help? >> >> The main issue with making an open source player to synchronize audio >> and video from different sources is that most legally-acquired audio >> and video sources have DRM. There is no technical barrier to breaking >> these DRM schemes (pretty much every scheme out there has been >> broken), but the laws of the United States and many other countries >> make it illegal to create software to break DRM and to distribute >> software that breaks DRM. >> >> So it's a nice idea, but until we have more audio and video sources >> legally available in DRM-free formats, there is not a lot of incentive >> to create such a program. As an open source developer, this hurts me >> deeply, but there's not much I can do about it until governments stop >> providing legal protection for DRM. >> >> Denver > > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
