Production Nationals

[tbarker13]

I thought the compilation video was fantastic. Was really sorry to see it go away.

My first thought, when I saw it, was that Paul was a genius for putting it together.

It's the sort of video on YouTube that would have gotten a lot of views over the next year or two.

Let's be clear. There is no one here that doesn't appreciate the work Paul does in producing the videos.

But on this thread, a chunk of the intended audience is offering suggestions on how it could be done even better.

It's up to Paul to decide if he wants to listen to those suggestions or ignore them.

[BritinUSA]

USPSA paid for my hotel at the B2B and Production Nationals in 2013, and I think they did one year for SS nationals but I forget when. All other matches I paid for everything. I started covering matches in 2009, LiveShots debuted in 2012, I've provided LiveShots for 23 matches including 14 Nationals, one IPSC Nationals and a World Shoot.

[zhunter]

I love the videos on Liveshots

[BritinUSA]

I used to compile the videos but it was labor intensive and I could not complete it in a reasonable time as I also had to write an article for these matches or I don't get any payment for my time and effort. My work on each match does not end with the last shot fired, the articles take a lot of my time as I am not a creative writer, I struggle with these write-ups every time.

The article for the Production Nationals will probably be the last one that I write, because I'm not sure what value that they add when viewers can watch the videos instead. If I don't have to spend the countless hours staring at a keyboard with terminal writer's block then I would have that time to compile the videos.

Another option that I have been wanting to try is some method of sorting the videos into various orders and then have some method of playing them automatically one after the other, this would negate the need to compile them and also give viewers the option to sort by competitor or stage number or Hit Factor.

This is one of the reasons why I want to see electronic scoring at all our Nationals so that I can add that Hit Factor to the video button at the range, this allows the viewer to see 'at a glance' who on the Super Squad shot the stage the best. But as I say this requires electronic scoring AND a definitive Super Squad policy for men and women so that we can showcase the best competitors at the match.

With electronic scoring there may be a option to add a leaderboard fed from the results that shows the lead changing from one stage to another, but as above Super Squads and electronic scoring would be required for that to be effective.

[alma]

Real-time leader board broadcast today the Internet would be pretty sweet.

I hope more of this type of thing happens in USPSA in the future. It doesn't appear that USPSA even put out a press release about the match results.

[BritinUSA]

Real-time leader board broadcast today the Internet would be pretty sweet.

I hope more of this type of thing happens in USPSA in the future. It doesn't appear that USPSA even put out a press release about the match results.

My 2 cents; No-one is looking at the big picture, USPSA has several Nationals each year, the past few years it seems to me that USPSA has farmed this work out in its entirety to the Match Director. The MD is focused on running the match and no-one is focused on the media and marketing of the match. The only thing of any value we can give to our sponsors is exposure, during the Production Nationals I posted the sponsors of the stages that I was covering along with their web-page.

There should have been press releases each day showing the current leaderboard and photos of the top shooters, but they were using paper scoring so the latest scores were not available until several hours after the competitors had shot their stages, with electronic scoring we could have the results in real time and that means they could be used for press releases etc...

Everything is connected; The match is not just the stages on the ground, it's the sponsors, it's the web presence, it's press releases, social media, etc. Stages should be constructed that offer a challenge to the competitor but also provide for good camera angles for videos. Solid walls cause problems in this regard as the competitor is not always visible to the video camera and the solid walls also block light that can restrict photographs too.

[Strick]

Have you tried to sell your services to USPSA or have you just waited to see if they would pay you for the effort?

On the issue of someone taking the videos, compiling them and then reposting them.....that is theft. While I am sure it was not meant as such the fact remains that the minute Paul captures the images they are his property and protected under copywright laws and Paul owns all rights. It is not relevant how he uses them, whether for profit or not. The only snag would be if the event was not open to the public or if to cover the event USPSA or the range required a media pass and had verbage stating all images could be used by USPSA or the range. I doubt that is the case but that issue can come into play.

[Nimitz]

I was stationed in LA during the early 1980s when professional beach volleyball was becoming a big thing but there was no money in it, no corporate sponsorship, just a trophy (and all the bikini clad 20-somethings you could want). Then the top professional players got themselves organized and the rest is history. Today, the top pros easily make a living from it with prize money & sponsorship & TV coverage, etc.

We have a national organization and we can't get organized .... beach volleyball did it with about 10-15 guys and some creative vision and drive about what was possible ..... what does that say about the competitive action shooting community ?

Edited August 15, 2015 by Nimitz

[Nimitz]

Paul: don't take this the wrong way but for the life of me I can't understand why you put so much time, energy & personal money into something with no payback ...? Unless you're just a bored rich guy looking for something to do in addition to shooting ...

[BritinUSA]

Paul: don't take this the wrong way but for the life of me I can't understand why you put so much time, energy & personal money into something with no payback ...?

You have no idea how many times that question popped into my head the fourth time I hauled my gear up the hills at PASA…

[hiker88]

thank you for doing the videos, Paul. I wish that the USPSA can officially incorporate your work in our organization.

[tbarker13]

Have you tried to sell your services to USPSA or have you just waited to see if they would pay you for the effort?

On the issue of someone taking the videos, compiling them and then reposting them.....that is theft. While I am sure it was not meant as such the fact remains that the minute Paul captures the images they are his property and protected under copywright laws and Paul owns all rights. It is not relevant how he uses them, whether for profit or not. The only snag would be if the event was not open to the public or if to cover the event USPSA or the range required a media pass and had verbage stating all images could be used by USPSA or the range. I doubt that is the case but that issue can come into play.

This is true to an extent. But copyright laws are not absolute.

