Posts Tagged ‘license’
Thursday, March 20th, 2014
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
What’s the new “normal” in reviewing and exchanging contracts? We are receiving an increasing number of contracts that had been issued as PDF files coming back as word files or even revised PDF files which means I have to read every single line of the agreement (along with an original version open beside it) in order to approve what is essentially a new version of the instrument we painstakingly crafted. Isn’t the presenter obligated to sign what we send or at least tell us they are amending our contract? We scratching our heads trying to understand what constitutes the “new normal” in contract practice.
I am the last person to proclaim what is and what is not “normal”. Normal is boring. Normal lacks imagination. Normal is not what the arts are all about. Nonetheless, when it comes to contract practice, many people in our industry continue to look for rigidity in a process that is intended to be quite fluid.
When you send a contract to another party, regardless of how brilliantly or painstakingly crafted the contract may be, you are sending them a “proposal” of the terms for their review. After all, unless you’re working within the structure of a pre-negotiated collective bargaining agreement, negotiating the terms of an engagement is not merely about agreeing on the date, time, and fee. Everything about the engagement is negotiable as well: insurance, force majeure terms, technical requirements, warranties, licenses, recording rights, approvals, publicity restrictions, exclusivity, cancellation, taxes, visas, etc.
While, as a general rule, a contract should never be presented until both sides have at least agreed to all of the most important terms, there are bound to be additional terms and requirements that were not discussed—and even if they were discussed, chances are the wording or phraseology in the contract may or may not comport with a party’s understanding of what was agreed upon. The contract is the way to present and memorialize all of the additional terms that are important to the engagement, but may not have been clearly discussed at the outset. Many people call all of these additional term “legalese” or “boilerplate” terms, but, remember, nothing is standard…everything is negotiable. Even if you find yourself in the enviable position of being able to say “take it or leave it”, no one is ever obligated to agree to anything. As a result, unless you have somehow managed to discuss and agree upon each and every term ahead of time, the presentation of a contract is often how the negotiation continues, not ends.
Both professional courtesy and common sense would suggest that, before anyone starts making contractual amendments, the party proposing or requesting such changes should bring them to the other party’s attention either by highlighting them or discussing them ahead of time. While marking up a contract with handwritten comments has long been the practice, technology makes it relatively easy to take a PDF, format it into an editable word document, and make changes. However, most word processing programs also allow you to “compare” two documents. So, rather than having to painstakingly read every single line of an agreement, you can just as easily ask your word processing program to compare the old and new versions and it will automatically highlight all of the changes for you.
Personally, because my handwriting often looks like a headless chicken ran through a puddle of ink, I love being able to make changes and edits directly to the text of a contract. However, I then use my word processing program to compare the old version with my version, rename the document, and send it to the other party with all of my proposed changes clearly marked. I also like to add a watermark that says “draft” on each page. Its only when all the terms have been agreed upon by all the parties that is time to remove the watermark, PDF the document, and get everyone to sign it.
________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 
legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:amendments, boilerplate, Brian Taylor, contract, Contracts, exclusivity, force majeure, Goldstein, insurance, license, music, negotiation, presenter, publicity, Review
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Presenters, Venues | Comments Closed
Thursday, January 23rd, 2014
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Greetings,
I have recently been contacted by ASCAP asking for fees based on music played by live musicians. Are we required to pay if we do not pay the musicians? Any musician who plays at the location is not compensated for their efforts.
Is anyone else who works at or for your location compensated for their “efforts”? Waiters? Staff? Vendors or suppliers? Do you have to pay for liquor if you give it away? Who pays for the electricity or the heat? People can always agree to donate goods and services, and many do. However, as a general rule, society discourages the involuntary donation of other’s property without their permission—even if it’s for a really good cause.
A musical composition—just like a computer, a watch, or a car—is considered property. It is no less valuable—indeed, I would argue, it is of greater value—than anything else you are required to pay for that has a physical price tag attached. A musical composition belongs to the composer who wrote it and/or the composer’s publishing company. Under US Copyright Law, whoever owns a musical composition also has the absolute right to control and determine all uses of the property—this includes the right to perform the music live, record the music, play a recording of the music for the public, change the lyrics, make arrangements, or just about anything else you can think of to do with music. Any location where music is performed—whether it’s a theater, concert hall, or other venue (for-profit or non-profit) where music is performed live or whether it’s a restaurant or store that plays recorded music for their patrons’ listening pleasure whilst shopping or eating—needs to obtain the composer’s permission and, in most cases, pay a usage fee called a “Performance License.”
