cixelsyd Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 there is no blanket option. it's a song by song by clip thing. very painstaking for sure. So say you use 4 notes of a tune...you have to get clearance for just those 4 notes, in addition to everything else. in order for older stuff to appear, DCI will have to probably make good with every rights holder out there. God only knows what that will cost. I think when DCi releases the info about what all is needed, which I'm told looks like chutes and ladders game boards, it will help clear stuff up in terms of understanding.I think one option to help clear up problems would be to start a capital campaign to raise funds to preserve our history First of all, DCI will never release "all the info". We will never know what Ts they did not cross or which Is were not dotted (it is their 5th Amendment right to omit those details). As far as preserving our history - the big problem there is with corps using sounds that are unlicensed, or prohibitively expensive to license. History is not preserved when corps have chunks of their shows deleted from the end product. We do not need a capital campaign for that - we need DCI to adopt policies such as zero tolerance for unlicensed music, and a no-play list for songs whose synchronization rights cause an impractical cost burden. The availability of legacy video/audio products is an issue of availability, rather than preservation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 First of all, DCI will never release "all the info". We will never know what Ts they did not cross or which Is were not dotted (it is their 5th Amendment right to omit those details). As far as preserving our history - the big problem there is with corps using sounds that are unlicensed, or prohibitively expensive to license. History is not preserved when corps have chunks of their shows deleted from the end product. We do not need a capital campaign for that - we need DCI to adopt policies such as zero tolerance for unlicensed music, and a no-play list for songs whose synchronization rights cause an impractical cost burden. The availability of legacy video/audio products is an issue of availability, rather than preservation. The problem is that legally, that is *not* the responsibility of the corps. Synch and streaming rights are out of the corps' hands, unless they are producing their own physical media or stream. In fact, if you're not the producer of the desired media/stream, you can't even get an accurate quote. So let's put a halt to the idea that rules should be passed prohibiting music that DCI can't get the rights to. It's stupid, impractical, and ridiculous. DCI already requires corps to secure arranging and performance rights, and that's as far as the organization can (and should) go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Depends. Some, such as Hal Leonad use Tresona to grant rights exclusively. Whether it's marching arts, film, commercial, etc. Others are using them to assist, if you want to call it that. No copyright case/usage is simple, even within the same genre or performance medium, each is why copyright regulations are so difficult to comprehend. Do you work with Tresona? Years ago, it felt like corps were designing shows for the DVDs not sure how much that has changed. Perhaps part of the Michael Cesario entertain the audience push? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 (edited) The entire licensing, copywrite clearances, sync, etc. etc. goes back decades and decades; at least 30 plus years of attempting to control. Initially BMI, ASCAP, etc. were courted by legal and/or marketing firms that brought to light the possibility that publishing houses/artists should be compensated by the end users. They even had (and still do) teams of "goon squads" going around the country to restaurants, bars, skating rinks, professional office complexes, small businesses etc. etc.....(in short any entity that plays(ed) recorded music or had/have live music doing cover tunes) to try and muscle these businesses into paying rights (for playing the recorded tunes as simple background music or having live bands). If Capone was around................he'd be envious and would had quit bootlegging booze altogether and gone into the music licensing rights business. Bottom line, it's all about the $$$. If there's a buck to be made....someone will try to find a way. As a side-note---personal experience dealing with a "goon squad" on a non drum corps level about licensing rights, etc...........is the reason of sharing this info; no matter what the business.....it's a "shake-down". Sadly, a perceived legal shake-down. PS: I won. Edited December 23, 2015 by bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quad Aces Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 The problem is that legally, that is *not* the responsibility of the corps. Synch and streaming rights are out of the corps' hands, unless they are producing their own physical media or stream. In fact, if you're not the producer of the desired media/stream, you can't even get an accurate quote. So let's put a halt to the idea that rules should be passed prohibiting music that DCI can't get the rights to. It's stupid, impractical, and ridiculous. DCI already requires corps to secure arranging and performance rights, and that's as far as the organization can (and should) go. I would imagine there is slowly developing a "list" of selections whose sync rights are really difficult (if not altogether impossible) to obtain - similar to the "list" of selections whose arranging/performing rights are really difficult (if not impossible) to obtain. Composers such as Bernstein, Maslanka, and De Meij, etc. fall on the latter list (IIRC). Corps generally seem to stay away from these composers, since they know they probably/definitely won't be granted these performance and/or arranging rights. Why aren't more corps staying away from selections and sound clips that are known to be nearly impossible or impractical to get the sync rights to? The Cadets with their Christmas show and the use of the Peanuts clips come to mind. IIRC, The Cadets knew that that clip wasn't going to make it onto the videos, but they went ahead and used the clip anyway. This seems to me (in some cases, not all) to be a situation where the corps are doing their responsibility by securing the rights that they need to secure, and then saying that they don't care about the rights that they are not responsible for (i.e. sync rights). Why can't the corps and DCI work together on this issue? Yes, I get that in a strict sense the corps