Open music samples, photography and even written content is readily available and continues to grow with the proliferation of open content licensing. Open video content is also present, but faces more challenges in terms of combined copyright and licensing. Time at iSummit 08 was therefore dedicated to discussing the reuse of video content and specifically to overcoming challenges in terms of video remixing, sampling and the capture of copyrighted material on film and in video.

Andrew Garton related his experiences in working with Australia's Video Slam project to collect open video content for reuse. Along with Creative Commons Australia, much work has been done in compiling information on sourcing, using and licensing video. It was also mentioned that a sub-project on Archive.org provides public domain video content.

Luis Patron related his experiences in producing multimedia and documentary video for the United Nations in Tokyo. He highlighted that videographers are often uncertain as to whether third party footage is usable in terms of licensing. He said that his project also uses Google Earth's ability to generate video. However, it required permission from six different companies who own the map images used by Google. Luis related his desire to want to make movies without having to chase permission.

Tracking down permissions can be an incredible waste of time and often the creator of the original content is not even sure what the limits of reuse for their own material is. However, when video is being produced for broadcast, for example, then it is vital that all the correct permissions are in place.

Tony Falzone, Executive Director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford Law School spoke about the differences between licensing and fair use. The challenge with licensing is that it presents restrictions that could conflict with third party intent for media use and contradict Creative Commons licenses, for example. As restrictions are not always perceived, these can surface later, and adversely so, for film makers.

Capturing copyrighted elements on film is also a big problem that faces documentary film makers, given the ubiquity of copyrighted content. Insurance is available, however, that covers film makers for potential legal costs and penalties. This is partly thanks to work by Falzone and his contemporaries in their preparation of the Best Practices in Fair Use document and their work in providing free legal services to film makers, based on the latter's financial standing.

The Best Practices in Fair Use document is a vital resource for creatives that unpacks fair use and makes it understandable for anyone. Unfortunately fair use does not exist in all territories; for example, Japan has no fair use and Australia has a different system called 'Fair Dealing'. But permission insurance is available in a number of territories. Of course, it is important to remember that footage has to be used in terms of how restrictions are applied in historical sequence and each country's system must be adhered to.

Track facilitator David Evan Harris raised the question of how to take fair use footage and include it in Creative Commons licensed work that can be remixed and shared.

Fortunately CC licenses will not allow you to make something more open than it already was. So if licenses are applied correctly then problems can be avoided. Elliot Bledsoe from Creative Commons Australia said that if you don't have a license or case for fair use then you shouldn't be using a Creative Commons license for the resulting work.

Media professional, documentary maker and freelance journalist, Henrik Moltke encourages the use of Creative Commons Non-Commercial licenses as this can insulate film makers from possible implications going forward.

The key is to be transparent; make licensing information readily searchable, and included in metadata. And, most importantly, use common sense.

Picture: Participants in the DIY Video lab by mecredis on flickr.com, CC BY-SA 2.0