camel lips

George Hopkins Charged with two Counts Sexual Assault

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bluzes said:

I have been made aware that FLO is now stepping in on DCI's behalf and are taking shows/vids off of YT. There are so many moving parts what 3 or 4 licenses. Rights to fielding the music a theatrical license for the theater, a streaming license for FLO and media rights for BluRay & CD. Most of the time DCI/FLO is asking permission from the artists.

What I don't understand what does FLO or DCI have to do with policing the internet, they are not the original rights holders of any of the music? It's the MMs music they paid and played the show but can't have their hard work displayed on YT while most other music is readily available. At this point, dci is no better than the rights holders holding back the music for their own profit. It would be interesting to have a thread reviewing the MM contracts to see what they may be forfeiting, it's their music, not the booking agents.

DCI/Flo licensed the mechanical rights from the copyright holders, which does NOT include freely posting them on the web (e.g. Youtube). They must show they are actively policing places on the web to uphold the rights of the copyright holders in order to maintain those rights and acquire them in future years.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, BRASSO said:
50 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

There is nothing in the " MM Contracts "

Hi BRASSO having a good day, KC Won so I am in a good mood. The good news is well, first of all, let us refer to music as visual arts since most music is that way today. 

Being for "instructional purposes" lessens rights issues on the net since it benefits all students or else homeschooling would not exist. That is a good thing.

"MM's are not professional, For-Profit, Musicians" but there is a lot of profit to be made from their work. It's dci that does not want their stuff on YT for their own profit. So there are many profits in there but the folks playing the music have no say and no profit.

"MM's in DCI do not play any " music " at all in their performances either." Then dci has nothing to worry about what are they taking down from YT?

The point is dci complaining to us that the artists made them cut this and that and the BluRays are incomplete. Then do the same thing to the MM who may want to watch a show 6 years down the road with their kid and has to buy a copy.

Seems to me dci has all the internet skills they need to track this metadata down on the net. Is that an evil use of the net like using it to check backgrounds?
It's the pot calling the kettle black. Dci is keeping it off YT not the original artists and they are doing it for profit or maybe not but they think so.

5

 

Edited by Bluzes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2018 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Ream said:

This is what this thread is about ... isn’t it?

I’ve never been that guy before, trying to bring focus back to the topic at hand. But for this topic, I’ll be that guy. 

Edited by Jurassic Lancer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bluzes said:

...I know nothing about the law...

As it applies to Copyright law, this is the most honest and true statement you have posted to date. Now back to the thread topic.

Edited by Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bluzes said:

I have been made aware that FLO is now stepping in on DCI's behalf and are taking shows/vids off of YT. There are so many moving parts what 3 or 4 licenses. Rights to fielding the music a theatrical license for the theater, a streaming license for FLO and media rights for BluRay & CD. Most of the time DCI/FLO is asking permission from the artists.

What I don't understand what does FLO or DCI have to do with policing the internet, they are not the original rights holders of any of the music? It's the MMs music they paid and played the show but can't have their hard work displayed on YT while most other music is readily available. At this point, dci is no better than the rights holders holding back the music for their own profit. It would be interesting to have a thread reviewing the MM contracts to see what they may be forfeiting, it's their music, not the booking agents.

 Image result for off topic... gifs

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, MikeD said:

DCI/Flo licensed the mechanical rights from the copyright holders, which does NOT include freely posting them on the web (e.g. Youtube). They must show they are actively policing places on the web to uphold the rights of the copyright holders in order to maintain those rights and acquire them in future years.

 

I don't think that can be substantiated, it is like saying bar owners need to police their customers. Making sure they are not describing accounts of the game w/o expressed written consent of the Commissioner. 

How could dci be in violation of anything if they already sought out a license to stream the stuff in the first place? It's dci and it has nothing to do with the original artists they know the internet is out there. Dci themselves had archives on the fan network and a free month now & then where were the original artists then?

We are a long way from Metallica v. Napster even they have come around in and found a marketing value on the internet.

Our corps overseas in the EU now have a draconian new law. Shuts down everything, post a photo with a corps shirt on FB and you owe a stipend to the corps. Sing happy birthday over the net costs you. Place a video clip of yourself at the bar and if there is music playing in the background you must pay. I am not making any of this up it's all at the link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union


 

Edited by Bluzes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

 Image result for off topic... gifs

Sorry

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Stu said:

As it applies to Copyright law, this is the most honest and true statement you have posted to date. Now back to the thread topic.

Thanks for the kind words, Stu. What is a thread anyway it's been like a Chinese Buffet lately. Where you been I missed being pummeled? Do we have a New Stu Brewing, your not posting in Church anymore, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bluzes said:

Thanks for the kind words, Stu. What is a thread anyway it's been like a Chinese Buffet lately. Where you been I missed being pummeled? Do we have a New Stu Brewing, your not posting in Church anymore, right?

 

Not only is this bad fishing, but the bait also stinks. Now (Please) get back on topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bluzes said:

I have been made aware that FLO is now stepping in on DCI's behalf and are taking shows/vids off of YT. There are so many moving parts what 3 or 4 licenses. Rights to fielding the music a theatrical license for the theater, a streaming license for FLO and media rights for BluRay & CD. Most of the time DCI/FLO is asking permission from the artists.

What I don't understand what does FLO or DCI have to do with policing the internet, they are not the original rights holders of any of the music? It's the MMs music they paid and played the show but can't have their hard work displayed on YT while most other music is readily available. At this point, dci is no better than the rights holders holding back the music for their own profit. It would be interesting to have a thread reviewing the MM contracts to see what they may be forfeiting, it's their music, not the booking agents.

they are the ones that create the video feeds/blurays. thats why they are policing

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.