don't need to worry about sync rights, but it seems like in some cases the corps are intentionally making DCI's job of obtaining sync rights more difficult (if not impossible), and in the long run, this is making the replaying of these shows really difficult for future (and present) fans of the activity that weren't at the live performances, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 23, 2015 Author Share Posted December 23, 2015 First of all, DCI will never release "all the info". We will never know what Ts they did not cross or which Is were not dotted (it is their 5th Amendment right to omit those details). As far as preserving our history - the big problem there is with corps using sounds that are unlicensed, or prohibitively expensive to license. History is not preserved when corps have chunks of their shows deleted from the end product. We do not need a capital campaign for that - we need DCI to adopt policies such as zero tolerance for unlicensed music, and a no-play list for songs whose synchronization rights cause an impractical cost burden. The availability of legacy video/audio products is an issue of availability, rather than preservation. i'm told soon. maybe even after the first the flow chart will go out. DCi can adopt policies, but that doesn't solve the past. that's what we'd need a capital campaign for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 23, 2015 Author Share Posted December 23, 2015 WGI has a comprehensive list on their site, but part of the problem is rights holders can change their minds and do from time to time too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 I would imagine there is slowly developing a "list" of selections whose sync rights are really difficult (if not altogether impossible) to obtain - similar to the "list" of selections whose arranging/performing rights are really difficult (if not impossible) to obtain. Composers such as Bernstein, Maslanka, and De Meij, etc. fall on the latter list (IIRC). Corps generally seem to stay away from these composers, since they know they probably/definitely won't be granted these performance and/or arranging rights. Why aren't more corps staying away from selections and sound clips that are known to be nearly impossible or impractical to get the sync rights to? The Cadets with their Christmas show and the use of the Peanuts clips come to mind. IIRC, The Cadets knew that that clip wasn't going to make it onto the videos, but they went ahead and used the clip anyway. This seems to me (in some cases, not all) to be a situation where the corps are doing their responsibility by securing the rights that they need to secure, and then saying that they don't care about the rights that they are not responsible for (i.e. sync rights). Why can't the corps and DCI work together on this issue? Yes, I get that in a strict sense the corps don't need to worry about sync rights, but it seems like in some cases the corps are intentionally making DCI's job of obtaining sync rights more difficult (if not impossible), and in the long run, this is making the replaying of these shows really difficult for future (and present) fans of the activity that weren't at the live performances, no? This is exactly the case as it's been explained to me. But, a "list"? I think this experience has taught us something about any such lists: The law says there are no lists. Old contracts and provisions won't likely apply in the future. So the only way forward to get the licensing you want is to hire someone who knows the yearly ebb and flow of licensing trends, what's happening this year versus last, or what may be expected in the next. I know a company that would be happy to provide such a service. It's starts with a 'T'. Demand for their services has spiked of late; the line to their door is long and distinguished. The pricing of their service will be set by those with the deepest pockets to afford it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesmusic Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 What exactly needs to happen for DCI (and the other pageantry arts organizations) to get out of this mess? Does anyone know specifically the steps involved to get DVDs/Blu-Rays/archived shows back up and running and intact with no gaping holes in the shows? Does DCI need to do some sort of "blanket" deal with Tresona that would cover sync rights of all shows in a given season? Does DCI need to enforce that each corps do a separate deal with Tresona for sync rights? Does DCI need to go back and pay for any and all sync rights for shows that are to appear in any sort of video media? Is there something else not mentioned? Is this just a standoff now with either party waiting for the other side to do something?? At this point, while understanding the issues involved, I don't think I understand what needs to happen to clear up the mess. Perhaps neither party knows, and that is the answer, but I would be interested in finding out at the least the necessary steps for the solution. Get a delorean, travel back in time and put today's copyright laws into the contract on your own terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 The problem is that legally, that is *not* the responsibility of the corps. Synch and streaming rights are out of the corps' hands, unless they are producing their own physical media or stream. In fact, if you're not the producer of the desired media/stream, you can't even get an accurate quote. So let's put a halt to the idea that rules should be passed prohibiting music that DCI can't get the rights to. It's stupid, impractical, and ridiculous. DCI already requires corps to secure arranging and performance rights, and that's as far as the organization can (and should) go. BOA has employed the "no-play" list method for participating bands. Are they stupid, impractical and ridiculous? Hundreds of scholastic bands gladly play the game according to BOA policies. What I find stupid, impractical and ridiculous would be for DCI to adopt no policies regarding rights for synchronization, streaming or sampling. Corps have already demonstrated "stupid" in their apparent ignorance of rights implications when making design choices. The only question would be how DCI chooses between "impractical" (i.e. the escalated cost of synch rights due to ill-chosen songs) or "ridiculous" (i.e. recordings with chunks of time missing, or whole corps omitted). As Dan Acheson said, DCI is in the music business. Common sense policies regarding music selection are an essential step in conducting this business. 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.