JimF-LowBari Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Also, in the past there were instances of corps getting rights to arrange and perform music, but failing to get "mechanical" rights which relates to use in video/broadcast (motion picture production). This is why some corps may have material missing from videos. Update: two other videos were removed: Madison Scouts playing "You'll Never Walk Alone" at their preview at a Brat Festival and their parade tune, I think, in Cedarburg (?) parade. It would shock me, but perhaps somebody at Scouts is taking exception to these clips. Hard to imagine that. Or someone has a mad on with Madison and reporting any vid with them in it. I just checked and found some still out there from other corps but who knows what tomorrow will bring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 But any good entertainment lawyer will also go for the deepest pockets. In this case, that would be DCI, not grandma in the stands who made a bootleg video. Any good lawyer would sue them both; and add a few more just for good measure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combia1 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Just want to point out. The corps (NOT DCI) are responsible for getting the copyrights so their shows can be recorded and sold by DCI. So to do what you want DCI would also require the corps to obtain Internet rights. 1) Wonder how enforcible that is (between DCI and the corps). If a corps doesn't get the needed rights today there is dead air and that is it. If a corps doesn't get Internet rights then what? 2) Wonder how much harder that would make it for the corps to obtain those rights. PS - Is it that much harder to go to the corps sites for vids? Other than friggin' google forcing you to YT when you are looking for anything... (hate that crap). This is incorrect. Individual corps (or bands, or drumlines, or colorguards) are required to secure permission to arrange and perform. DCI (or BOA or WGI) is responsible for negotiating licensing fees and securing the synch license required to record, produce, and sell DVDs. They are also responsible for securing the new media licenses required for things like YouTube. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 The answer is "yes" to your question in similar performance arenas; there are cases (as example) of high school bands being sued almost into extinction because YouTube snippets (parents may have made) are out there without proper approval. There ARE larger legal issues here; as example dealing with such organizations as ASCAP. This is not DCI, DCA, or the fault of the guy "livin' down by the river". It's a litigation nuts world, and as trivial as something may appear in any station of life or occurrence, #### DOES really happen. Please point out some specific examples of this happening. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combia1 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Personally, I'd recommend that DCI turn the rights clearance issue and financial element of the process back to the individual corps. Right now, you have a few corps whose rights expenses are disproportionately high (either because they chose an expensive piece or because they're using 7 pieces of music that need to be cleared). Let the corps pay for that aspect of their program and negotiate their own deals to include social media clearance. BOA and WGI already do this. They have lists of composers/publishers who they know will be high, and the performing unit has to pay a one time "fixing fee" to help defray the additional costs. And if you are using more then x number of tunes in your production, you have to pay additional fees to help defray the extra administrative expenses required for multiple compositions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combia1 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 This just shows how dumb DCI & this activity has become. Drum Corps is a niche fringe activity that needs all the publicity and exposure it can get. Forcibly removing videos of your product on the worlds largest video website is a strategy that hurts your activity. Rather than worrying about protecting Fan Network subscribers, DCI should be more concerned with expanding its reach & audience. DCI sure could use some Marketing expertise because they are clueless. It may sound dumb and silly, but your problem, as you've outlined it above, is with US copyright law. Not with DCI. DCI is just covering all of their legal bases. If they don't make an effort, and something slips through, it could be a huge legal expense. It's too risky to NOT do what they currently do. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) This is incorrect. Individual corps (or bands, or drumlines, or colorguards) are required to secure permission to arrange and perform. DCI (or BOA or WGI) is responsible for negotiating licensing fees and securing the synch license required to record, produce, and sell DVDs. They are also responsible for securing the new media licenses required for things like YouTube. Understand DCI is responsible to have the legalities set for anything DCI sells. But it was my understanding that DCI required the corps to do that leg work and then provide the paperwork to DCI. At least that's my take on the threads dealing with dead air on DCI DVDs. Especially the ones where DVDs were released complete and later have had parts silenced out. I aint't a lawyer... but seemed like the finger was pointing to the corps (rightly or wrongly)... For the Mini corps IIRC, the legalities are all done by the corps (and Mini CD/DVDs are sold). The Minis then turn over all paperwork to DCA (who handles the sales). And if everything ain't hunky-dorry, the corps is not allowed to perform. Edited July 2, 2013 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 All this sturm and drang about a "jerky, hand-held, 1-minute video clip" zooming in on someone's stepson? You'd think someone called us bandos. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Please point out some specific examples of this happening. Hi Geoff, I stopped playing a drum corps activity Eve Arden's secretary's portrayal from the old "Our Miss Brooks" radio and tv program years ago. It's all out there.....I'm too busy shaving my legs and keeping "buff" looking svelt and shapely for my boss when the precious time arrives I'll be asked to do some lap-sitting to take notes; i.e. my boss is my wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Hi Geoff, I stopped playing a drum corps activity Eve Arden's secretary's portrayal from the old "Our Miss Brooks" radio and tv program years ago. It's all out there.....I'm too busy shaving my legs and keeping "buff" looking svelt and shapely for my boss when the precious time arrives I'll be asked to do some lap-sitting to take notes; i.e. my boss is my wife. The only thing I've remotely found when searching is the guy who came up with the "Charge!" theme suing pro sports teams for using it. A lot of stuff on you could possibly be sued, but no actual examples of this happening. So, does anyone know of any specific examples of a composer or arranger suing or threatening to sue because their works appeared on a video sharing site without permission? 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.