ASCAP, like BMI and SESAC, is an organization that represents composers and helps them by issuing performance licenses and collecting fees on behalf of the composer. It helps locations, too, because, rather than having to contact every composer individually, you can purchase a performance license from ASCAP to cover all of the composers they represent. It’s like one-stop shopping. However, as they don’t represent every composer, most locations need to purchase licenses from BMI and SESAC, as well.
If your musicians are performing original music they composed themselves, then they can certainly agree to perform their own music for free. However, if they are playing (“covering”) music composed by other artists, then just because the musicians agree to perform for free doesn’t mean that the composers have allowed their music to be performed for free as well. If ASCAP contacted you, it’s because music is being performed in your location and ASCAP is trying to ensure that you have obtained permission from each composer they represent to have their music performed. While there are a number of factors that can determine the cost of obtaining performance licenses—the size of your venue, the price of tickets, the number of performances, etc.–ultimately, it’s your responsibility to ensure that the necessary permissions and licenses are obtained.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:artist, ascap, bmi, Brian Taylor, composer, composers, composition, copyright, copyright law, Goldstein, license, music, musical composition, musician, original music, performance license, permission, recording, sesac, venue
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Publishing, Recordings, Venues | Comments Closed
Thursday, November 21st, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
I was wondering if I have my own blog and post a music video from iTunes in the blog, giving full credit to the musician, including the musician’s original link, would this be legal? And can you please specify on what full credit means. Further, if I can’t do this, how do you go about getting permission from the musician?? Thank you!
A “copyright” is literally the right to make copies. A copyright “infringement” is when you make a copy of something without the owner’s permission.
Almost everything you can find on the internet (photos, images, videos, text, etc.) is someone else’s property. Part of the challenge of understanding digital rights is that the ease with which we can download and copy materials on the internet tends to make us forget that copying any materials without permission is still copyright infringement.
Without question, many people post pictures, videos, and other materials and are more than happy to have others repost and share them; but that decision is entirely up to the person who owns the materials. In other words, just because a car is parked on the street, doesn’t mean its free for the taking.
Purchasing and downloading a video from itunes only gives you the right to enjoy it. It doesn’t give you the right to re-post or copy the video. As such, posting someone else’s video on your blog would constitute copyright infringement unless you had permission from the owner of the video.
If you are commenting on or reviewing the video or the artist, then, arguably, you might be able to claim that posting the video constitutes “fair use.” However, the more of an item you post, the less “fair use” it becomes. So, an excerpt of a video is more likely to be “fair use” than posting the entire video. The better option would be for you to post a link to the video rather than post the video itself. In other words, you would be inviting your readers to go to itunes or the artist’s own website to view the video. This way, the owner can control whether or not they want the video to be shared.
I know many people who subscribe to the theory that, in practical terms, you should post anything you want until someone tells you to take it down. However, in practical terms, that’s also called “really bad advice.”
