Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only

sabbey51

Saddle River, US
648 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
sabbey51 Gold Member Nikonian since 10th Jan 2010
Tue 09-Nov-10 02:05 AM

Here's some text from the D7000 User's Manual (page xvii):

"AVC Patent Portfolio License
THIS PRODUCT IS LICENSED UNDER THE AVC PATENT PORTFOLIO LICENSE FOR THE PERSONAL AND NON- COMMERCIAL USE OF A CONSUMER TO (i) ENCODE VIDEO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AVC STANDARD (“AVC VIDEO”) AND/OR (ii) DECODE AVC VIDEO THAT WAS ENCODED BY A CONSUMER ENGAGED IN A PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND/OR WAS OBTAINED FROM A VIDEO PROVIDER LICENSED TO PROVIDE AVC VIDEO. NO LICENSE IS GRANTED OR SHALL BE IMPLIED FOR ANY OTHER USE. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM MPEG LA, L.L.C. SEE http://www.mpegla.com"

Is this weird or what? Not the existance of such contracts (I've bought plenty of commercial software in my life with restrictive contracts), but that Nikon is selling a restricted license on a $1,200 device.

How did that work with Chase Jarvis' promotional videos for the D7000, shot with great fanfare, using D7000s?

Nikon seems to be promoting this for (among other things) wedding and event photographers; they can't use video from the camera? From the Jarvis blog regarding the camera: "Will do well for lots of markets. The photojournalist, the wedding shooter, the pro-sumer, the video crowd, backup body for pros. Pretty much everybody wins."

Seems like a problem.

km6xz

St Petersburg, RU
3559 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#1. "RE: D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only" | In response to Reply # 0

km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009
Tue 09-Nov-10 05:55 AM

That is pretty standard wording for patent pool licensing. The details are always in the fine print. It costs money for commercial distribution either as in a manufactured product that encodes and decodes or based on end users. Almost all patented coding systems have sliding scales with a threshold that triggers license fees. In the AVC/H.264 patent pool that threshold 100,000 units per year.
If you sell over 100,001 copies of a H.264 encoded productions during a year you need to pay. I see nothing Draconian or unfair about this patent license fee structure. If I sold 100,001 to 250,000 wedding videos in a year, I would be quite happy to pay the $25,000 license fee. Or $75,000 for 1,000,000 copies.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Robman3

West of Santa Monica, US
1842 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#2. "RE: D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only" | In response to Reply # 0

Robman3 Registered since 12th Apr 2010
Tue 09-Nov-10 06:02 AM

I'd not pay too much attention personally.

I bought the camera to flesh out the production tools and am headed to Denmark with the AF D7K Video, plus the D3S to build from a script narration and story board for a humanitarian event.

We WILL use content for promotion and possibly broadcast purposes.

They can come and confiscate the camera if they wish.

I suppose the MPEGLA folks will want a piece then, so be it, let BMI argue it when some video makes BET or CMT rotation.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

csgaraglino

Colorado Springs, US
647 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only" | In response to Reply # 1

csgaraglino Silver Member Charter Member
Wed 10-Nov-10 02:16 AM | edited Wed 10-Nov-10 02:17 AM by csgaraglino

So let's talk about this a bit...

If I record on the D7000 under the current license agreement, but edit in my NLE of choice, say Adobe Premier, and out put using a codec from PRE (not the raw from the D7K) shouldn't I be good to go commercially?

Isn't this restriction only on the raw footage, as compressed in camera?

---
Regards,
Chris Sgaraglino
Outdoor Studios Photography || on Flickr || on Google+

Robman3

West of Santa Monica, US
1842 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only" | In response to Reply # 3

Robman3 Registered since 12th Apr 2010
Wed 10-Nov-10 04:56 AM

Yeppers...

This would never stand in court under scrutiny.

The codec aside, intent and restriction of fair trade coupled with the Chase PROMO would sway any jury and Nikon would bear the brunt of false advertising.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

intrepidnz

NZ
233 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: D7000 Video for Non-Commercial Use Only" | In response to Reply # 2

intrepidnz Registered since 18th Nov 2004
Wed 10-Nov-10 10:50 PM

A couepl of things come to mind regaring this.

1 - What happens if you use the D7k to record a historic moment, some exciting news footage or some other momentous event? And you give it to a news channel, get a modest some of money for it (no idea how much) and then the news channel distributes it all around the world?

2 - how different is this camera to the dozens of other video cameras around the place and do they have the same non-commerical use clause? I would imagine that dedicated video cameras wouldn't be so restricted as this clause so why the difference?

regards

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

G