There is an interesting case involving an artist that takes people's images from Instagram. Essentially all he does is add a caption to the images - thereby modifying the work and making it his own. The dude is making serious money doing this - and it's legal. The people whose images have been appropriated are just screwed.

Essentially all you have to do is "add value" to the appropriated work for it to fall under what's known as "fair use."

Where people get into trouble is when they just use something without modifying it whatsoever. That's a no-brainer.

Of course, the issue of you being a jerk for using someone else's work is a whole other matter.

[bdpaz]

I don't have an opinion on this case of the use of the match videos, but "fair use" is widely misunderstood.

Essentially all you have to do is "add value" to the appropriated work for it to fall under what's known as "fair use."

Where people get into trouble is when they just use something without modifying it whatsoever. That's a no-brainer.

It's not nearly that clear cut. Your linked article is specifically about fair use in the art world and even there it says:

"Prince has managed to come out on top of his legal battles because of the complexity of fair use (and also because he's very rich). Fair use in the art world can be a relatively amorphous thing, because much of contemporary art is built on historical or popular imagery. Fair use requires consideration of the difficult-to-define "purpose" and "nature" of the work, the amount of copyrighted material used, and the effect the appropriation might have on the market value of the original work. Courts evaluate fair use on a case-by-case basis, and the boundaries aren't firmly planted. What Prince is doing with New Portraits, essentially, is testing the limits of copyright law. By divorcing recognizable images from their contexts, if only very slightly, Prince is arguing that he can create new, more valuable art. To be clear: not just anyone can get away with this. People are spending thousands of dollars on these images because they're paying for Prince's name, not because they sincerely want an enlarged Instagram photo."

From a link http://copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html within that article: "Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances." I don't see that as blanket permission to use copyrighted work as long as it is modified.

Edited August 16, 2015 by bdpaz

[elguapo]

Travel and hotel costs for Production Nationals were over $800, for the World Shoot it was over $2K.

What does that have to do with anything or the price of tea in china?

Forget I asked........

Edited August 16, 2015 by elguapo

[tbarker13]

I don't have an opinion on this case of the use of the match videos, but "fair use" is widely misunderstood.

Essentially all you have to do is "add value" to the appropriated work for it to fall under what's known as "fair use."

Where people get into trouble is when they just use something without modifying it whatsoever. That's a no-brainer.

It's not nearly that clear cut. Your linked article is specifically about fair use in the art world and even there it says:

"Prince has managed to come out on top of his legal battles because of the complexity of fair use (and also because he's very rich). Fair use in the art world can be a relatively amorphous thing, because much of contemporary art is built on historical or popular imagery. Fair use requires consideration of the difficult-to-define "purpose" and "nature" of the work, the amount of copyrighted material used, and the effect the appropriation might have on the market value of the original work. Courts evaluate fair use on a case-by-case basis, and the boundaries aren't firmly planted. What Prince is doing with New Portraits, essentially, is testing the limits of copyright law. By divorcing recognizable images from their contexts, if only very slightly, Prince is arguing that he can create new, more valuable art. To be clear: not just anyone can get away with this. People are spending thousands of dollars on these images because they're paying for Prince's name, not because they sincerely want an enlarged Instagram photo."

From a link http://copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html within that article: "Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances." I don't see that as blanket permission to use copyrighted work as long as it is modified.

Couldn't agree more. Both "fair use" and "copyright" are both widely misunderstood.

What is clear is that very little is clear in the modern world of social media and shared images/videos.

It's always going to come down to legal arguments - and eventually, court fights for those who think it is worth fighting over. In this particular instance - videos that appear to have pretty much zero financial value - it is hard to imagine any boundaries being tested. Unless, that is, Paul plans to file a lawsuit against the guy who compiled that video.

I'm simply saying that it is a bit presumptive to state that the compiler of that video is breaking the law. There are arguments on both sides of this issue.

As you pointed out: "Courts evaluate fair use on a case-by-case basis, and the boundaries aren't firmly planted."

Here's an example. If you were to post a replay of the Superbowl on your own website, the NFL would nail you for copyright infringement. But if you posted a few of your favorite Superbowl plays, there's not much they could do about it.

[BritinUSA]

Match Report : CLICK

[altabonita]

Match Report : CLICK

I enjoyed reading your match report. Thanks.

[Brooke]

The above posts are correct. Copyright and fair use are nebulous. No doubt the videos are the property of the maker, but since the copyright is not registered (and even it were), since no value is received by the owner there is no loss of money to him. He has no damages.

Most creators including me (photographs) like to be asked for permission to use there images, but if you put them on the internet there just is no way to stop anyone from using them. It seems to me the guy meant no harm since he took his work down when contacted.

I know how you feel, but you cannot control this so either keep them to yourself or quit doing it. It sounds like the guy did a great job. Why not (as suggested by someone else) partner with him and approach USPSA about buying the result?

[alma]

Nice writeup

[MilkMyDuds]

Travel and hotel costs for Production Nationals were over $800, for the World Shoot it was over $2K.

Assuming the video and photos can be used to broadly promote USPSA you should be added to the match staff.

I thought he was one of the USPSA PR staff all along

[BritinUSA]

I finally got around to compiling videos of some of the top finishers. I took the first 10 men and first 5 women that I had more than two videos for and compiled them into 15 compilation videos: http://liveshots.net/video/2015usnatsp/

[Unibrain]

I finally got around to compiling videos of some of the top finishers. http://liveshots.net/video/2015usnatsp/

I just watch a couple and have a new plan for the evening. Thanks for doing this.

Jim

[JayWord]

Match Report : CLICK

Excellent article Paul.

Jay

[BritinUSA]

Thank you

[gallardo0311]

Badass compilation of videos! Thanks