|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 22:03, Paul Shirley wrote: Actually on the DVD, usually there is a warning saying that you cannot broadcast it, so you are aware of it before purchase. On the musical score, you actually can perform it. As for touring on CDs and Sheet music, that is also allowed. That's how "cover bands" make a living. They are not allowed to record it, but that's part of the agreement on the CD when you purchase it. Rosemary's complaint wasn't that there should be no restrictions, but rather, if there are any, the buyer should know about them before purchasing. |
|||||||||
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18012 Posts |
Cover bands are "Supposed" to pay royalties to ASCAP or BMI or it is to be paid by the clubs they work in .... Just to muddy the waters a little more
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
|||||||||
TheGreatGalling Loyal user 245 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 21:47, ALEXANDRE wrote: That makes me happy and only more solid in my opinion that restrictions should be clear before the purchase. |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
"As for touring on CDs and Sheet music, that is also allowed"
Your correct... kind of. I didn't really make my point as clear as I should have. My point is that the purchase price of a c.d. or sheet music does not give you performance rights. That IS paid for separately. As Psychic Samurai points out.. the venues pay an annual royalty for live music to be performed. This money is supposed to go to the creators of the music performed. This also applies to any recorded music being played from c.d in a venue.... including D.J's and background. Musicians can not stop their music being played in a venue by a band or from c.d, but, they are compensated for it.... not much... but compensation is given none the less. Play the SAME song on t.v and its a totally different ball game. Firstly, a song writer/s can stop another artist performing their songs on T.V. A band here in Australia did it a few years back to prevent their tracks being performed on Australian Idol. Secondly, If one of your original compositions is played on T.V the royalties paid are much much greater compared to 'Live Venue' royalties.... because the audience is much greater. Rosemary's actual opinion aside... I was summing up my own opinion on the thread topic.... and in reaction to some of the other opinions expressed here. I feel magic and its creation are as important as any of the arts and should be protected the same way. that's all |
|||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts |
Paul,
You are correct, but again the big difference is that when you pay for those things in the music industry, you know ahead of time that that's the deal. If a magician sells a product and "warns" the customer ahead of time that it cannot be performed without paying royalties and both the customer and the seller agree to it, then it's a fair deal. However, if the customer pays and is then later informed then it's not fair. I think that's the point of the original post. I agree with that point. |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 23:17, TheGreatGallina wrote: I absolutely agree with restrictions being made clear before purchase... and, that its not hard to get a bit of T.V coverage. However, being filmed by a news crew for a 30 second snippet, (Which is usually the case) is a lot different to performing as a guests on something like David Letterman.... so how can the performance rights 'rules' apply to both of these examples in the same way? Also, I may be wrong here but, isn't the news/film crews producer also required to get you to sign a release to use the footage of you in the first place? |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
Yes, it should be protected the same way, but it is not. The music industry has very clear rules and the ability to enforce them. It is standard policy that nonpublic domain and free use materials have performance restrictions and procedures. In the magic/mystery entertainment fields we have no such standard policy or practice.
Although I would like to see this type of protection, the music industry has legal precedence that does not apply to us, the copy write laws. (I’m just trying to keep it simple, I know there are more laws than just this, and that the big money is what keeps it in check, but this is the basic law as I understand it). Playing music (playing the notes as written, or more than a small portion of them) and or vocalizing the lyrics, is no different than reading someone’s written work, it is duplicating it in another medium which is covered by the copy write laws. Royalties are the fees to allow the performance. Magical performers very rarely use the copy written dialog accompanying an effect, so those laws would not apply. This argument has been going on for many years in the magic circles. Tony |
|||||||||
Aaron Little Loyal user Lexington KY 263 Posts |
Quote:
Also, I may be wrong here but, isn't the news/film crews producer also required to get you to sign a release to use the footage of you in the first place? Not if it is news. They have a different set of rules. |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
So does TV. When I went around with NBC last year, they did want us to clear everything we were going to use, it was spelled out in the releases we were provided. But when I questioned them on this, I was told that it was ported directly from a music release and it really did not apply to us unless we used music. When the show aired, there were pieces performed that were private pieces from other performers where no permission or authorization was given. So in the end, it did not matter...
|
|||||||||
Aaron Little Loyal user Lexington KY 263 Posts |
I have provided quite a bit of footage to Spike and I have never been asked for a release.
