Hi,
By means of an experiment I contacted several people who created stuff and sold it. I always asked the same questions : can I perform your effects and can I perform them on TV.
Most people were kind and said "yes". Some where not so kind and said "no".
Now, I have no problem with "no". Absolutely not. You ask a question and rejection is just a chance you take.
But, I do believe that those people who sell their stuff should let the buyers know those things in advance.
For books like novels, it's quite normal that you don't allow other people to copy it. It's also common knowledge that it's not allowed.
But for people in the performing arts, it's much like you buy a manual to do something yourself.
If you are not allowed and you only see it mentioned in the book once you have bought it, well... It just isn't fair play to me. You lost your money, but you still can't do what you wanted to do with the things you bought.
I think we should know in advance what we buy, so that we can make informed decisions.
Jeff Richards, Christian Chelman (who is a god in my eyes), and several others, please consider this for your future releases.
This is not meant as an attack, just as a reasonable request from a customer (or, in Jeff's case "potential customer".

Okay.

Rosemary pm'd me and asked me about television performance rights for split reality.

This is a pet effect of mine -- and I retain TV performance rights...

lots of creators do this...

J

Yes, I did PM you, like I contacted many others. I stated that above.
I just ask those "lots of creators" to play fair and to let this know in advance.
That's all.

Personally I don't see the point of this post...

another strange attempt to stir the pot and defame fellow performers by rosemary..

I am very transparent when asked about the effect ( as I am sure you will attest to) I have never tried to decieve anyone, and do not appreciate being painted as some one who is not being fair or giving all of the info about this piece...

The point is that I'd like to know what I buy.
It's not only about you, Jeff. So don't take this personally.
I didn't accuse anyone of deceiving.
And I admit I do stir the pot sometimes, yes. But is it a reasonable request or not ? I mean : there are even magic books in which there's stated that you can not use the effects in performance at all.
So, I don't feel bad it pointing such things out.

Very few do this, and it is always spelled out in the manuscript if there is a restriction. Most all list the restriction in their ads as well because not doing so amounts to restricting the rights of an item after purchase which is not legal, and is also grounds for return and full refund of purchase.

If it's in the ad, I don't have a problem at all.
If it's in the manuscript, then it's too late, because you already bought it then.
That's what I was pointing out. Good to know it's not legal, so perhaps it'll change now.
I always love your posts, Tony

This is a very valid topic and one that many people don't pay attention to.

Thank you for bringing it up Rosemary.

Tony

Finally a nice reaction from somebody.
Since the "TT2" affair, most people treat me like I'm the evil witch of the North. TT2 is not one of them, I must add !

So help me clear this up a bit...
If no disclaimer is given in a manuscript does that mean that it's an open playing field and the purchaser has the right to use the purchased information as they wish ie. performance, television etc.
Does Jeff Richards manuscrip state that it's not to be used or does he state this after the fact when contacted?

Please don't focus too much on Jeff.
But this problem exists, yes. And I don't know if it's an open playing field then. I never thought about it that way. But it would be great, no ? Everyone performing "split reality" on tv and getting away with it ? Just teasing, Jeff, just teasing !

I can add an ad to that.

Everybody loves Tony's post. He is a "grandpa" to all of us.

Unless you agree to restrictions as terms of the purchase, there are no restrictions of use. In the US, some restrictions of use have been determined to be invalid and not enforceable as well. Case in point, the rental of video and audio products.

Moral and ethics are a different matter. Had I purchased a product that listed no restrictions but was informed of restrictions after purchase, I would return the product and more than likely avoid any contact with that individual and his products. Ethics and morals go both ways.

Tony Iacoviello

I have only released one collection of effects so far and as such, I am not as qualified to comment on this issue as many others on this forum but this is an issue I spent time thinking about before my release.

My humble opinion on the matter is that I would appreciate someone making a genuine attempt to contact me before performing one of my effects on TV but they are by no means required to do so.


However, I understand that many performers are in a different situation and that some effects which they release are an important part of their act and as such are essential in setting them apart from other performers.


Its a difficult area but I agree that if performance rights are restricted, then the seller has a responsibility to make buyers aware of this fact.


Just my tuppence


All the best

Vai

How many performers would actually purchase something that actually advertised that you cannot perform it live or on televison?
What's the point of the purchase.
Now in this day and age of easy access to internet as well as the easier chance to perform on television, why would anyone try to sell anything unless it can be actually used or performed?
If a performer is releasing a "pet" effect, one they make their living off etc etc then they should also be willing to actually "release" the effect free of all hidden agendas.
In my opinion the reason for placing restrictions is simply a matter of greed,"I want to show the world how brilliant I am, but I don't want anyone being able to use my information to look better than me!" That's the message that I read.
Anyway, that's my opinion.

I would suggest that once you have sold an effect, it is no longer solely (in the exclusive sense),"your effect," as someone has now compensated you to use the material. As Tony stated, unless there are limitations to its usage, included within the terms of the transaction, you simply cannot reasonably expect that the buyer has limited use of the material.

While we do seem to hold Television on a pedestal above all other forms of performance, television rights unto themselves, are not in any way innately separate (unless clearly identified as such in agreed upon terms of usage). What about radio, stage, street, etc.? Simply put, any limitation of usage cannot be assumed, or stated after-the-fact.

I am totally mystified as to how a creator who does not specifically state that TV rights are withheld can retroactively withhold them and then expect people to abide by that restriction. Absolutely astounding!

Christopher

Is not fair if you don't know it BEFORE buying:

otherwise noone force you to open your wallet and order it.

but as tony Iacoviello said better; even if you happen to get the infamous tv rights restriction is a piece of cake to really perform it anyway on tv maybe with the smallest of the changes in the patter or in the routine.

ethics ?? that's another tough question. sellers and ethics don't go hand in hand [or rarely go hand in hand]

that's why I love books,ebooks,dvds, where you know upfront that when you buy the stuff you can perform it either on tv or just for your grandparents

I think unless its noted and explained somewhere on the site or product, then all items should be for tv usage...

though it is the done thing to ask regardless I personally feel..