Wow

Octane, as Dave has eloquently pointed out, I think the key point is ...

Movies are movies. Everyone knows they are not real. MINIs on public roads are documentaries ... non-fiction. HUGE difference.

Embellish, make your movie exciting ... go for it! Everyone loves spectacular movies. Showing a video or illegal driving to be "cool", IMHO, is not cool.

Hullish said My view is, if NAM is taking down car videos due to execssive speed, then why does this site exist?

If that is all your get out of NAM, then you probably right, its not for you. However, I doubt thats true for 99% of the rest of the users.

myzombonie said: All you need is a disclaimer stating that NAM does not support nor condone the illegal activities that occur in videos posted on the site.

A disclaimer won't do Mark one bit of good if someone is sued for and he is named for contributary negligence. Pretty sure thats true.

Finally, at least in Darkness' case, while others may disagree, there is the issue of influence such a video brings to bear onto those who may be impressionable. If someone is easily impressionable, they may think its also "cool" to break traffic laws (or whatever) since "he did it" and its NOT a movie. That is a huge burden to bear if it leads to just one injury, never mind death, due to the influence of it not being a movie.

Bottom line. You want to make a movie. Make the best one you can, add all the AI you want, we all know its a movie. Make a non-fiction documentary where the driving breaks local traffice laws ... not cool at all as it condones the actions and yields influence on the impressionable.

When you think about it, it much like the kids making videos of their law breaking activities (e.g., robbing a store, shooting innocents people with paint guns on the street) because they are proud of it and showing the videos ... great evidence in court.

 

The argument in this post always makes me laugh. I listened to every backwards masked Led Zeppelin LP, and never once worshiped the devil!!

The fact that someone may be that impressionable is not the "artists" problem, and has been proven time and time again in court.

Steve

 

Funny thing too, this response makes me laugh. There is a big difference between a movie for entertainment and real life driving on REAL roads with REAL pedestrians. Comparing a record, and maybe playing it backwards to find the devils msg, is not the same thing.

If you dont see the difference, then no argument is going to until someone dies.

 

I didn't intend for this thread to become a repeat of the one on MOTD. The focus was to be from the artists creative vision versus reality and what line do we cross as we try to uphold the "responsible" thing to do.

The topic at hand is NOT Darkness's video, and I would appreciate it if his video and activity were not mentioned in this thread.

My Malibu DVD did not feature illegal activity nor reckless driving but somehow myself and my video have been lumped into this. I mentioned a line I crossed/touched, it wasn't a feature or focus of the video, it wasn't something that was bragged about, it was a moment in time that I didn't edit out because I chose not to. I don't think it was even noticed because it was so subtle, yet I pointed it out to emphasize the dangers involved in any driving.

 

Octane Guy,

I have Edited my last post to clarify. I definitely see how you took it the wrong way.

To answer the post about using Youtube.com, go there and search by my screen name

 

Yes, someone can die from reckless driving. No question.

Saying that a movie with reckless driving on real roads "will" cause someone to go out and "try this at home" is absurd.

Are there idiots? Yes there are, but those idiots would most likely do it without the video.

Again, it is NOT the "artist's" (filmmakers in this case) responsibility, on how the bottom of the gene pool interpretes the artform. That has been proven in court time and time again.

Steve

 

Is there a link for that?

 

Don't bother. They're gone now.

 

I didn't use the word "will". I distinctly and on purpose used the word "influence". Your twisting what I wrote to imply something not there. Influence means exactly what I meant. It doens't mean they "will"

Octane, your right about OT. the first half of my post was directed to you. I still believe documentaries/non-fiction are fine. I have not seen your video and if its is not breaking traffic laws of your state, it should be fine and see no issue.

If NAM has pulled it, and you claim you drove legally, then the issue becomes Dave's comment: "... enthusiast video is taken on a public road that shows behavior which is addressed by the site guidelines." Its the moderators interpretation of the guidelines. You should address it with them

 

OctaneGuy, you have not responded to my clarification of the tailgaiting and double yellow line crossing in the other thread.

This is what I posted in the other thread to clarify that I was not discussing the staged initial shot of the MINI's lined up nor was I discussing the single yellow line crossing on the one way section:

I do believe that your Malibu teaser video is still available for download at your vacucam website. Anyone can go there and view it and make their own call.

