Retaining rights for public performance and broadcasting

[Choralia]

I've been contacted by a composer who is willing to publish scores of his works through IMSLP, allowing copy and free distribution of them. However, he would like to retain all rights relevant to public performance and broadcasting. It is not much clear to me whether CC license types accepted on IMSLP can accommodate this, and which specific type would be suitable. Could anybody clarify?

Max

[pml]

Hi Max,

I wasn’t aware this was an option with any of the core CC licences, except tangentially with the non-commercial (nc) provisions – they are more aimed at the literary and representational arts, with the performance arts not so well catered for.

As a response IMSLP prepared its own equivalent to the CC licence, the Performance Restricted Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives 1.0, which may go some way to meeting your composer’s requirements. It’s based on the CC-by-nc-nd 3.0 (Unported) licence, with some extra restrictions particularly relating to the performance and broadcast of musical compositions.

Cheers, PML

[Choralia]

Great, Philip, thank you very much for the info. I also thought that CC licenses were not best for performance art, so it's good for me to learn that a suitable alternative has been conceived here at IMSLP.

Max

[pml]

Feldmahler wrote the IMSLP pr-by-nc-nd licence so I think he has a better idea of what precisely may be permitted under the CC-by-nc-nd licence – but not having musical performance in mind, I think the protections were of the kind that one could navigate a truck through (or make a fair attempt). The opening paragraph of the IMSLP licence states that the restrictions it makes are excessive – all public performance and broadcast is explicitly disallowed. (Disclaimer: IANAL…)

An important idea associated with the CC licences however (and by extension, the IMSLP licence) is that any of the licence restrictions may be waived with the permission of the copyright holder – which in this case puts the composer or his or her agent in the position to negotiate the specific rights as performances and broadcast opportunities arise. You should point your composer in the direction of the IMSLP licence (and probably the CC-by-nc-nd licence for comparison), noting that the IMSLP licence by itself denies the composer any performances and broadcasts – so in addition to the licence it is extremely desirable for the composer to publish alongside some contact details for him/herself and/or a designated agent in order to allow the “no performances/broadcasts” issue to be negotiated/waived.

Cheers, Philip

[Carolus]

I'm planning on contacting the two performance rights societies in the USA (ASCAP and BMI) about the issue of CC licenses with respect to performances (whether broadcast or live). As I understand it, under the latest versions of the non-commercial CC licenses, only "non-commercial" performances and broadcasts are permitted without restriction. In the USA, the only performances which are considered to be "non-commercial" by ASCAP and BMI are benefit performances (like a concert to raise money for Tsunami victims) in which none of the participants are paid (performers, promoters, producers, or venues). All other performances are considered commercial in nature (even if no admission is charged) and therefore subject to the standard restrictions, fees, etc. Does the CC license apply this strict of a definition for "non-commercial"?

[haydenmuhl]

In the USA, the only performances which are considered to be "non-commercial" by ASCAP and BMI are benefit performances (like a concert to raise money for Tsunami victims) in which none of the participants are paid (performers, promoters, producers, or venues). All other performances are considered commercial in nature

What about performances that do not raise money, but in which no one is paid?

[Melodia]

Yeah, like college recitals for instance (where, in a sense, the performers are actually paying).

[steltz]

College recitals are usually covered by a blanket licence that universities purchase. These do not cover grand rights works, but usually cover everything else. So the copyright fees are effectively covered up front. The works performed need to be declared, though the university usually has someone in the department that collates this information, and the students don't need to worry about it.

I'm sure there would be other examples, though, of concerts that have no income.

[haydenmuhl]

Once a month I sing in a concert at a retirement home. We do not pay for use of their "venue", and everyone is a volunteer. It is open to the public, and no admission is charged. Where would this fit?

[Carolus]

I imagine it would qualify as "non-commercial." Keep in mind that this definition might vary from country to country. I was using the term as it is applied in the USA by ASCAP and BMI for their collection of royalties. SACEM, GEMA, PRS and others might have a different interpretation.