Letter from Tresona

[perc2100]

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

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.

Girl Talk is SO awesome! I saw him DJ an [adult swim] party at Comic-Con several years ago and what he did was so inventive, fresh, and TONS of fun. I can't believe he hasn't been sued yet; I remember after seeing him at the party thinking I'd be reading about him in lawsuits for the next year and I can't believed that's not happened yet.

Another interesting (though more oblique) example of this is the film ESCAPE FROM TOMORROW http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2187884/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

This film is essentially about a guy on vacation at Disney World with his family, finds out he's being laid off, and gradually loses his mind hiding that from his family so as to not spoil their good time. The movie shot secretly at Disney World and Disneyland with zero permission from the Mouse House; the shot in the park, the movie features multiple rides (including both a real and dark 'fantasy' version of "It's a Small World"), and even features Disney princess 'characters' who have a night job as prostitutes. When the film screened at a film festival (I want to say Sundance) most people assumed that a) no distribution company/studio would buy the rights to release the film because b) Disney would sue the ever-loving snot to make sure the film never saw the light of day.

Shockingly, Disney never did a thing: never issued a cease/desist letter, never filed a lawsuit, never threatened any distribution company. Several people assumed Disney did NOT want to call attention to the film by suing it, and seemingly (rightly) thought the film would never broach main stream attention, even with the gonzo filming methods. Maybe there is another reason Disney didn't sue as far as Fair Use is concerned...

[perc2100]

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.

If the rights' holders set the price (which they do) then that is out of all of our hands: including Tresona. It sounds as if Tresona is merely a go-between/middle-man and potentially all of this rage is seemingly directed towards the wrong individuals/company

[perc2100]

I'm a Band Director in Indiana. Our Copyright Licensing 'yearly average' for securing rights to our shows averaged $400-$600 pre-Tresona, and $1500-$2200 now that Tresona has come into their extortative ways existence. I ALWAYS played by the book copyright-wise. They have, however, cornered the effective market, and either they themselves have decided to double or triple what the individual music publishers were charging, or they convinced the publishers to do so (my guess is it is some of both). As an example, Hal Leonard's 'standard' fee to use a piece of HL-owned music was $300. Now it has ballooned to $590. Some publishers used to charge $100-$150 to arrange their music for marching band. That has ballooned to $400-$590, depending on the publisher.

This company, and the (shady) practices behind it are obscene, and are 100% hurting the smaller bands like mine (my band competes pretty decently within the ISSMA fall circuit).

It is out of control.

I guess, then, the real philosophical question is whether or not this practice is a good or bad thing. For band directors/music boosters paying the fees the price up-tick is not good, but neither are the rising costs of arranging/drill writing, facilities (we sometimes get charged by our district to use our own freaking band room!), transportation, etc: meaning, costs of EVERYTHING continue to rise, albeit maybe not at the rates of rights' licensing.

If creators are being paid better, this is a GOOD thing in our broad music industry! It's easy to look at corporations charging more and profiting off of artists' work, but artists still are the ones who sold their work to those companies at some point.

Maybe a better philosophical question is:

Are we doing marching band/drum corps/marching arts correctly? Maybe the old model of how things USED to be done is quickly becoming outdated and new models must be formulated...

[corpsband]

I guess, then, the real philosophical question is whether or not this practice is a good or bad thing. For band directors/music boosters paying the fees the price up-tick is not good, but neither are the rising costs of arranging/drill writing, facilities (we sometimes get charged by our district to use our own freaking band room!), transportation, etc: meaning, costs of EVERYTHING continue to rise, albeit maybe not at the rates of rights' licensing.

If creators are being paid better, this is a GOOD thing in our broad music industry! It's easy to look at corporations charging more and profiting off of artists' work, but artists still are the ones who sold their work to those companies at some point.

Maybe a better philosophical question is:

Are we doing marching band/drum corps/marching arts correctly? Maybe the old model of how things USED to be done is quickly becoming outdated and new models must be formulated...

If arranging fees climb too high, directors will find a non-Tresona source of material.

If sync fees climb too high (apparently some already have) media will be published in alternate channels.

So long as there's demand, there will be suppliers.

I was a happy paying consumer paying a legitimate supplier what we both considered a reasonable fee. And it appears a couple of greedy d-bags have loused it up. So....

I for one welcome our new pirate overlords.

[Eleran]

Are we doing marching band/drum corps/marching arts correctly? Maybe the old model of how things USED to be done is quickly becoming outdated and new models must be formulated...

