Jump to content

Yay! I got my first official YouTube video removed...


gak27

Recommended Posts

I thought the Internet was supposed to be free and open. Hahaha

I did spend some time last night viewing, again, the 2006 MSARP. Truly glorious. Don't take that video down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the expense of major legal fees, future uses of music being lost in some cases, and potential prosecution of those responsible for allowing this to happen?

That's worth allowing videos out there?

Maybe you and the others that think DCI should allow it ought to pay the streaming fees that are starting to be required. And just do it for the shows and songs you like. Just make sure you have a minimum of several hundred thousand dollars annually to cover these fees.

Otherwise, it might help to learn about the topic in all level of music, art, film, television, and writing before jumping on the "blame DCI" bandwagon, because it's not about some 45 second SCV video that this issue is really about.

Although I guess those of us that think it's about DCI will probably never stop blaming them anyway.

Was the clip from SCV 2014? That's all Rimsky-Korsakov 1888 I would think, unless it's based on a more recent arrangement. So isn't that public domain now? If so then it's SCV's own copyright they're protecting, which is still valid but perhaps more interesting for this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have another question: Does anyone know whether DCI's sync/streaming rights (as defined in recent years) differentiates between public streaming and private streaming? That is, does DCI's streaming rights allow it to publish content on YouTube if it wanted to? If not, how much more would it have to pay for "open" publication versus "closed" paywall based FN?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the clip from SCV 2014? That's all Rimsky-Korsakov 1888 I would think, unless it's based on a more recent arrangement. So isn't that public domain now? If so then it's SCV's own copyright they're protecting, which is still valid but perhaps more interesting for this discussion.

If it is from 2014, the source music is public domain, but the arrangement is not. The control the rights to their arrangements.

Which means, yes, people can freely do what they want with his music, but DCI owns the videos and SCV owns the arrangements, and can have them taken down.

Edited by tesmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have another question: Does anyone know whether DCI's sync/streaming rights (as defined in recent years) differentiates between public streaming and private streaming? That is, does DCI's streaming rights allow it to publish content on YouTube if it wanted to? If not, how much more would it have to pay for "open" publication versus "closed" paywall based FN?

There are laws dictating every level of use. Hence the reason a live webcast can have complete shows but an on demand site like the Fan Network may not be able to use material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are laws dictating every level of use. Hence the reason a live webcast can have complete shows but an on demand site like the Fan Network may not be able to use material.

Yes, but this does not get at the question of whether DCI streaming rights in fact cover public streaming. I think what you're saying is that it would need to be specified separately, right? If that's so, does anyone know if DCI generally acquires such separate public streaming rights?

DCI sometimes publishes short video clips, but these may be covered separately as promotional short clips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is from 2014, the source music is public domain, but the arrangement is not. The control the rights to their arrangements.

Which means, yes, people can freely do what they want with his music, but DCI owns the videos and SCV owns the arrangements, and can have them taken down.

I've always understood the legal relationship between DCI and member corps to effectively allow DCI to use official DCI videos any way they want to. Meaning DCI could promote the activity by putting SCV 2014 complete on YouTube if they wanted to, and other PD shows at least. (But this may not be correct. Maybe their agreement with corps only allows FN streaming/DVDs, etc.).

Then they could take the steps necessary to point several million pairs of youthful eyeballs at them. Including worldwide. (The issue of the lack of promotion of drum corps is my hobbyhorse, and I notice that I usually find a way to bring the conversation around to it, consciously or unconsciously :tounge2: ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always understood the legal relationship between DCI and member corps to effectively allow DCI to use official DCI videos any way they want to. Meaning DCI could promote the activity by putting SCV 2014 complete on YouTube if they wanted to, and other PD shows at least. (But this may not be correct. Maybe their agreement with corps only allows FN streaming/DVDs, etc.).

Then they could take the steps necessary to point several million pairs of youthful eyeballs at them. Including worldwide. (The issue of the lack of promotion of drum corps is my hobbyhorse, and I notice that I usually find a way to bring the conversation around to it, consciously or unconsciously :tounge2: ).

But we're not talking about videos on YouTube that DCI put up, and SCV wants down. This is about fan produced videos, whether recorded at shows by DCI or by individuals on their own. Even if DCI recorded, and a fan out it up, it's not supposed to be done.

Now had DCI put the video up, as the sometimes do, it would still be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but this does not get at the question of whether DCI streaming rights in fact cover public streaming. I think what you're saying is that it would need to be specified separately, right? If that's so, does anyone know if DCI generally acquires such separate public streaming rights?

DCI sometimes publishes short video clips, but these may be covered separately as promotional short clips.

The DCI streaming rights are for use on their site only, not on websites like YouTube.

Also, there are separate rights, as I already pointed out for live streaming, archival streaming, and they are different for audio streaming and video streaming as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a shame that the folks who own the musical rights don't soften their stance against youth music activities using their music. Everyone in the music industry talks about promoting & funding youth musical programs, yet they go after them when they use their music. Its too bad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...