|
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 23:57, jstone wrote: Yes, we do know ahead of time when purchasing a CD or DVD yet I have never seen these 'Performance warnings' as part of an advertising campaign for a CD or DVD... and, if you buy on line, you don't get to see the the warnings on the package until after you have paid for it. This doesn't get questioned though because as a CD/DVD buying public we just KNOW the deal.....why should an advertising blurb for an effect be any different. Shouldn't we just KNOW the same way we do for other arts and media? Now, if there was the same level of money to be made in the creation of effects as there is in film and music, we probably wouldn't even be discussing the topic.... we would just know |
|||||||||
Aaron Little Loyal user Lexington KY 263 Posts |
Quote:
This doesn't get questioned though because as a CD/DVD buying public we just KNOW the deal.....why should an advertising blurb for an effect be any different. One buys a music CD to be entertained. They buy an instructional DVD in order to learn how to perform the subject of the DVD. There is a difference between the two. If not then what is an instructional DVD for? |
|||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts |
Quote:
This doesn't get questioned though because as a CD/DVD buying public we just KNOW the deal.....why should an advertising blurb for an effect be any different. Good point. However, keep in mind that the purpose of a DVD/CD is entertainment. However, purchasing a Book or DVD that teaches you how to perform a trick for an audience but then tells you can't perform that trick for an audience seems a wee bit counterintuitive. It would be like reading a book on how to play chess with a disclaimer in the book saying that you can't use this techniques in a tournament and the reader should just "know" that before buying the chess book. I think we have to admit that magic products are meant to teach you how to use the tricks in your act. |
|||||||||
R Gould Regular user 193 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 22:40, TT2 wrote: Sure, if he teaches you something and makes you sign a contract that's one thing, but there's nothing stopping one from studying Lucero's performances, coming up with your own version, and performing it. You can't copyright a card trick. Period. |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-22 00:42, Aaron Little wrote: Of course there is a difference between a music CD and an instructional magic DVD. The difference is the intent you have for the material you are learning.... same as the intent you have for buying a CD. If your intent with the c.d is to listen and enjoy then great. If however your intent is to use it on a t.v show...then you are required by law to pay extra royalties. Simple. Im saying the same should be for magic.... and should be just common knowledge between creators and performers. If your intent is to buy the instructional DVD to learn new skills and show friends, family or even put on a show and earn money from ticket sales (Something we are all able to do, often WITHOUT paying anything extra to an effects creator... and something that the creators within the magic fraternity generously accepts)... then that is fine too. However, if you intend to use the material for a specific T.V appearance, I believe you should be required to obtain the performance rights separately from the creator. Most respectful performers would seek out the performance rights..... but we are not all respectful, so retaining T.V performance rights enables the creator to protect his/her work. . . . and there are many many reasons why a creator would want to keep his effect from being displayed on national television. |
|||||||||
Aaron Little Loyal user Lexington KY 263 Posts |
I sale a couple of hundred instructional DVDs a month and intellectual property rights are very important to me. I absolutely believe that one should have the right to protect what they create.
With that being said there is an expectation that a music cd is produced and sold for the purpose of entertainment. There is also an expectation that an instructional video is produced and sold for the purpose of the purchaser to learn to perform the skill. As the expectation of use for the end user is different, the use of license agreements should be different. It really does seem rather simple to me. If you do not want someone else performing a skill that you have, don’t teach them how to do it or advice them of such limitations before purchase. |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
Quote:
Or reading a book on building a house and not being able to use the info .....No If you liken chess technique to a book of variations of common sleights or variations on the use of a NW then yeah, kinda.....Being that there is no definitive way of playing chess.... and no one owns the rights to the game itself.. hard to draw a parallel really. Would it be o.k for me to buy said chess book and go on TV 'Presenting' the information on 'How to play better chess with Paul' without either seeking the authors approval or giving credit? |
|||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-22 01:43, Paul Shirley wrote: I think the parallel is pretty accurate. As you said, no one owns the rights to the game of chess, just as no one owns the rights to doing magic. Just as there is "no definitive way of playing chess," there is no definitive way of performing magic. As for the second part about presenting the teaching methods of chess on TV, that would be more likened to teaching how the trick is done on TV, which I'm not advocating. I think buying a DVD that teaches you how to perform should not restrict you from performing. Buying a book that teaches you how to play chess should not restrict you from playing chess on TV or not. When buying a magic what are you buying if not the ability to perform the trick? By the way, on a personal note, I'm related to "Shirley's." Do you have family in California or Georgia? |
|||||||||
Jerome Finley V.I.P. SLC 3419 Posts |
R Gould,
Der. Is that not what we are talking about here? I'm saying there are things we can do and ways to share the secrets of our craft that affords protection. Alain Nu does something similar with his own workshops, as do others. You say you cannot copyright magic, I say you are just the type of person I want to stay away from and will not perform around. You seem to think anything you can lay eyes on is free to recreate and use in whatever manner you wish, good luck with that. Let me know how it works out for you. -J
"Join my update list here!" http://eepurl.com/uE3Jf
|
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
Quote:
I agree. I really do. But we wouldn't need to advise of such limitations before purchase if it was just a common understanding within our fraternity as it is in the other arts. Imagine all the wonderful things we would have missed out on if they weren't released due to the creator wanting to keep control just 'incase'. .... instead, the creator is able to maintain control over t.v rights and feel safe in the knowledge that he can share his ideas with us all. Loops anyone? |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Buy it, but it's still mine. Is this fair? (4 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |