Letter from Tresona

[garfield]

an to touch on 4, because of past abuses, people want paid for them.

literally 4 notes a few years ago that were added in last minute cost DCI a bundle

I'm curious, what is "a bundle", specifically.

I'd like to be able to relate it to the $10-million (+/-) income statement of DCI.

[garfield]

I've been involved in some long, arduous, and detailed threads on DCP but this one has been one of the more enlightening and enjoyable to read passively.

I've enjoyed learning about posters via their comments, and learning new viewpoints backed by some interesting source material.

Kudos to all of you who have participated, with NE, Stu, Kamaraq, Pete, and a few others earning particular praise.

Edited April 23, 2016 by garfield

[HockeyDad]

Listen - strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.

-Dennis the constitutional peasant, Monty Python And The Holy Grail

[MikeD]

Honestly, no I wouldn’t. I only complain about costs going up on things in which I am ‘compelled’ to pay for; such as the government increasing my taxes. However, if Publishing Company A skyrockets their permission to arrange fees to a point out of my reach I would just seek out quality music from Companies B, C, etc… to turn into my competition arrangements. If enough people did that it would help other companies competing against Company A make more profit; which in turn would likely cause Company A to rethink their draconian fee increases. Or Companies A, B, C, etc… might not even care at all that they are losing a small clientele base within this niche we call the marching arts so they all raise their permission fees. And if that were the case I would just look into other options like original music or quality stock charts. What I would not do would be to complain about the ebb and flow of the competitive free market.

I would certainly complain, but then I'd move along to "Plan B", whatever it may be. I am in the beginning stages of arranging a 19th century symphonic work for our band this year because 1) our members do that sort of music well, and 2) no fees to pay.

[Stu]

I've been involved in some long, arduous, and detailed threads on DCP but this one has been one of the more enlightening and enjoyable to read passively.

I've enjoyed learning about posters via their comments, and learning new viewpoints backed by some interesting source material.

Kudos to all of you who have participated, with NE, Stu, Kamaraq, Pete, and a few others earning particular praise.

Thank you for your kind words; your input on various threads has also been well thought out and edifying.

[Stu]

I would certainly complain, but then I'd move along to "Plan B", whatever it may be. I am in the beginning stages of arranging a 19th century symphonic work for our band this year because 1) our members do that sort of music well, and 2) no fees to pay.

In retrospect, I admit that I would complain to myself. And what you did by using the 19th century music is great. A few things I have never understood about design choices within DCI corps staff: 1) With the millions of musical pieces written over the years why fixate on 'just the one you just have to arrange' irrespective the cost, not only monetary cost but the cost of not being able to record the performance for future generations to enjoy. 2) Again with all the millions of musical charts why this or that particular piece 'has' to be arranged and performed multiple times; not only by multiple corps but redone again and again by the same corps.

[Stu]

Links to documents which support a position do help back up opinions on the subject at hand. Two types have been presented within this thread. The first are academic interpretations; they are useful in helping give perspective to the opinions expressed by the person engaging in the thread postings. The second is a copy of a letter written by Jefferson; which is source material and at least to me carries more weight. The thing is that to gain the most accurate understanding of what Jefferson penned in that letter it needs to be placed in context of who it was written to (Madison), the date it was written (Aug 1789), the focus of the entire letter (the hashing out of the Bill of Rights and the limits placed on those rights), combined with placing it alongside many other letters and documents written by him (from the Declaration to even the letter he wrote to the Danbury Baptist Church and his editing of the Bible, because they all place you in the mind of Jefferson), as well as the writings and documents which influenced his thinking process (from the treatise written by Locke to the Magna Carta, from the English Bill of Rights to the Virginia Declaration of Rights, as well as failed items like the Articles of Confederation). All of that has to be combined to really get the best understanding of his mindset when he wrote to Madison about seeking a specified term limit on exclusive ownership of literature and inventions.

[skevinp]

I'm curious, what is "a bundle", specifically.

It's a collection of objects or a quantity of material grouped together into a single unit, but that's not important right now.

[N.E. Brigand]

I am in the beginning stages of arranging a 19th century symphonic work for our band this year because 1) our members do that sort of music well, and 2) no fees to pay.

One position put forth in this discussion (perhaps not entirely seriously) is that copyright should never expire. That was actually the position of Sonny Bono's widow in her 1998 testimony before Congress when they were contemplating extending the term of copyright from 75 to 95 years, which they did. She asked: why should my late husband's works ever belong to anyone but his heirs? By that argument, you ought to be paying for that 19th century work you're rearranging.

Edited April 23, 2016 by N.E. Brigand

[Pete Freedman]

Doesn't THIS pretty much exclude drum corps from the discussion anyway?

(4) performance of a nondramatic literary or musical work otherwise than in a transmission to the public, without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and without payment of any fee or other compensation for the performance to any of its performers, promoters, or organizers, if—

(A) there is no direct or indirect admission charge; or

(B) the proceeds, after deducting the reasonable costs of producing the performance, are used exclusively for educational, religious, or charitable purposes and not for private financial gain, except where the copyright owner has served notice of objection to the performance under the following conditions:

(i) the notice shall be in writing and signed by the copyright owner or such owner’s duly authorized agent; and

(ii) the notice shall be served on the person responsible for the performance at least seven days before the date of the performance, and shall state the reasons for the objection; and

(iii) the notice shall comply, in form, content, and manner of service, with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation;

Note the or at the end of the line. Then follow that down to the next line and you'll find the part I bolded. DCI qualifies if it owns and sells the tickets itself, as I see it. (And before somebody objects, yes of course it spends it's money on for-profit vendors and such. All non-profit money is spent for the recipient's profit - employees, vendors, TEPs, whatever. But DCI itself is a non-profit education organization - that's what counts I believe.)

Actually, you can answer the question better than I. By my read, if show tickets are owned and sold by a profit-making entity (TEP) which profits from the proceeds, then this would disqualify DCI. But if DCI officially sells the tickets and pays TEPs such as yourself as venue partner cost - as schools do when they don't have their own hall - then they would be good to go on the ticket question. However, if the TEP sells the tickets (i.e. owns the proceeds, not merely handing out DCI's tickets at the gate) and only gives DCI a cut, then I would think DCI is out on their butt.

But my concern was mostly for the 98,000 public schools that seem to be deriving no benefit from this and other non-profit exceptions. DCI would presumably face more severe scrutiny. For example, if the judge's test is simply, does most of the revenue seem to come from fans seeking real entertainment vs. supporting education, then DCI is in trouble. But if the test is, does the performance of a work in the education market actually compete with (i.e. decrease) the entertainment market for that piece, then DCI is good to go again. If it's never been heard by a court, then we don't know.