Stu Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 (edited) Ah lawyers. Jesus and Shakespeare were so right. The biting sarcasm of Shakespeare and the scathing rebuttal confrontations of Jesus; what a one-two punch! Edited May 4, 2016 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Ah lawyers. Jesus and Shakespeare were so right. And yet, Jesus and Shakespeare are both dead, while we lawyers are still around. Poets & Prophets 0 - Barristers and Solicitors 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 And yet, Jesus and Shakespeare are both dead, while we lawyers are still around. Poets & Prophets 0 - Barristers and Solicitors 1 So can you lawyers rise from the grave and conquer death as Jesus did? Or is it only surgeons who make the claim of being God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 So can you lawyers rise from the grave and conquer death as Jesus did? Or is it only surgeons who make the claim of being God? If you consider that lawyers were undoubtedly responsible for writing the 95 year time span for copyrights, then yes ... I'd say we conquered death in some areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 The biting sarcasm of Shakespeare and the scathing rebuttal confrontations of Jesus; what a one-two punch!Considering the people Jesus spoke of were not the same as lawyers of today, and considering Shakespeare's statement was actually a compliment in the context it was made, I'd say it's two swings and two misses. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Considering the people Jesus spoke of were not the same as lawyers of today... Jesus was addressing lawyers who were manipulating the law for their own personal gain in wealth and power; so of course you are right, no lawyers like that exist in our modern era! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 ... considering Shakespeare's statement was actually a compliment in the context it was made,... The quote by Dick the Butcher in Henry IV concerning lawyers is one that, in context, is supposed to be delivered with biting sarcasm; sort of like the way most people today take jabs at lawyers seen in adverts on TV who come across as really just doing it for their own personal gain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daave Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Sorry for bringing up one of these again, but as the season arrives, have a question. During years past, whether at small shows or at Lucas, I have seen various corps have DVR's of their shows from years past playing at their booths. These shows appeared to be from the old FanNetwork where you could pay for them when they were released. Now that this Tresona thingy (and all that it brings with it) has impacted the activity, would there be any issues if corps continued to do this? Any violations in this type of practice? I know, that when I'm in the souvie areas, I stop at watch these videos. I suppose in their own way it is a marketing tool. I stop, I watch, I buy. Veni, Vedi, Vici I came, I saw, I conquered. - Caesar Veni, Vedi, Velcro I came, I saw, I stuck around (and bought souvies). - Daave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornTeacher Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Veni, Vedi, Velcro I came, I saw, I stuck around (and bought souvies). - Daave Absolutely priceless!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted July 14, 2020 Share Posted July 14, 2020 An interesting legal case on the matter where Tresona has been denied. https://srileylawblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-end-of-tresona.html My take on the law...DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer. Tresóna is a for profit business who was spearheaded by publishing companies. Much like politicians can be persuaded by lobbyists, Tresóna works specifically for publishers and no other stakeholders. In terms of producing a show, the performance rights have nothing to do with Tresóna. The fact is, those rights are provided by performance specific rights organizations such as BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, CCLI, MTI, etc. Having discussed this matter multiple times with each of these organizations, the producer of the performance is not responsible for the payment of any royalties for the performance of any musical number. However, the venue is responsible for the royalties as the venue is often the organization charging the ticket price. For example, a live show producer offers a themed show for use in a theme park. The producer is not selling nor distributing any musical recording or sheet music for a fee. They are putting the show together by writing, designing, and managing the production as a service based organization. The theme park is charging a ticket price into the park, therefore they are responsible for royalties. Ahh, but the good news for them is that they already pay for a blanket license covering all music from each of the necessary aforementioned rights organizations. So, no infringement can be brought against them. That being said, a production company could never sell it's custom library of musical arrangements to any other person or organization as that is considered sale or distribution of copyrighted works. Therefore, they could be pursued based on that premise. However, any arranger who provided the service of arranging the charts for the production company's use is exempt as they would be considered either as a W2 or 1099 Employee of the company. All the arranger is doing, is providing the service of the arranging and/or producing of soundtracks. Even Tresóna states that the end owner would have to pay for the arrangement and for the arranger's service. The Arranger is merely an employee. Even as a 1099 (contracted laborer) employee, the arranger is carrying out the instructions of the client and not providing an arrangement for sale to the general market. In the end, Tresóna is a cash cow for publishing companies. To be honest, I find their rates and terms offensive to all stakeholders in the situation. At one time, I had a print license on several songs owned by Cirque du Soleil. I paid an up front royalty and then additional after that royalty had depleted. I want to say it was $125 for each song for choir arrangements. Tresóna wants $500-$750 for one song and then the school must buy the copies from Tresóna and they get a limited license to perform the work which is typically 2 years. Got that? Way too overpriced for educational use. Then, they demand that you have to go through them, and you would need permission from any copyright holders...HUH?? Bottom line, if they don't own the song, they can not force any licensing fees or charges upon anyone. Now, I did run into one song that the copyright owner stated they were under contract with Tresóna for custom arrangement licensing. They were the original publisher of the song contracted by the artist/writer to manage any and all publishing of their work. However, after discussing the matter with that publisher, they granted an arrangement and performance license to cover me and my school based on the educational use premise and I was instructed there was no need to deal with Tresóna. In terms of the booster group, again...if they are the producer of the performance, they have no liability here, especially if they are a non-profit organization to the best of my knowledge. The school is the venue and it would be exempt anyway. Even by their own structure, and statement of purpose, Tresóna is not a performance rights organization. They are a publishing rights organization. They have no claim nor any say over performance of any song or arrangement. If they did, every band, karaoke/DJ, wedding singer, music studio, school, college, musician, or artist would be open season for them. Since artists and groups are represented by a performance rights organization by contractual membership, Tresóna will never be granted those possibilities! This is my understanding of the law in regards to this situation. It is not legal advice, merely commentary and thoughts on the matter. I encourage anyone to discuss these things with other organizations and stakeholders involved before paying any royalty or rights fee to any organization! 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.