Jump to content

Copyrights And Common Sense


Recommended Posts

RIGHTS, TITLE, DATE RANGE, GEOGRAPHIC AREA, EXCLUSIVE/NON EXCLUSIVE.

These are only some of the basic attributes that a rights contract covers.

RIGHTS

That's right, each media that drum corps broadcasts/distributes on must be mentioned separately in rights contracts. Non-theatrical rights. Theatrical rights (Big Loud Live is pushing it calling itself Non-theatrical), internet, CD, DVD. Audio only rights. Video rights. Television broadcast. Public TV broadcast.

DATE RANGE
Now how many years does the corps get those rights to distribute/broadcast? In perpetuity?

EXCLUSIVE/NON EXCLUSIVE

Now what if a corps wants exclusive rights to use the piece in drum corps or marching context for that year? That's another right.

GEOGRAPHIC AREA

Yes, you can restrict Internet distribution areas.

It's an incredibly complicated contract to draw up and requires hours of attorney time to negotiate just one contract.

Personally, I think drum corps should create a portal for willing musicians to present their works under a standard "reasonable rights" remuneration contract. Better yet, corps should be looking to pieces written by the members themselves. This heightens the learning experience and makes the art form even more authentic.

Edited by Channel3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In '08 the composer changed his mind. it was something in the agreement.

Which implies that DCI failed to check with the composer before shipping the initial round of DVDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it seems very obvious that DCI and its member corps are far more interested in "in the moment" live performances while making programming decisions, and not that interested in selling audio/video products. Directors choose to make design decisions they feel will benefit their score, and there's nothing inherently wrong about that. I think as fans, it would actually be MUCH easier if DCI just came out and said that if that is corps' philosophy as far as design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hesitate to criticize the Madison Scouts, but I do feel the corps org was deliberately misleading about the situation all summer - I distinctly remember them releasing information as if it were still a work in progress, rather than a fait accompli.

Mike

My son marched Scouts in 2011. They were still hopeful that ESOM would be licensed after finals. Either way it was the right closer for that show. When the State Farm commercial aired during the Super Bowl (not September as stated elsewhere) we finally found out what had really happened. State Farm was the culprit, yet well within their rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which would be fine - then release the FN archives on YouTube for free, and for educational purposes. Based on what's been said earlier in the summer, it was a small to non-factor in people's purchasing decisions anyways.

Mike

'for educational purposes' are wise and worthy words. I enjoy reading your posts. You're onto something good! Hope that people read you clearly as I do. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The initial point in the opening argument goes nowhere. "Non profit" simply means that the revenues derived don't go into the personal pockets of the Board members of the corporation, and there are no 'owners', per se. It doesn't mean that everyone who comes into contact with said non-profit company agrees to donate their work.

If a composer or another rights-holder has their work presented, regardless of whether admission is being charged, a fee is required for viewing, etc, that rights-holder has the expectation to be compensated for their work, if they so desire (and most professional artists expect that they WILL be paid for the work they create: it's what makes them "professional").

That, in this case, is the "common sense" element of the discussion.

Edited by Slingerland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My son marched Scouts in 2011. They were still hopeful that ESOM would be licensed after finals. Either way it was the right closer for that show. When the State Farm commercial aired during the Super Bowl (not September as stated elsewhere) we finally found out what had really happened. State Farm was the culprit, yet well within their rights.

Hmm. Robert W. Smith, who was with Madison at the time, is quoted as follows in Michael Boo's posting:

“In our case, State Farm Insurance knew well in advance that on 9/11/11, they were going to put out a nationwide television commercial using ‘Empire State of Mind’ as the central statement, with school kids singing the song at a New York City firehouse. It was in the best interest of the insurance company to obtain exclusivity and they paid a lot of money to get it. If someone else in the popular media had come out using the piece, it would have lessened the impact."

That's my emphasis. But you don't need to take his word for it. Here's a video of that commercial, posted to Youtube on Sep. 11, 2011:

(Link to Youtube, so you can see the posting date.)

Unless Youtube has developed time travel, it does seem that the commercial aired nearly five months before the Super Bowl.

Huh. I never noticed before that the commercial was directed by Spike Lee.

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...