In the 80's, my high school simply bought and performed marching band arrangements from the publisher, just like you buy a concert band piece from the publisher, and the purchase price included the rights to perform it - as I mentioned above, no other rights were necessary since they weren't recording and selling it. They knew upfront what the price would be, since it was just the list price in their catalog. I often think it would be easier if high school bands returned to that format - playing 4 mass-published arrangements, instead of having someone individually arrange within the band director's grand artistic vision. In addition to simplifying (and reducing costs) of the process, not every band director is necessarily capable of putting out quality arrangements.

[C.Holland]

I'm a Band Director in Indiana. Our Copyright Licensing 'yearly average' for securing rights to our shows averaged $400-$600 pre-Tresona, and $1500-$2200 now that Tresona has come into their extortative ways existence. I ALWAYS played by the book copyright-wise. They have, however, cornered the effective market, and either they themselves have decided to double or triple what the individual music publishers were charging, or they convinced the publishers to do so (my guess is it is some of both). As an example, Hal Leonard's 'standard' fee to use a piece of HL-owned music was $300. Now it has ballooned to $590. Some publishers used to charge $100-$150 to arrange their music for marching band. That has ballooned to $400-$590, depending on the publisher.

This company, and the (shady) practices behind it are obscene, and are 100% hurting the smaller bands like mine (my band competes pretty decently within the ISSMA fall circuit).

It is out of control.

Its a 50/50 split between publisher and composer/arranger. At least it usually is. One creates the piece, the other does all the legwork for it. HL has been one of the problem's behind tresona as they have a different agreement that drives up prices. I can see some of the smaller circuits deciding to agree to not use anything from the HL library.

[perc2100]

In the 80's, my high school simply bought and performed marching band arrangements from the publisher, just like you buy a concert band piece from the publisher, and the purchase price included the rights to perform it - as I mentioned above, no other rights were necessary since they weren't recording and selling it. They knew upfront what the price would be, since it was just the list price in their catalog. I often think it would be easier if high school bands returned to that format - playing 4 mass-published arrangements, instead of having someone individually arrange within the band director's grand artistic vision. In addition to simplifying (and reducing costs) of the process, not every band director is necessarily capable of putting out quality arrangements.

Yeah it really seems that the bottom will fall out sooner than later: it seems improbably to think that the activity from an expenditure/design standpoint can continue to grow and grow. For scholastic groups, seeing how much time & resources are spent on marching band or winter drums it seems sometime ludicrous: especially when some of those programs have wind programs that don't come close performance level-wise (meaning, it seems obvious some programs/parents spend big money for marching band or drum line trophies/success at the expense of a more broad, standards-based instrumental music program).

I'm not saying one more than the other is a good or bad thing (FWIW I teach at a program that has pretty consistent success marching & concert), but I think the current situation brings up a more interesting conversation that is maybe going ignored a little bit: we focus on the problems of making an older model fit a modern world when maybe it's time to completely re-evaluate the model

[combia1]

I'm a Band Director in Indiana. Our Copyright Licensing 'yearly average' for securing rights to our shows averaged $400-$600 pre-Tresona, and $1500-$2200 now that Tresona has come into their extortative ways existence. I ALWAYS played by the book copyright-wise. They have, however, cornered the effective market, and either they themselves have decided to double or triple what the individual music publishers were charging, or they convinced the publishers to do so (my guess is it is some of both). As an example, Hal Leonard's 'standard' fee to use a piece of HL-owned music was $300. Now it has ballooned to $590. Some publishers used to charge $100-$150 to arrange their music for marching band. That has ballooned to $400-$590, depending on the publisher.

This company, and the (shady) practices behind it are obscene, and are 100% hurting the smaller bands like mine (my band competes pretty decently within the ISSMA fall circuit).

It is out of control.

Exactly! Working directly with Hal Leonard was always pretty efficient and painless. They had a great online portal long before anyone else. They were well organized, easy to work with, and prices were reasonable. In this case, Tresona is an unnecessary middle-man/layer that adds ZERO value to the process, but adds additional cost/overhead to bands, choirs, etc.

[mingusmonk]

Exactly! Working directly with Hal Leonard was always pretty efficient and painless. They had a great online portal long before anyone else. They were well organized, easy to work with, and prices were reasonable. In this case, Tresona is an unnecessary middle-man/layer that adds ZERO value to the process, but adds additional cost/overhead to bands, choirs, etc.

Remember that Tresona has customer's on both ends. They are serving performing units AND arrangers. While it may appear Zero value to you from the performance unit's side, there is still another percentage of value that Tresona is considering.

[N.E. Brigand]

If creators are being paid better, this is a GOOD thing in our broad music industry! It's easy to look at corporations charging more and profiting off of artists' work, but artists still are the ones who sold their work to those companies at some point.

I'd be very curious to know whether composers really are making more money in the age of Tresona, and if so, how many are benefiting.