Letter from Tresona

[N.E. Brigand]

OK, kudos to them for responding.

[The Observer]

Even if the main reason for the email was because this CA Show Choir, that still doesn't explain why it's becoming more impossible to secure mechanical and/or sync rights at a reasonable (i.e. affordable) rate so that videos can be produced once again.

BTW, I need to find out how this show choir is raising $500,000. Maybe I'll be able to afford to use more copyrighted music.

[mingusmonk]

I've heard through the grapevine that a lot of choirs and show choirs are the ones pushing back here. They are starting to call Tresona's bluff by not working with/through them.

Everyone interested in this topic should Google "Girl Talk Copyright" basically Girl Talk does a TON of sampling and doesn't get anyone's permission or pay any fees. And he has never been taken to court. The theory is that none of the publishers want to take him to court because they are afraid they will lose, and then that loss in court will set a precedent. So it is easier to avoid high-profile court exposure and instead just force every band and choir in the country to fess up with "small" licensing fees.

Check out http://www.girlwalkallday.com/ and you can hear all of the samples. And this is a movie, so normally a synch license would be needed. But they didn't get one.

Played Feed The Animals and All Day back to back to assist with a long drive between Indiana and Florida a few weeks ago. I love it.

[tesmusic]

Even if the main reason for the email was because this CA Show Choir, that still doesn't explain why it's becoming more impossible to secure mechanical and/or sync rights at a reasonable (i.e. affordable) rate so that videos can be produced once again.

BTW, I need to find out how this show choir is raising $500,000. Maybe I'll be able to afford to use more copyrighted music.

It may not be a single California show choir, but instead an organization. For example, "Show Choir Camps of America" is a rather large beast in the midwest.

[MikeN]

Sampling is subject to performance rights (just like music) and synch rights. Designers don't really care about synch rights because it's not their responsibility, and they may not be able to get the info on securing those rights because they aren't producers of the recordings.

Exactly. My point is that either they need to care, or a Program Coordinator needs to take a larger view.. or they don't see a/v issues or merchandise revenue as a big deal. It could be simply fans care about a/v products more than the corps, which is a whole other issue.

Mike

[C.Holland]

Show Choir's just arrange and perform. We had those in Indiana. They were almost as shady as Feld Entertainment.

Edited April 15, 2016 by C.Holland

[mingusmonk]

I'm not sure that response really changes anything. While it does clarify that our activity was not the target, the point still stands.

If a California show choir can make an argument that could up in the courts (which must be possible, or there wouldn't be the need for the original letter) then what is the problem again?

[cowtown]

Linked In of founder Mark Greenburg Sr.

Attorney bio of founder Kenneth Booth

Linked In of the OP's letter-writer, EVP Larry Mills (with a recommendation at his old Sony/ATV job from Greenburg.

A staff of less than 10 people?

University of Utah College of Law and a Tofurkey Fabricator for Akbar and Jeff's Tofu Hut?

I’m not impressed; please continue to throw lawyers at them, make this venture unprofitable for them through legal niggling, bleed them dry

[Pete Freedman]

Both Tresona's letters presume that the issue is teachers not paying their fees, not the actual issue which is whether they are obliged to pay those fees.

Can anyone state the legal reason arrangers for non-profit educational institutions are supposed to pay fees?

And by legal reasons I mean either the black letter law in section 110, or specific case law refining it.

I'm not sure there's supposed to be an education copyright market at all. The premise seems to be you have to pay only if your work competes with the entertainment market versions of the piece. Thus, if you charge admission for profit, you must get copyright clearances. But if the admission goes to support the non-profit educational purpose, you don't have to?

This seems to be a culture in which thousands of teachers without lawyers get their advice from opposing counsel, leading to predictable systematic exploitation.

Another way of putting this is, has a non-profit teacher ever been found guilty of arranging music for their students without permission? Or an arranger for hire, even? Both are employed by the school to support the school's educational mission. Both take home a check personally.

[Pete Freedman]

Dear beloved music teachers,

We value our ongoing relationship, and celebrate your passion for and commitment to the development of music students.

This relationship depends on our continued ability to extract funds from you that you don't even realize you may not owe.

We cannot stress enough how important this is to our business model. It is vital that you truly believe that the fees you pay us actually go to the songwriters whose genius you so admire and teach your students to express lovingly, instead of to the "copyright holders" who are generally those who exploited the songwriters in the first place.

Some of you have taken the unfortunate step of hiring competent counsel. This disturbing trend is disheartening, because it suggests that you may not entirely trust our judgement in your legal matters. For our part we remain your faithful opposing counsel committed to dispensing the best advice to you that is interpreted in the light most favorable to us. You can rely on us always to advise you in our own best interests.

If you have a problem, call us. Talk to us. To us alone.

Thanks again, and remember, we couldn't do it to you without you.

All our love,

RealNameMightViolateDCPTOS Music Service