Tim Snyder Threatens Over Fair Use

[TheOneWhoKnows]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRf-S42j3X2/?igsh=MXVpYjd0amNwc2x5OQ==
 

Pretty over the top response from Mr. Snyder based on this account. Definitely brings into question my support for Box5.

[combia1]

6 minutes ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRf-S42j3X2/?igsh=MXVpYjd0amNwc2x5OQ==
 

Pretty over the top response from Mr. Snyder based on this account. Definitely brings into question my support for Box5.

Tim Snyder does not understand fair use. And he proves once again that he has zero tact. He’s an ######## and a bully. Always has been. Always will be. 

[KVG_DC]

Box5 did not impress folks in the HornRank forums for Grand Nats...again.

[corps8294]

He would be better off getting into fisticuffs with Lucas Oil Stadium parking lot security. 

[keystone3ply]

👀 Dang - Guess you need instagram. Might check on my wife's account unless it's on FB.   

Edited November 26, 2025 by keystone3ply
c

[cixelsyd]

8 hours ago, combia1 said:

Tim Snyder does not understand fair use. 

If anyone understands "fair use", it would be the U.S Copyright Office.  As posted on copyright.gov, they say:

"Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports."

Reposting the entire show of an ensemble is not a "limited portion"... therefore, that is not "fair use".

Of course, the alternative to "fair use" would be to get permission from the copyright holder for what you want to do.  With marching arts, that is very complicated due to the fact that there are multiple levels of rights involved (i.e. the original music, derivative works, public performance, recording/broadcast all have separate rights).  In any case, if you try to contact whom you believe to be the copyright holder and get no response, that does not give you the right of "fair use" either.

Quote

And he proves once again that he has zero tact. He’s an ######## and a bully. Always has been. Always will be.

Not surprising.  What is surprising is that there is anyone left who is either stupid enough or obstinate enough to provide video services to the marching arts, when their participant/customer base engages in piracy so rampant and memeworthy that we can all access a library of such material via searching "cake recipes", "bike trails", or just the name of the ensemble with a "not" prefix.

(Oh, and if the video provider is a ########, that still does not make it "fair use".)

[TheOneWhoKnows]

3 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

If anyone understands "fair use", it would be the U.S Copyright Office.  As posted on copyright.gov, they say:

"Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports."

Reposting the entire show of an ensemble is not a "limited portion"... therefore, that is not "fair use".

Of course, the alternative to "fair use" would be to get permission from the copyright holder for what you want to do.  With marching arts, that is very complicated due to the fact that there are multiple levels of rights involved (i.e. the original music, derivative works, public performance, recording/broadcast all have separate rights).  In any case, if you try to contact whom you believe to be the copyright holder and get no response, that does not give you the right of "fair use" either.

Not surprising.  What is surprising is that there is anyone left who is either stupid enough or obstinate enough to provide video services to the marching arts, when their participant/customer base engages in piracy so rampant and memeworthy that we can all access a library of such material via searching "cake recipes", "bike trails", or just the name of the ensemble with a "not" prefix.

(Oh, and if the video provider is a ########, that still does not make it "fair use".)

I’ve seen some loopholes used around the “reposting”. Pausing the video, reducing the contrast/visibility of the video in the background. Things like that to get around “reposting the entire thing”. Don’t know how much of that has been truly proven in court, but those cases seem to have worked.

The other thing here is it’s clear there was no ill intent on reporting and Tim could’ve just requested he take it down instead of berating him about it. Or even ask him to credit Box5 for the recording and use it as a free marketing tool. I think Tim missed an opportunity as a CEO to grow potential viewership. 

[Algernon]

you are assuming the young man in the IG post is providing an accurate account of the conversation,

[cixelsyd]

24 minutes ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

I’ve seen some loopholes used around the “reposting”. Pausing the video, reducing the contrast/visibility of the video in the background. Things like that to get around “reposting the entire thing”. Don’t know how much of that has been truly proven in court, but those cases seem to have worked.

The other thing here is it’s clear there was no ill intent on reporting and Tim could’ve just requested he take it down instead of berating him about it. Or even ask him to credit Box5 for the recording and use it as a free marketing tool. I think Tim missed an opportunity as a CEO to grow potential viewership. 

Two problems with that:

1.  Again... when there are other rights holders upstream, the video producer only has whatever copyrights they have already negotiated and paid for.  For example, if they only have license to broadcast live, they cannot legally provide on-demand video or downloads (much less authorize third parties to do so).  Obtaining those additional rights would be a separate negotiation and a separate price... and if someone upstream says "no", forget it.

2.  If you do not defend your copyright, you can lose it.  And if you have other rights holders upstream, you may face lawsuits from them on top of that.

[TheOneWhoKnows]

1 hour ago, Algernon said:

you are assuming the young man in the IG post is providing an accurate account of the conversation,

Yes that is why I said “based on this account”.