artjunky,
Was the demo reel thing lifted in the last re-write of the laws? It has been a few years since I took Copywrite Law classes and I know it was an exception then.
as far as I’m aware there is no exception for ‘demo reels’ and never has been. I suspect that your instructor may have misunderstood the law.
Just to be clear - I am not a lawyer, I just happen to be someone who has done a great deal of reading on copyright law both for personal and professional interest.
Here is another thread you might find of interest
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/member.php?u=1921
It’s amazing, I remember doing my first demo with music I mixed in ACID and was told it wasn’t professional enough. Use music that is being mixed on the station I’m applying for I was told.
It might be possible that the stations have an exemption worked out with the copyright holders (although I suspect not). The more likely case is again the practical colliding with the strictly legal interpretation.
My memory isn’t the best as far as examples, but I do remember the whole Coolio/Weird Al thing cracking me up for a while.
Actually Weird Al’s work has generally been parodys which are a different ball of wax. While he does in fact seek permission of the copyright holders he probably would be in the legal clear to not do so. Also he probably does so to forestall the hassle of asserting fair use if he were sued.
A point that should be made - ‘fair use’ is an ‘affirmative defense’ - that means that if you are sued - as your defense you can raise a claim of fair use . So even when your usage may constitute fair use, the copyright holder is perfectly within their rights to sue and force you to prove it in a court of law. So even when you are certain that your use would constitute fair use it is still best to ask permission.
One other thing, what about covers then? Has that changed, too? Or does the venue still pay ASCAP and everything is all right. I just can’t see all these little local venues getting permission for every song a small band might play in their place.
I just checked to confirm my recollection,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/12/03/BUGL13CH5H26.DTL
Essentially bars and other such venues are required to purchase a license from ASCAP otherwise they are infringing.
The author though appears to have confused trademark law and copyright law elsewhere in the article though - ie
Legally, if a copyright is not enforced within a reasonable amount of time, the copyright holder loses the right to enforce it.
(that is a provision of trademark law not copyright law…)
LetterRip