jasgre2000 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 It only sounds like an urban myth because you haven't got any sort of research, analysis, or information on the topic, and you've chosen to disregard all REAL information from multiple sources in this thread in order to #### and moan about DCI. It's real, and honestly the rabbit hole goes much deeper than anyone wants to know about. For example, purchasing a piece of concert band music does NOT give a high school band the right to record a CD of themselves and sell it (which TONS of groups do). It's illegal for bands to make copies of their marching band show for the kids in the band. It's illegal to copy a 1st trumpet part if you order a piece, get 3 1st trumpet parts, and have 5 players. All of those videos of high school theatre troupes performing 'Carousel' referenced in this thread? Those are illegal too, as the school has the right to perform that musical but not to record and distribute the video. ALL OF THIS IS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE GROUP IS DISTRIBUTING FOR FREE OR SELLING FOR A PROFIT/FUNDRAISER. The actual letter of the law is bad. And it's clear that it's better to go into C.Y.A. mode with this stuff than to risk lawsuits, however absurd or likely. I love DCI. This isn't about them. It's about Copyright. You're wrong. I have done research and analysis on this issue. I am a lawyer myself and have dealt with multiple copyright cases. I will happy admit I am wrong if you give me one real life example of an organization being held liable for the infringing activity of a third party. You seem to be confusing issues here. There is no dispute that DCI/corps need to secure licenses to play music, record it, and display it on the internet. That is a completely different issue from a fan posting a youtube video without permission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Honestly, either way, this is an issue that's only going to become more prominent. It's good that it's being discussed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) You're wrong. I have done research and analysis on this issue. I am a lawyer myself and have dealt with multiple copyright cases. I will happy admit I am wrong if you give me one real life example of an organization being held liable for the infringing activity of a third party. You seem to be confusing issues here. There is no dispute that DCI/corps need to secure licenses to play music, record it, and display it on the internet. That is a completely different issue from a fan posting a youtube video without permission. The third party thing is gray to me. I know my responsibilities for my organization. Either way, there had to be enough of a reason for the video in question to be in violation of copyright for it to be taken down. Edited July 3, 2013 by Lead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 The convenient detail you're missing here is that Youtube has a copyright failsafe. If a video is reported to them as infringing, 99.9% of the time, the video is taken down without a second thought, regardless of who filed the complaint. It can conceivably be said that DCI will have been aware of an infringing video longer than the original owners of a song arranged in a show. That's some serious leverage that DCI is acting in bad faith to upholding their end of the bargain, and suitably, DCI and Youtube aren't going to begin to risk it. But yes, just insist that it's for DVD and BD sales. I'd prefer you be surprised when they do take your advice and then a lawsuit comes in and the entire activity has to at least sweat for a year or two, and if not, face extinction. DCI has no obligation to issue take down notices, except to protect its own rights. The only reason it would need to protect its own rights is because it believes it is making less money because of youtube videos. I suppose that the underlying rights holder could be issuing the notices, but why would they target DCI videos and ignore every other violation (which usually get more views anyways)? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 The third party thing is gray to me. I know my responsibilities for my organization. Either way, there had to be enough of a reason for the video in question to be in violation of copyright for it to be taken down. The reason is because DCI believes they are hurting DVD sale and fan network subscriptions. DCI/Corps do own their own rights for the performances shown in the youtube videos. There is no question that the youtube videos are in violation of copyright. DCI could sue the fans if they wanted to. I, and others, are just of the opinion that it is a bad business decision to take that kind of action. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 You're wrong. I have done research and analysis on this issue. I am a lawyer myself and have dealt with multiple copyright cases. I will happy admit I am wrong if you give me one real life example of an organization being held liable for the infringing activity of a third party. You seem to be confusing issues here. There is no dispute that DCI/corps need to secure licenses to play music, record it, and display it on the internet. That is a completely different issue from a fan posting a youtube video without permission. I don't think I'm wrong, just got off on a tangent that didn't address the third-party thing. Sorry about that. I don't know all of the third-party rights, I also don't know about the digital distribution thing (Fan Network) and how that works. I would find it hard to believe, however, that a mid-season iPhone video from a random show being on YouTube is going to affect DVD/BRD sales. Just me, maybe I'm wrong... but I buy the BRD to get the performance and the quality at the end of the season :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Why can I watch other 2007 Madison video right now on you tube? Why was this one flagged and not others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumcorpsmademeaTuba Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Why can I watch other 2007 Madison video right now on you tube? Why was this one flagged and not others? Maybe because shaky cams offend a random Youtube shmuck who was able to pose as Drum Corps International to get the video removed? I'll spend all thread asserting that this is perfectly possible, won't I? :rock:/> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I don't think I'm wrong, just got off on a tangent that didn't address the third-party thing. Sorry about that. I don't know all of the third-party rights, I also don't know about the digital distribution thing (Fan Network) and how that works. I would find it hard to believe, however, that a mid-season iPhone video from a random show being on YouTube is going to affect DVD/BRD sales. Just me, maybe I'm wrong... but I buy the BRD to get the performance and the quality at the end of the season :) I find it hard to believe as well, which is why I think it is crazy that they would be issuing tons of takedown notices. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 That's just why I'm in the boat of 'it has nothing to do with DVD/BRD sales.' 1 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.