Contacting the Publishers Directly about YouTube

Comments

1. David Topping says

   October 6, 2011 at 3:36 pm

   Accepted without hesitation, Philip, although the possibility of a “Freudian slip” does come to mind, given my past involvement in the copyright discussions. 🙂

   Log in to Reply

2. philip copeland says

   October 6, 2011 at 3:03 pm

   David, I meant to say “Jack” has explored these issues before.  Many apologies.

   Log in to Reply

3. David Topping says

   October 6, 2011 at 10:25 am

   I have enjoyed watching the elementary-school choir videos in Jack Senzig’s “joinchoir” YouTube channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/joinchoir#g/u), and am impressed that those videos have received over 2 million views (with over 1 million for “Still Alive”). I appreciate his pioneering work in communicating with both rights agencies (BMI, etc.) and individual publishers regarding licensing issues, as it’s obvious (to me, at least) that *most* of those posting performances of copyright-protected music to YouTube have done so without obtaining permission/licenses from the copyright holders. I encourage people to read the three publisher responses linked above, as they are helpful in understanding the publishers’ current policies on publishing performances on YouTube and I hope that similar information can be obtained from the other choral publishers in the near future.

    

   There have been a number of posts and discussions on ChoralNet about YouTube, including several started by Jack, and although I have participated in those discussions, I’m not sure if I’m the “David” being referred to at the end of Philip’s blog post (I only posted one comment/response in the “YouTube No License Needed” topic Philip linked to), as another “David” (David Janower) first raised this issue in 2008 here:

    

   Compilation: choral performance and Youtube
   https://choralnet.org/view/177928

    

   For ChoralBlog readers’ convenience, here are links to additional ChoralNet forum discussions involving this “YouTube issue,” in chronological order:

    

   Non public domain performance online
   https://choralnet.org/view/240291

   500,000 views Lessons from YouTube
   https://choralnet.org/view/255945

   YouTube No License Needed
   https://choralnet.org/view/265915

   YouTube and BMI
   https://choralnet.org/view/266800

   Posting choral song on school’s website: legal?
   https://choralnet.org/view/273075

   YouTube question
   https://choralnet.org/view/275347

    

   In most of those discussions, I think that the consensus was that one should attempt contact with the copyright holder (usually the publisher) before posting such a performance to YouTube. In the case of at least two out of the three publishers responding to Jack’s queries, you can use the procedures that they sent to Jack to “be legal” (read those posts for details). There was recently a significant announcement in YouTube’s official blog about an agreement with the NMPA and Harry Fox, announced in this “Composers of Choral Music” ChoralNet Community forum post:

    

   YouTube agreement with Harry Fox and NMPA
   https://choralnet.org/view/292782

   (here’s the link to the YouTube blog post: http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2011/08/creating-new-opportunities-for.html)

    

   The way I read that announcement, it’s not a “blanket policy” obviating the need for YouTube users to obtain permission for what they post, but rather an “opportunity” for copyright holders to reap benefits from (“monetize”) the posting of their copyrighted works on YouTube. YouTube’s stated policy (link: http://www.youtube.com/t/copyright_what_is) continues to be that “YouTube respects the rights of copyright holders and publishers and requires all users to confirm they own the copyright or have permission from the copyright holder to upload content.”

    

   About my interest/opinions/etc. — I’m not a “copyright cop,” and wouldn’t report anyone for perceived violations of copyright laws. After years of communicating with those involved with virtually every aspect of the choral music profession/industry (I have even hosted websites for composers and publishers), I’d like to see this issue clarified, rather than just having everyone think that because people aren’t being sued or hauled off to jail for violations of the current laws, that it’s OK or even ethical to post videos of copyrighted works to YouTube (or any number of other methods of distributing copies, including making CDs and DVDs of performances to give/sell to choir members) without obtaining, or attempting to obtain permission to do so. The “everyone else is doing it” rationale isn’t adequate, IMO. (Standard Internet disclaimers: IANAL and YMMV)

    

   Peace,

   David T

   (just one of the many “Davids” on ChoralNet)

   Log in to Reply

4. donald patriquin says

   October 6, 2011 at 9:06 am

   As a composer, conductor, self-publisher as well as being published by commercial publishers, I can see no reason why any publisher would not WANT to have music by their composers up there on YouTube for the world choral community to hear, enjoy and purchase!

   That being said, it makes sense for them to ask that the publishers and composers of music so performed be named. Much else amounts to needless bureaucracy, and is just a stumbling block for publisher, composer, and choir. With the advent of PDF transmission and self-publishing, ‘traditional’ music publishers are under a lot of pressure today, maybe even extinction. Anything to keep them going is a valuable service to the music community; music printed on cheap paper today and gone tomorrow is not always the answer. Also, publishers help set standards via their editorial policies, something that self-publishing tends not to do. They also advertise, have readings and so on. May they stay around, but may they take advantage of 21st. century media. And may they keep it simple- for everyone’s sake!

    

   Log in to Reply