As for giving “full credit”, giving an owner credit in any form or manner neither gives you any rights to post materials nor absolves you of copyright infringement. Stealing a car, but leaving a thank you note crediting the owner, doesn’t make it any less a crime. If you want to get actual permission to repost a video, photograph, or any other copyrighted material, then you need to get permission (aka “a license”) from the owner—which may or may not be the artist. More often than not, video rights are controlled by record labels. Nonetheless, when seeking licenses, the best place to start is always the musician’s publisher, manager, or agent.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:artist, blogs, Brian Taylor, copy, copyright, copyright infringement, Goldstein, image, images, license, permission, photo, photograph, record label, Review
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing | Comments Closed
Wednesday, August 7th, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: Since ASCAP does not cover dance or theatrical performances, how does a dance group go about getting the appropriate permissions/ copyright releases needed for their performance? Another word for “permission” or “copyright release” is “license.” Dance performances, like theatrical performances such as opera or theater, as well as any other performance of music other than a concert, most often require two types of licenses for their performances: (1) a “Performance License” which is required for music to be performed (either live or via a recording) and (2) a “Dramatic License” for the music to be interpreted dramatically either through choreography or by performing the music as part of a play, musical, or opera. While ASCAP (as well as BMI and SESAC) does not issue dramatic licenses, they do issue performance licenses. Typically, most venues, theaters, presenters, etc. will obtain yearly blanket performance licenses from ASCAP, BMI and SESAC which allow the music in the ASCAP, BMI and SESAC catalogs to be performed in the venue. In such cases, that means you would only be required to get dramatic licenses for your group’s performances. However, not every venue obtains ASCAP, BMI and SESAC blanket performance licenses. Some erroneously believe that non-profits are somehow exempt from such licenses. Others believe it is the artist’s responsibility while others simply hope they won’t get caught. There are also instances where the music you want to dance to may not be represented by ASCAP, BMI or SESAC. Regardless of the reason, in instances where either the venue doesn’t have a performance license or the performance license doesn’t cover the music you need, you will be required to obtain both performance licenses as well as dramatic licenses. As for how your group actually obtains the necessary licenses, you would need to identify the composer or publisher of each musical work you want to use in your performance and contact the composer or publisher directly. Identifying composers and publishers isn’t actually that hard. ASCAP, BMI and SESAC maintain free, searchable databases, as does the Copyright Office website. You can also search the databases of other licensing organizations such as the Harry Fox Agency (which issues mechanical licenses.) You may have to be persistent and allow for lots of time. Not every composer or publisher will respond right away—or even respond at all. You may need to make repeated requests. If you don’t’ get a response, assume the answer is “no” and select different music. “Silence” is never golden which it comes to licensing. Also, just because you request a license doesn’t mean the composer or publisher will agree. And even if they agree, they can charge whatever they want. Composers and/publishers are free to be as arbitrary as they want when it comes to issuing licenses and setting fees. As I frequently remind everyone, there is no such thing as “industry standard.” If all of this seems daunting, keep in mind that, more often than not, you will be able to get the licenses you need provided you invest the necessary time and attention. Do not leave the licensing process to the last minute and do not assign this task to a volunteer intern helping out at your office. Also, bear in mind that the same rules that may seem to thwart your ability to use the music you want also protect you when it comes to controlling the ability of other dance groups to copy and perform works that you create and control. If all else fails, consider supporting a composer and commissioning your own music. _________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org. All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously. __________________________________________________________________ THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE! The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:ascap, bmi, Brian Taylor, choreography, copyright, dance, dance group, dance performances, dramatic license, Goldstein, license, Licensing, music, necessary licenses, non profits, performance license, permission, release, sesac, theaters, theatrical performances, venue
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Non-Profits, Presenters | Comments Closed
Wednesday, April 10th, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
A few weeks ago you wrote a great article about how to obtain a mechanical license when someone wants to record music. But what about using a recording that already exists? We would like to promote an upcoming concert at our venue by putting some recordings of the artist on our website. Since the artist gave us the recordings, are we ok?
Thanks…and no, you may not be ok.
Any time you want to use an existing recording of a composition, whether to put on your website, or as a soundtrack to a film or video, you will need to get permission (aka “a license)” from the composer (which often means contacting the composer’s publisher) as well as permission (aka “a license”) from the owner of the recording (which is often a record label.) That’s right, you may need to get two separate licenses! Why? Because copyright law creates a separate copyright in compositions and a separate copyright in the recording of a composition.
Just because an artist or an artist’s manager gives you a recording and gives you permission to use that recording, doesn’t mean that the artist owns the recording or has the rights to give. Even if it is a recording of the artist’s own original composition or if the composition itself is in the public domain, the artist may not own the recording. In which case, the artist cannot give you permission to use it, much less the artist’s manager.
Shortly after I posted the earlier blog you mentioned (The Mechanics of Mechanical Licenses, March 6, 2013), Peter Christ of Crystal Records Inc. (http://www.crystalrecords.com) sent me an email which exactly and accurately addressed this issue. He graciously agreed to let me post it here:
Your explanation was very clear and should help those who want to record music that is not public domain. However, it does not address the situation of a person who wants to use a recording already made, and on a record label, for their web site or their movie or other background music use. It should be made clear that the publisher needs to be contacted and ALSO the record label or other copyright owner of the recorded music.