If you recall, I do own your Malibu video and I also sent you many hours of Dragon footage for a DVD which you never got around to producing. I ended up asking for my tapes back and produced my own DVD and distributed it for free to my friends. However, due to the nature of my videos and the site guidelines here, I did not offer it for download or for sale to the general public anywhere. Had you been the one to edit my footage and offer it for sale, I would not expect the NAM store to sell it due to its content. I do not feel that my rights to produce my own videos and distribute them to anyone I choose has ever been diminished by this website.

 

Move it to the NUTS.

 

Sorry, you are right. However even if it influences them to go out and try it, it is still not the "artists" responsibility.

As a side, this is one of the biggest problems with society today, people are constantly looking to hold someone else responsible, for inadequicies of parenting, self control, and common sense. Nobody wants to take responsibilities of their own or their children's actions!

Steve

 

Nope but this forum fortunately is a place established by and moderated by reasonable, rational adults who will not play a role in showcasing irresponsible acts on public roads that endanger other motorists. There are plenty of other venues that will without concience play this role but it will not be the kind of place that NAM is

 

For the sake of watchability, the video does NOT show a continuous sequence in time. There were shots that happened earlier and later that were changed in sequence because it flowed better. Remember, this is called EDITING for entertainment. I'm not documenting fact.

The teaser is exactly what it is. It's a short segment of edited clips designed to give the viewer a sense of the video while hoping to motivate them to buy. You're judging me and my video on a promotional teaser. Amazing.

I have stated before that I was using my prototype VacuCams that were wireless and had a lot of signal reliability issues which necessitated me to use judicious editing around these drop outs.

It's obvious that you haven't been in Tuna Canyon, much like the comments that I cannot and will not make on driving the Dragon. Maxmini was a safe distance behind me. I slowed down often to get a better view of him. We were travelling less than 45 mph. Average speeds on that run were between 25 and 40, definitely nothing excessive.

re: Runflats
My runflats squealed on command. If I pushed into a corner, they squealed. I took advantage of that because it's fun. Who said anything about ever losing control???

Face it Andrew. You are splitting hairs in an attempt to lump my video, into the reckless type of passing and lane crossing that have been posted on the Dragon. There is simply no comparison.

 

artists do have to be careful what they are doing and what they are showing. for example, performance artists are often arrested. if a video is shown that displays illegal behavior, that video can and has been used as evidence. professional movies and commercials are very careful to place disclaimers on their works in order to indemnify themselves.

then again, i am also biased against "creative vision" for many films. i cannot stand seeing videos that use other people's music with no credit being given. commercials and movies pay for the rights. amateur videos neither pay nor give credit... as a composer, those videos should be used as evidence of theft... (hahaha - just had to throw in another can of worms)

 

And that I agree with you 100% Its prevalent in society and no one is or wants to be held accountable. We are in total agreement there.

 

Oh I'm not bothered by NAM exercising their right. That's ok by me. It's the fact that some people seem to believe they are the "moral police" that's bothering me.

http://vacucam.littlemini.us/
Scroll down and click Malibu Run Teaser

I just watched it myself. For entertainment sake, the one way road was cut with a scene from an earlier part of the video which had two lanes. I did that because I figured no one would notice, and it happened to be an exciting shot of the front wheel looking straight ahead. Did I touch the line yes. Was it illegal? Well it wasn't my intention to do it, so I suppose it was. But you place a camera on your front wheel against the line on a canyon drive and lets see how often you might get close to the line over a 3 hour period?

 

What's next? I will be charged cover royalty for singing in the shower just because my wife, the dog and two cats hear me? It's a benefit concert, damn it!

 

Well that I agree with, and that's why I use either royalty free music or compose my own.

 

well for your singing it is another story.... you should pay for the ear damage to the cats...

 

OK, I watched it. At first glance I thought, whoa, this guy is all over the road ... I see the cuts, and then its clear its a one way road with the white arrow so it didn't matter.

At the very end, you are clearly over the double yellow line but I would assume its the same one way road. If not, then you didnt just "touch it" but it looks clearly in the other lane and you would have gotten a ticket.

thats how I viewed it. Did I see it correctly?

 

You sound like my wife. I pay no matter what.

 

that's ok, i found bootlegs of my music on the internet, asked for a copy and was told that i would have to pay for it...

 

Richard...

Can you please clarify something for me? Please confirm or correct the following, from your Malibu teaser video:

1) The road(s) displayed that have a single yellow line are one-way (there is even a glimpse of a "Do Not Enter" sign facing the other way in one shot)
2) The road(s) displayed that have a double yellow line are two-way

Are both statements correct?