Gary Matczak Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Without recognizable music this activity is gone. many have been saying this for decades,...............but for other reasons,...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Matczak Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Maybe if there were a way to convince all the rights holders that as far as non-profit performing arts education organizations goes, there isn't enough royalty potential to make it worth dragging it out, the process could be streamlined. I don't know if there's a way all these activities (MB, DC, CG, drill teams, etc.) could make a deal en masse with all the rights holders. There's no interest group representing all of our activities to conduct the negotiations. Unless we were to, say, create one... (Solution #5 I think?) realistically,............I have no idea how you could do this,.........I could see the dc, band, etc folks colaborating,............but you are thinking about getting Andrew Lloyd Webber, Jay-Z, et. al. all together on the other side of the table? NEVER gonna happen,............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rd Glasgow BB Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Lots of questions and lots of opinions but let's be honest, not one answer. I say that because they only folk who can answer this are DCI and they're keeping very quiet on what the future holds with regards to Drum Corps & sync rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Freedman Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 realistically,............I have no idea how you could do this,.........I could see the dc, band, etc folks colaborating,............but you are thinking about getting Andrew Lloyd Webber, Jay-Z, et. al. all together on the other side of the table? NEVER gonna happen,............ Yes, but many of the major players (ASCAP, etc.) could participate. That would attract the attention of the smaller ones, especially if they are losing revenues because units are only using tunes (and clips) they can get through the service. I realize this last part is a pipe dream, since this thread only exists because units are quite willing to use material without having the rights anyway. One way or another, you have to change this attitude. Still, participating in such a service might allow DCI just enough intestinal fortitude to say "You can't play it on the field unless you either chose material through the Marching Arts Consortium or hope that we negotiate the rights in time." Catchy name, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Yes, but many of the major players (ASCAP, etc.) could participate. That would attract the attention of the smaller ones, especially if they are losing revenues because units are only using tunes (and clips) they can get through the service. I realize this last part is a pipe dream, since this thread only exists because units are quite willing to use material without having the rights anyway. One way or another, you have to change this attitude. Still, participating in such a service might allow DCI just enough intestinal fortitude to say "You can't play it on the field unless you either chose material through the Marching Arts Consortium or hope that we negotiate the rights in time." Catchy name, eh? It's an interesting idea. The incentives are obvious. Drum corps and related activities can have confidence they're usuing material appropriately. The license holders might capture new revenue as corps, bands, etc., arrange from their titles. That said, all these players are notoriously independent. You might have to turn the long ranger up to 11 to get their attention. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Yes, but many of the major players (ASCAP, etc.) could participate. That would attract the attention of the smaller ones, especially if they are losing revenues because units are only using tunes (and clips) they can get through the service. I realize this last part is a pipe dream, since this thread only exists because units are quite willing to use material without having the rights anyway. One way or another, you have to change this attitude. Still, participating in such a service might allow DCI just enough intestinal fortitude to say "You can't play it on the field unless you either chose material through the Marching Arts Consortium or hope that we negotiate the rights in time." Catchy name, eh? Why would the people at ASCAP, BMI, Hal Leonard, Boosey-Hawkes, Warner Brothers, Sony, et al want to participate by increasing their own work load and, quite frankly, develop an overbearing responsibility on them to create such a service? I mean it would not increase their bottom line revenue one iota, and right now the responsibility and work load is on the potential performance unit/organization not the publishers. Currently all the publishers have to do is field simple questions from those performing units/organizations: Can we arrange this? Yes and pay us this fee; Can we sync that? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I think you hit the nail on the head. What is more important? The artistic endeavor? The "perfect show design"? History? Competition? Archives? Then we could get into whether or not we should be encouraging people to GO TO SHOWS to ensure they get to see the most complete product OK; for those of us who live on the other side of the country from most show (i.e. the western region), your "encouragement" is meaningless for those without significant disposable income. But you know what I can afford? Fan Network. Blu-rays and DVDs. Those types of things (that are, to be honest, the industry/entertainment standard). If you are saying that DCI put all of its eggs into one basket while ignoring the other, I would stipulate a sincere lack of business insight. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Lots of questions and lots of opinions but let's be honest, not one answer. I say that because they only folk who can answer this are DCI and they're keeping very quiet on what the future holds with regards to Drum Corps & sync rights. Or perhaps they don't really know what the future holds. If DCI is being passive and conservative, they're likely hoping they can keep up with rights requirements, more designers will choose stuff they can clear legally than won't, and the problem will be limited and the trend of more rights issues/show editing on DVDs every year is too small of a sample to take too seriously. They've been pretty honest in their communications as to what is going on, however I get what you're saying if your point is we don't know if DCI intends to impose stricter limits on corps' designs or if they'll continue with the (flawed) status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 (edited) Then we could get into whether or not we should be encouraging people to GO TO SHOWS to ensure they get to see the most complete product And at the start of the season how many threads do we get from people complaining the shows are INcomplete? And the response from some is corps should worry about Finals week so deal with it.... Man if I was a corps member and couldn't hear/see a full copy of my show because of a problem that staff KNEW about.... My wife won't be the only one saying I can be a PITA.... Edit: Great recruiting tool.... "Join Our Corps! You might not be able to see or hear what you did this coming season, but join anyway". Edited November 9, 2012 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 So the copyright is intact for live performance. Intact for audio. It applies even though you take money for each. But video crosses the line? It's all the more idiotic in the Charlie Brown context where no video was taken - only audio. The audio is okay. But the audio from the video on the video isn't? I'll say it again: Good grief. HH PS: Don't lecture me on sync license and millenium video act. I get it. It's stupid. That's my point. In the case of the Cadets 'Charlie Brown' thing it's not intact for audio. From the DCI email quoted earlier in this thread detailing edited content: 2012 World Championships CD • The Cadets: 37 seconds of unlicensed, pre-recorded material has been removed. I only bring this up because you've referenced The Cadets a few times in this thread 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.