We sometimes find out that our copyrighted recordings are being used as background music for films or on someone’s web site. This is not legal without our permission, and when it is discovered, the legal expenses can be very high for the perpetrator.
Some people want to do it right, and we frequently get requests for license to use our recordings for films, web, etc. We always appreciate that someone is honest and knowledgeable enough to request a license. However, in most cases, they do not realize they need a license both from the record company and from the publisher of the music. And in many cases, the music was recorded under an AFM contract and additional payment must be made through the union to the musicians on the recording. It should be pointed out that even if the music itself is public domain, the recording is most likely not, so permission from the record company, and possibly the union, is definitely needed. So the two minutes or so they want to use can get quite expensive.
Thank you for your excellent column in Musical America.
See, I don’t make this stuff up just to make your lives complicated! Bottom line, when it comes to music rights there are three rules: never assume—always ask—and know who to ask.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 
legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:artist, Brian Taylor, composer, composition, compositions, copyright, copyright law, Film, Goldstein, license, mechanical license, music, musician, payment, permission, public domain, record label, recording, venue
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Presenters, Publishing, Recordings, Venues | Comments Closed
Wednesday, March 6th, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
Does all music (if not in public domain) require a mechanical license to be recorded? I don’t quite understand when it is needed and when a person could pay a statutory fee and move forward without permission.
Yes, anytime you want to make an audio recording (whether you want to go into a studio or record live performance), you must obtain a “Mechanical License” from the publisher or the copyright owner(s) of the song or music you wish to record. A “Mechanical License” is the permission issued to a licensee (typically a record company or someone recording a cover song for their independent release) granting the licensee the right (ie: permission) to make and distribute an audio recording of a specific composition at an agreed-upon fee, per unit manufactured and distributed.
If the music has never been recorded and publicly distributed before and yours will be the first recording, then you will need to seek a Mechanical License directly from the publisher or copyright owner(s) who are free either to refuse to grant you the license or charge you whatever license fee they want. However, once a musical composition has been recorded and publicly distributed, the U.S. Copyright Act provides for a “Compulsory Mechanical License” to anyone who wants to record and distribute the work provided certain statutory requirements are met: (1) You have to provide notice to the publisher or copyright owner(s) of your intent to claim a Compulsory Mechanical License; and (2) you must pay the applicable Compulsory Mechanical License Fee set forth in the Copyright Act. The Compulsory Mechanical License Fees are set by the U.S. Copyright Office and are updated every few years. Currently, the rate is 9.1 cents or 1.75 cents per minute of playing time or fraction thereof, whichever is greater, per united manufactured and distributed. (Distribution includes both physical copies (ie: CDs) as well as full downloads. Different rates apply for limited-use downloads, ringtones, on-demand streaming.) Provided these requirements are met, the Mechanical License must be granted…the publisher or copyright owner(s) cannot refuse…that’s why it’s “compulsory.”
However, before you start drafting your Grammy-Award acceptance speech, there are few restrictions to keep in mind:
1) Compulsory Mechanical licenses do not apply to dramatic works, such as operas, film soundtracks, ballet scores and Broadway medleys. If you want to record one of these, you will need to seek the Mechanical License directly from the publisher or copyright owner(s) who are free to refuse or charge whatever they like.
2) Compulsory Mechanical licenses are available for audio-only recordings only. If you are making an audio-visual recording, such as a DVD or video, or anything involving visual images, you will need to obtain a “Synchronization License” directly from the publisher or copyright owner(s) who are free to refuse or charge whatever they like.
Compulsory Mechanical Licenses can be obtained through the Harry Fox Agency (www.harryfox.com), which represents most U.S. publishers. Mechanical licenses can also be negotiated directly with the publisher or copyright owner(s).
_________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 
legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:Brian Taylor, copyright, copyright act, Goldstein, license, live performance, mechanical license, music, musical composition, permission, public domain, recording, statutory fee, statutory requirements, synchronization license, u s copyright office
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Publishing, Recordings | Comments Closed
Wednesday, February 13th, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder: May we borrow music for an orchestral performance from another organization that purchased this music, but is currently not using it?
