BD, SCV and Youtube

[JayM]

Please refer to Cavaliers.com for their posted videos -Danielle

Elmo Blatch

.org, ma'am.

[jjeffeory]

Once again, expectation of privacy of the performance has nothing to do with copyright law. It is the expectation of specifically distribution models that are largely affected bby copyright law. As has now been stated multiple times in this thread alone, it is completely within your right to record the public performance for your own use; however, if you decide to distribute that content to someone other than yourself, it must be done with the permission of the organization that has the rights to the content. Corps these days get a lot more legal flak than they did in years past, especially because performances are so easy to access now, so they must show a great deal of diligence in living up to their commitments.

Really?

[CerpinTaxt]

However, it was my understanding that such copyright issues were raised over the posting party making money off of the video. In this instance the individuals are sharing out of the goodness of their hearts without any possibility of making a profit off of it.

YouTube makes money off of it though through the advertising that is done on the site.

I'll state again, there is nothing wrong with taping in the lot for your personal use. I've watched Scott Johnson take people's cameras in crowded lots to go and get close up shots of the line, and I've had SCV drum staff pull me in close to the line so I could get a good angle for some show reps.

I love watching lot clips as much as anyone else, however I do understand the corps' position. I've been involved in both sides of copyright issues, and it's not fun.

[jwillis35]

I posted SCV's Drumline warming up, not the book/show

It doesn't matter. Whether it is a piece of music copyrighted by another composer and publication company or it's just a warm up or original composition by one of the staff members, the bottom line is that it IS SCV's right to take it down. It is they who are performing the music, and whether they wrote the music or not, there may be agreements, licenses, fees, and all kinds of legalities involved. And most importantly, it is THEY who are doing the playing, and for you to tape it and think you have some right to it just because it was in a public venue is ridiculous. They are the performers and they do not have to allow you any special privileges just because you're a diehard fan. They have no way of knowing what you will do with that video or audio, and frankly they don't care. They don't have the time to research your intentions, all they can do is make sure that their performances are not given away for free when, in fact, the activity needs to make money; and they could especially care less when the potential for a copyright infringement may be on their hands because some fan abused his/her right to something that was not meant to be taped in the first place, and it was not part of the actual show. And sometimes what sounds like a warm-up ends up being some show music.

We have had drum corps die because of financial issues, even those who were put out to the pasture due to tax issues, and the last thing we need is a drum corps being sued by some media company for breaking a copyright and/or performance right unknowingly because of some fan trying to be cool and get material that does not belong to them. Imagine that law suit. That has the potential to put a few drum corps out of commission for a while, if not for ever.

But as I said, the bottom line is that they must protect the composer's/copyrighted material, and they have a right to protect their own material and performance. Whether you like that policy or not is not of concern to them. And this whole saying "well, it helps to bring people to the activity" is baloney. Yeah, like we have millions of fans just climbing the fences just to see drum corps these days, and all because of YouTube.

If the corps chooses to post the material themselves, then they have done so with permission. And in some cases they can only leave it posted for a while. The Cavaliers posted a clip of their music for this year just before the season, yet I see that material didn't stay up long. And the Cadets have had to yank several illegal clips off You Tube.

Personally, if you want to make illegal tapes of drum corps and share that with the world because you feel we are so starved for drum corps, you go right ahead. For me, I will gladly put my money into the activity, and that includes DVDs, CDs, tour videos, and the like, because I would rather support the activity legally and because I want better quality to the product I receive.

Edited July 4, 2007 by jwillis35

[kdaddy]

If it would get SCV in trouble for the clip to be posted, it should be taken down. I'm surprised that SCV would get in trouble with a publisher if a third party taped a performance and posted it, but I'm no lawyer.

If it's just SCV wanting it to be taken down, then I find this ridiculous. To me, it's in SCV's best interest to have such videos out there. It promotes their "product." It gets kids interested in marching SCV. It might get people interested in purchasing a DVD. A crappy youtube video is no substitute for a good recording. My guess: if someone sees the youtube video and likes it, they won't be satisfied with a grainy youtube video - they'll purchase a better recording. If someone sees the youtube video and is indifferent, then they'll never watch it again, and SCV is out nothing. To me, it can only help SCV to have videos like that out there (assuming that they won't face legal action from a publisher, that is).

[hughesmr]

The problem comes from the permission to arrange.

I do percussion arrangements for a few high school groups. Depending on the publisher/composer of the music that is to be arranged, there can be varying requirements to what has to happen to arrange that music. Sometimes they really don't care, and you can do a lot with it. The Tool show I did a few years ago for a winter line was this way, I got a letter back from the publisher that pretty much said "go for it, do what you like". Others have required a ton of steps to be done to make the arrangement happen, such as plastering long copyright statements and permission statements on the bottom of every score and part, along with a requirement to send a video or recording to the publisher at the end of the season. Along with this, I have been required to destroy all copies of my arrangement after the season has ended.

My snare parts had basically nothing to do with the original music, however they are my interpretation and arrangement of someone else's original idea.

That's why it is still a no no sometimes to post clips from show books without permission. For all we know, SCV or BD could have gotten a warning from some publisher or composer for a previous show arrangement, and to be safe, just took everything down.

It's a violation of the exclusive right to distribute.

Licensing the public distribution of recorded copyrighted material is an entiely different issue than arranging or performance rights for the material. Recordings (audio and/or video) come under the umbrella of mechanical and/or synchronization licenses.

[hughesmr]

To me, it can only help SCV to have videos like that out there

It doesn't help the composer/arranger of the material one bit.

Suppose my local community chamber chorus buys performance rights to Whitacre's "Water Night" (which you do by buying the sheet music and/or paying ASCAP). They decide (without permission) to record it and distribute it to area HS choral groups, and post it on YouTube. They do this because they sang it well, Whitacre is popular, and it will surely help recruitment into the chorus.

Tell me, how does this benefit Eric Whitacre? How is this any different than xeroxing the sheet music and passing it out across the Internet?

Edited July 4, 2007 by hughesmr

[Michael Boo]

Makes sense and I concede. I wonder why SCV is so anal about this issue when other corps don't seem to care. I'll say this, while the other corps have exposure via Youtube and other sources, SCV is going to shoot themselves in the foot by limiting their exposure. Shame on them.

Please don't try to "shame" SCV for doing what is their legal right to do.

[CHSnare]

My SCV videos got pulled too. At least I still have them for my personal use. :)

[Kyle B]

Shame on you for posting materials that are considered copyrighted, have the gall to say that you know better if it's copyrighted, and then say to everyone that SCV shouldn't be following the laws.