over60 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) I'm not a lawyer but here are my thoughts on the ongoing DCI copyright problem. Any legal clarification would be appreciated, but do we really need any? I think an adjustment to the copyright laws, or rather, an exemption, is indicated. Are the DCI corps causing meaningful net financial harm to copyright owners? I don't think so, and I contend it could be just the opposite. Copyrights protect people who create original content, whether it's music, art, literature, newspapers, movies, etc. I understand that these people want, and deserve, financial compensation if other people are attempting to profit financially relating to the performance of or other use of their protected material. But this is not the case with any of the DCI corps. All the corps are non-profit groups and DCI is a non-profit corporation. Therefore, it's my contention that they should not have to pay when they perform copyrighted material since they have no intention of, nor do they, profit financially. Think of all the high school and college bands, orchestras and dramatic groups. Do they have to request permission from multiple copyright owners every time they perform copyrighted material just because they may charge admission? I doubt it. I hope not. It certainly can be argued that DCI and and its member corps are also educational organizations and therefore are in the same category as schools, or should be. Here is a copy of DCI's copyright and trademark policy from their website: "Copyright and Trademark PolicyAll content included on this site is the property of Drum Corps International, Inc., and is protected by U.S. and international copyright laws. All rights are reserved. Materials copyrighted or trademarked by Drum Corps International, including, but not limited to, audio recordings, video recordings, logos, graphics, photographic images, print materials; event results, score reports, and recaps; trademarks, and service marks (whether or not the material is included on this site) may not be used without express written permission from Drum Corps International. This includes audio and video recordings of performances at Drum Corps International events.Drum Corps International may grant permission to use the foregoing on a case-by-case basis. Requests for permission must be made in writing. Requests for use of copyrighted music or other images owned by composers or others require you to secure copyright permission from the owner prior to your request to Drum Corps International. This release must be included with your written request. Should permission be granted, the release is on a one-time basis. Further use or reuse without permission is prohibited. All materials must be given appropriate credit; for video or still images, credit must be given to Drum Corps International as well as the photographer or video production agent." DCI is also a copyright and trademark owner and expects compensation. But, they indicate they are willing to make exceptions. I'm particularly interested in this sentence, “Drum Corps International may grant permission to use the foregoing on a case-by-case basis.” (my emphasis) Would it be possible for DCI and the corps to get blanket permission to use copyrighted material on a season-by-season basis from the copyright owners? Have they tried that? That would be one simple way to solve the problem, but if the copyright owners insist on payment, then I think there's a more fair way to collect the money. If anyone is earning profits from the DCI performances around the country it's the non-educational, for-profit entities like local hotels and motels, restaurants and other local businesses. It's these for-profit businesses who should be making the copyright payments, not DCI or member drum corps. I doubt it would include LOS. That's a HUGE building that must cost plenty to operate for three days. The city of Indianapolis is not a business but collects taxes from all the paying fans and the businesses they frequent while in town. The city certainly "profits" by having so many people spend their money each championship week. I don't know how much money DCI collects from the sale of performance related merchandise like the championship DVDs, but from what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, after DCI covers it's considerable expenses in creating the merchandise, it divides the remaining proceeds with the member corps. There are no business profits being accrued by DCI or it's member corps. It's my contention that because of the DCI performances, many fans are exposed to music and other performance material they've never known before and are therefore likely to purchase commercial CDs and DVDs from professional performing groups of this newly discovered material that they never would have been aware of without seeing the DCI performances, thus providing future royalties to the copyright holders. In effect, the DCI corps are providing free advertising for the copyright owners whose material they perform during the season. Much of this music is obscure to the general public and the copyright owners should be thankful for the added national exposure of their works by the DCI corps. Personally, I became interested in classical music in the early 1970s mostly because of Phantom Regiment and I have spent a lot of money in the last 40+ years buying commercial classical CDs, DVDs and attending professional perfomances where royalties are paid. Let's remove this unnecessary legal burden from the corps and DCI who are only trying to provide a learning experience to the members and entertainment for the fans. There has to be a way to get an exemption for