When you write that the other organization “purchased this music”, do you mean that they actually purchased all performance rights to the music or merely purchased the score and parts? Did they actually purchase the score and parts or merely rent them?
When it comes to copyrights and performance rights, “physical” possession of an artistic work does not inherently include any rights to the work other than the right to own it and possess it. For example, when you purchase a copy of Harry Potter, you get the right to read it, enjoy it, and place it on your bookshelf. If you like, you can even lend it to a friend or sell your used copy at a flea market. However, purchasing a copy of the book does not give you the right to perform it, interpret it dramatically, make a movie out it, copy and re-print excerpts, or do anything other than enjoy it. Similarly, when you purchase a painting from a gallery, you are purchasing the right to hang it on your wall and enjoy it. Like a book, you can also lend it to a friend or museum, or even re-sell it—but you do not have the right to make copies of it, alter it, post images on your website, use it as your logo, or do anything other than look at it. Those rights must be obtained separately.
Purchasing music works much the same way. The physical ownership of sheet music does not also give you the rights to perform it. Those rights must be obtained separately from the composer or publisher—or, if the composer is a member of a performing rights society (ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC) then you can obtain licenses through the society. So, in your scenario, assuming the other organization purchased the score and parts, then they have the right to loan you the music, but if you want to perform it, then you will need to obtain your own performance rights and licenses. Assuming they only rented the score and parts, then they don’t have the right to loan it to you in the first place. That would be like an illegal sub-let.
Borrowing music is like borrowing a car. First, you have to make sure that the person loaning you the car actually has the right to loan it to you in the first place. (Just because they have the keys, doesn’t mean they own the car.) Second, even if you are allowed to borrow the car, if you want to drive it, you’ll still have to pay for your own gas.
_________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:ascap, bmi, Brian Taylor, composer, copyright, Copyrights, excerpts, Goldstein, images, license, music, orchestra, orchestral performance, ownership, performance rights, performing rights society, physical possession, purchasing music, sesac, sheet music
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Publishing | Comments Closed
Wednesday, January 9th, 2013
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder,
I am a music professor at a medium-sized state college. We have two questions with regard to live streaming some of our concerts and recitals. We, of course, have paid the ASCAP and BMI licenses/fees to cover the rights for live performances. I believe the licensing agencies base the amount of the fee on the size of the school, and we pay a flat amount each year. Does paying those licenses for live performances also cover streaming the concert live? Our department chair believes this to be the case.
The other issue involves archiving the recordings of the concerts, or leaving them on the website for a time after the concert so patrons (e.g., parents of students or any other interested parties) can view the concert at a later date if they had a conflict the day of the original concert and were unable to watch it live. Would this practice also be covered by the licenses or fees we’ve already paid? Is this a grey area in which the law has not yet caught up with the technology, or would this practice be a violation of copyright?
I know of other schools whose music departments are streaming performances. Any clarification you could give on this subject would be most helpful not only to us but to many schools throughout the country.
Some ASCAP/BMI licenses for live performances also cover the right to stream the concert live. However, as with all rights, you only get what you ask and/or pay for. So, if you paid for the right to stream live concerts, then your license covers that. If you only paid for live concerts, then it does not. You need to check the license terms and agreement you received from ASCAP/BMI.
With regard to the issue of “archiving the recordings of the concerts”, the good news is that it is not a grey area at all. The bad news is that it is not a grey area at all. ASCAP/BMI licenses only cover live performances and, in some instances, streaming a live performance. However, making an audio/visual recording of a concert to be seen or heard at a later a date or…gasp…placed on a website for the whole world to access, is quite another. Such rights are called “synchronization rights” and they must be arranged separately. When you purchase the right to perform music at a live concert, there is no “inherent right” to make an archival recording or a recording for “non-commercial” purposes. There is no “inherent right” to make a recording of any performance at any time under any circumstances without the permission of (a) the composer/publisher of the music (assuming the composition is not in the public domain) and (b) the performers themselves.
