4 ms·

Dumb question - when someone films outside in public, why is audio of music from a passing car considered a copyright issue but video of a passerby in a Mickey

• londons_explore 7y ago
  If that t-shirt was in a film, you can bet there would be someone in the legal department getting the right permissions...
  • fenomas 7y ago
    Presumably the same would be true of music in a film, so I'm not sure how it bears on my question.
• throwaway2048 7y ago
  Just because youtube chooses to penalize it, doesn't mean a court would agree its a copyright violation. There is virtually zero chance something that isn't free use 100% in the clear.
• ecspike 7y ago
  It's not that the Mickey Mouse shirt isn't, it's just that companies don't go after it (at least on the small scale in public spaces). Both are fair use. I think it might be lobby stuff and how they are consumed. Great music can transform / enhance a pivotal moment in a movie whereas the presence of an Apple logo or Mickey Mouse shirt, not so much. Companies can and have sued for licensing fees or if they feel their product logo was shown and misrepresented in film. Back to the t-shirt example, on the movie/funded production scale, a lot of this is prevented by the wardrobe department making sure extras are not clothed in licensed stuff.