DCI. Anyone know a copyright attorney who might be sympathetic to presenting DCI's case? Edited August 11, 2015 by over60 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) DCI and the corps may be classified as non-profit organizations but... you can still sell things for financial profit. DCI is selling the copyrighted material to benefit itself and the member corps. That would be using the profits IMO..... And IIRC it doesn't matter if profits are made or not, YouTube gets hit and where is the profit there? Edited August 11, 2015 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2muchcoffeeman Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 You Tube = Google, whose name is synonymous with profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 yeah bad choice saying YT.... nm that line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrownBariDad Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 If you read the Anti-Piracy screen on most Hollywood DVD/BluRay discs they specifically say "whether or not for profit". Control of the content is reserved for the copyright owners only. Not saying I like how hard it is to license music, but that's the way it is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2muchcoffeeman Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 yeah bad choice saying YT.... nm that line The irony being that the corps don't make the profits from YouTube. Google makes the profits from YouTube, even though exactly zero people at Google or You Tube have any idea what drum corps is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStainGlass Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 DCI and the corps may be classified as non-profit organizations but... you can still sell things for financial profit. DCI is selling the copyrighted material to benefit itself and the member corps. That would be using the profits IMO..... And IIRC it doesn't matter if profits are made or not, YouTube gets hit and where is the profit there? most dont know but the NFL has been a nonprofit for years making Billions of dollars. What benefits nonprofits is that they are tax exempt and donations can be written off by those who donate. What the NFL does is at the end of the season whatever money is left over they give to the teams. So if DCI were to invest the profits from the DVDs into new corps or ones in trouble we would be cooking! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packetslave Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 even though exactly zero people at Google or You Tube have any idea what drum corps is. That's not exactly true. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Copyrights protect people who create original content, whether it's music, art, literature, newspapers, movies, etc. I understand that these people want, and deserve, financial compensation if other people are attempting to profit financially relating to the performance of or other use of their protected material. But this is not the case with any of the DCI corps. All the corps are non-profit groups and DCI is a non-profit corporation. Therefore, it's my contention that they should not have to pay when they perform copyrighted material since they have no intention of, nor do they, profit financially. Think of all the high school and college bands, orchestras and dramatic groups. Do they have to request permission from multiple copyright owners every time they perform copyrighted material just because they may charge admission? I doubt it. I hope not. It certainly can be argued that DCI and and its member corps are also educational organizations and therefore are in the same category as schools, or should be. If DCI, because it and its member corps are not-for-profit organizations, shouldn't have to pay composers for the use of their music (via the licensing companies whom they have designated to negotiate licensing on their behalf), then why should they have to pay for anything they use? Why are composers less worthy of being paid than, say, gas stations where corps purchase fuel for their buses and trucks? I work for a not-for-profit theater. We have to get permission from playwrights and then pay them a royalty (typically 5-10% of box office income, less some standard deductions) in order to produce their plays. Sometimes we request the rights to produce a play and we're turned down. It's just the same for drum corps and music. And as for schools, they absolutely are required to pay for the right to perform music that is still under copyright. If they use commercial arrangements, the cost of purchasing the parts normally includes permission to perform for the public. If school ensembles have their own arrangers, they need to obtain permission from the original composers (or their licensing house designees) for the right to arrange and perform that music--and, if they wish to make video recordings, the "synchronization" rights. (Earlier this summer in these forums, it was explained that the "mechanical" rights, i.e., those for audio recordings are compulsory, i.e., cannot be denied, and there is a standard fee for that.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2muchcoffeeman Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 That's not exactly true. No, of course, not exactly true. . . it's true enough to make the point that even when an entity, such as Google, which has little control over the nature of the content that is uploaded to YouTube, nonetheless makes the money from the advertising sold against it, it's ironic that it is the drum corps community -- which doesn't make a dime from You Tube -- that gets punished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.