As opposed to the law not catching up with technology, this is more of an issue where the performing arts industry has not caught up with the law. I, too, know of many schools and non-profits that regularly make archival recordings and stream concerts. While some of these are licensed, many are not. There is a common misperception that, so long as something is used for educational purposes or no money is charged, then no licenses or permission is required. Nothing could be further from the truth. While many composers and publishers are happy to grant liberal permission, or even turn a blind eye to unauthorized used, others are not. It’s anyone’s guess as to which one you’re dealing with until it’s too late. The safest rule of thumb is: never assume you have permission to do anything you haven’t specifically asked for. Always ask permission. It protects artists, protects your institution, and perpetuates the value of the arts.
________________________________________________________________
Both Robyn Guilliams and Brian Taylor Goldstein will be attending the Association of Performing Arts Presenters Annual Conference in New York, providing both workshops and consultations. Please stop by the 4th Floor of the Hilton and say hello!
_________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:ascap, bmi, Brian Taylor, composer, copyright, Education, Goldstein, license, Licensing, live performance, live performances, music, Non-Profits, performer, permission, recitals
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Non-Profits, Presenters, Publishing, Recordings | Comments Closed
Wednesday, November 28th, 2012
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
May we loan music that we own for orchestral performances by other non-profit organizations (schools, community orchestras, etc? Would the other group still need to obtain performing/recording permissions? Could we be liable if they don’t?
It depends how define “own.” If by “own”, you mean that you purchased the sheet music, then, yes, you can loan it or give it to whomever you want. It’s like purchasing a book or CD: when you’re done reading it or listening to it, you can loan it to a friend, donate it to a library, or even re-sell it. You just can’t copy it, perform it, or record it—and neither can the organization you loan it to.
Ownership of a physical copy of books, sheet music, CDs, or other copyrightable material is not the same thing as owning the copyright. Owning a physical copy merely gives you the right to physically possess it—or give it away—not do anything else or convey any other rights. So, if you’ve purchased the sheet music and you loan or give it to another organization, regardless of whether or not the other organization is a non-profit or for-profit, they will still have to obtain the necessary rights if they want to perform or record it. Should they fail to do so, they will be liable for copyright infringement, not you.
If, on the other hand, you have merely “licensed” or “rented” the sheet music, then you cannot loan or give it to anyone else. That would be like sub-letting an apartment without permission. When you license or rent, its just for you.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:Brian Taylor, community orchestras, copyright, copyright infringement, copyrightable material, Goldstein, Liable, license, orchestra, orchestral performances, orchestras, ownership, permission, recording, sheet music
Posted in Arts Management, Contracts, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Liability, Licensing, Music Rights, Non-Profits, Recordings | Comments Closed
Wednesday, November 21st, 2012
By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
I have a small venue. All 3 licensing companies are claiming I need to pay them for my karaoke and music that occurs weekly, but the bands that I have sign contracts making sure they only play their original music, nothing copyrighted. These companies have been strong-arming me with threats that there’s no such thing as original music anymore and that I must pay or I will be heavily fined. Is this true and, if so, is there blanket licensing that I may acquire for all 3?
Well, if there’s “no such thing as original music anymore”, that’s news to me and, I suspect, the thousands of composers out there!
If you require your bands to perform only original music that they composed themselves, then you do not need to obtain performance licenses from ASCAP, BMI or SESAC. The bands can give you all the permissions you need. However, if the bands breach their contract by “sneaking in” a few covers and performing music written by other bands or artists, then you would be liable for not having the proper performance licenses in place. (The band would be liable, too—for both breach of contract AND copyright infringement—but the performing rights organizations are more likely to go after you than the band.)
The karaoke is another matter. Karaoke machines, like jukeboxes, require licenses to be used in public venues such as yours. If you are featuring weekly karaoke nights, then you definitely must obtain karaoke licenses. The good news, such as it is, is that you can, indeed, obtain blanket karaoke licenses from each of the three performing rights organizations. The licenses will be based on the size and income of your venue.
Thanks for writing…and thanks to all of you who have written in, supported our blog, and asked great questions! Keem ‘em coming! Happy Thanksgiving!
________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.
All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.
__________________________________________________________________
THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!
Tags:ascap, bmi, breach, Brian Taylor, composers, copyright, copyright infringement, Goldstein, karaoke nights, license, Licensing, music, original music, performance license, performing music, permission, public venue
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Liability, Licensing, Music Rights, Venues | Comments Closed
legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com
