• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There were screenshots of an email leaked prior to the official announcement that indicated that DCI not allowing Encorps to travel to Marion, IN for Open Class Championships and/or Indy for DCI Prelims was not fair, and one of the reasons for folding. The reason given in that email was that they "hadn't traveled before" or something to that effect. It didn't imply that the membership numbers from last year were an issue.
  2. Would the better alternative be to hold camps, collect fees, learn a full show and then fold one day before the first show when they only have 53 contracted members? My understanding is they asked DCI for clarification on what would happen if they fell short of the 55 member limit. Would they be barred from competition, be fined or face or other sanctions? There wasn't a clear answer provided by DCI, and the other Open Class corps they inquired with didn't know either. Combine that with the fact that it could potentially be difficult to recruit 55+ members for a 4 show season with no championships... and I can see why they decided to pull the plug now.
  3. The last time it was explained to me, Open Class corps do receive an appearance fee during the first part of the season where they appear at shows with World Class corps. They do not receive an appearance fee when they split and do the Open Class tour the second half of the season.
  4. The "gotcha" that I see is the callback. Plus an additional $125 if you get a callback to re-audition at the December camp. So the question is... how many contracts will be offered after the first round of auditions... and how many people will be invited to an additional $125 camp in December?
  5. I get the allure of trying to funnel all of the revenue direct to DCI. However, I wonder if they can truly pull off hosting shows around the country without the involvement of some of the groups currently hosting/running shows. Even with a reduced slate of shows, it still takes a local presence & herd of volunteers to make a show a success. Simple things like access to stadiums and other community assets often times are a result of established connections made through the local host. Not to mention, some of those groups have been hosting shows for decades. I can't imagine them being thrilled with the idea of losing out on their fundraising/revenue stream. Example - July 3rd show in Cedarburg, WI:
  6. Perhaps George Bonfiglio hasn't been nominated for one reason or another? It looks like anyone can submit a candidate: 1. NOMINATION Any interested person may submit a candidate for World Drum Corps Hall of Fame membership consideration by completing a Nomination Form* on the World Drum Corps Hall of Fame website and obtaining the candidates confirmation. * Forms are available online and must be submitted online by January 15th to be considered for that calendar year. Once submitted, applications remain active and do not need to be re-submitted annually.
  7. The precedent is there in other sports/activities to keep people in the Hall of Fame despite legal issues that later ensued. One perfect example is O.J. Simpson. He remains in the Pro Football Hall of Fame despite all that has happened after his playing days were over. In that particular case, it was stated that "on field" achievements and/or contributions were the only factors that are taken into consideration with respect to membership in the Hall of Fame. Another example is Michael Jackson. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has refused to remove him based on similar reasoning. They indicated that his excellence in music and impact on rock and roll merit him being in the Hall of Fame. Given the significant contributions/effects that George Hopkins had on the drum & bugle corps activity, they could rather easily justify him remaining in the Hall of Fame just by following the logic used in the high profile examples listed above.
  8. The important thing to understand is that the stream you're watching isn't a direct pipe from Flo to your home. It runs through a multitude of different networks & providers through various peering agreements. Depending on your ISP, it could be a relatively short/direct path... or it could be a completely roundabout path with many hops. At any point on that path, a slowdown can occur that would effect your streaming experience. That's in part why some end users have flawless streaming experiences, while others have freezes every show. Large streaming providers like Netflix & Youtube typically work with ISPs (or pay) to ensure that their streams have a pathway of least resistance with more than adequate bandwidth. They also have fall backs in place that allow them to re-route around problems & slowdowns. While Flo as a streaming provider is growing in size with the addition of more sports coverage, it's definitely not in the same class as those other streaming providers at this point. That's not saying that they shouldn't be working proactively to provide a better streaming experience, but it is acknowledging the fact that some factors may not be in their immediate control.
  9. Unfortunately, I have seen several different versions of that statement today ("die mad boomers") across Facebook, Reddit and other platforms. I understand the sentiment behind it, but it's doing absolutely nothing to bridge the gap between the different viewpoints/generations. In fact, it's actually turned a couple people off today that had approached the situation with an open mind. In an activity that is often reliant on donations, it seems odd to target the "boomers" that control roughly 70% of the disposable income in the United States.
  10. The greater emphasis on member safety & security has definitely played a role in how volunteers are utilized. Some corps have struggled internally with how to balance those key areas with the need/desire/openness of having people drop in & help for a couple hours or even a couple days. In many cases, it's not practical for grandma & grandpa that live near a random show on tour to go through the necessary screening to be able to help with one or two meals before the corps moves on to the next stop. At the same time, not putting them through that screening leaves the corps at risk on multiple levels. It's easier in many cases to just politely decline their help. Doing so is not nefarious by any means. It's exactly what many people in the activity have been asking for.
  11. If they engaged in any type of "commerce" in the state of Massachusetts, then it could potentially be an issue. That includes performing in a show/concert, participating in a parade, or any other business function which could be considered a conflict with what the original 27th Lancers declared on their trademark registration. Even selling souvenirs/merchandise through an online store to a customer in Massachusetts could potentially be considered "commerce" based on many of the new tax laws that require out-of-state merchants to collect & pay sales tax as if they had a brick & mortar presence in each state. Given that thought process, a court order would likely stop them from using the name in within Massachusetts. If the new organization opted not to appear in that state, and simply chose not to sell merchandise to customers in that state, they could probably skirt local trademark registration. Would it be worth it though?
  12. To add to this, state trademark registration only protects your trademark in the state where you register it. If a group wanted to incorporate a drum corps (or similar type organization) in Massachusetts using the "27th Lancers" name, they most likely would not be able to do it. There are two trademark registrations in Massachusetts that would in theory prevent them from doing so; "27TH LANCERS DRUM AND BUGLE CORPS" and "27TH LANCERS DRUM AND BUGLE CORPS INC.". I'm guessing that's what may have happened with the alumni corps. However, if a group wanted to register the organization and trademark in any other state, they most likely would be able to do so without much difficulty. They could potentially even register the trademark with the USPTO as there wouldn't be any competing marks on file at the time of their application. The Bonfiglio's could oppose the registration and claim ownership of the trademark based on first use, but that route isn't always a guaranteed win. One other factor to consider would be "abandonment". Non-use of a trademark for three consecutive years is considered abandonment unless proven otherwise. If the drum & bugle corps aspect of the 27th Lancers has not been active in the past couple years... there could be an argument that any right to the trademark (whether registered or not) has been abandoned based upon non-use.