LOR Copyright Agreement

[Guest guest]

I hope Dan or someone else at LOR can resolve at least part of this issue of copyright law for us.

Please tell us exactly what agreement you have negotiated when securing the rights for the songs you sell with the sequences. Did you merely get the rights to distribute the songs, or does it also give us the rights to use the songs on our homes and display them in a show for the public? I would like to see the exact wording of the agreement, please.

[Tim Fischer]

July, do you actually have LOR sequences you've purchased from Dan that you are worried about using? Or are you just trying to stir the pot again?

[Guest guest]

Yes, I purchased Music packages from LOR.

I could ask the same of you, it appears you're trying to stir the pot. If you don't like what I say, why don't you just move on instead of trying to rile things? As I've said a number of times, I'm just trying to provide some useful information. Just because it doesn't coincide with what you want to hear, does not make it wrong or give you the right to criticize me for trying to be helpful.

Tim Fischer wrote:

July, do you actually have LOR sequences you've purchased from Dan that you are worried about using? Or are you just trying to stir the pot again?

[Guest guest]

There's a very informative FAQ on the ASCAP page. I suggest you all read it.

Even restaurants have to get permission to play music in the background.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

[Tim Fischer]

july1962 wrote:

There's a very informative FAQ on the ASCAP page. I suggest you all read it.

Even restaurants have to get permission to play music in the background.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

Exactly- restaurants are a business making money (or at least attempting to).

Unless you're charging people to see your lights, they are not a business.

Are you saying that we should ignore the advice that came DIRECTLY FROM ASCAP/BMI, listen instead to your speculation, and fork over money to ASCAP/BMI anyway? No thanks.

[Guest guest]

It doesn't matter whether you charge or not. It's a public performance. You have no right to use someone else's copyrighted material for your own use and present it to the public. Just like you don't have the right to go into the library and xerox passages from books.

Tim Fischer wrote:

july1962 wrote:

There's a very informative FAQ on the ASCAP page. I suggest you all read it.

Even restaurants have to get permission to play music in the background.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

Exactly- restaurants are a business making money (or at least attempting to).

Unless you're charging people to see your lights, they are not a business.

Are you saying that we should ignore the advice that came DIRECTLY FROM ASCAP/BMI, listen instead to your speculation, and fork over money to ASCAP/BMI anyway? No thanks.

[Guest guest]

Something to ponder...

What if you composed and entirely new piece of Christmas music and spent a week sequencing it to your lights. You make a video of it and put it on YouTube.

Then, what if someone comes along and downloads your video, strips the song off and uses it in their own display without your permission?

And what if another person comes along and takes the video, uploads it into their own YouTube account and takes credit for the music and the display as their own?

Do you think that's fair? Would you like that?

[George Simmons]

I guess we'll have to experience that and find out. To the best of my knowledge no one here has ever taken credit for creating the music that they legally purchase and use in their displays.

[Guest guest]

I guess it would be too much to ask for you to speculate objectively.

Just because you purchase music, doesn't mean you own it and can do whatever you like with it. You purchase the right to listen to it, but not broadcast it to the public. Just like when you buy computer software, you can't distribute it to other computers or users freely, you only have the right to USE the software on one computer.

George Simmons wrote:

I guess we'll have to experience that and find out.  To the best of my knowledge no one here has ever taken credit for creating the music that they legally purchase and use in their displays.

[tonyjmartin]

july1962 wrote:

I hope Dan or someone else at LOR can resolve at least part of this issue of copyright law for us.

You might want to shoot an email over to Dan and crew, and then report back here with their answer. They are the only ones who can definitively answer your question as stated.

BTW--ASCAP/BMI doesn't represent all the recorded selections out there.

[Guest guest]

ASCAP and BMI are the two major players in the licensing field, but you're right, they aren't the only two. And they don't actually grant permissions themselves, they still have to get the approvals from the copyright holders.

OK, I'll send Dan an email. It was my impression that they read these posts, though, since from time to time they are closed.

tonyjmartin wrote:

july1962 wrote:

I hope Dan or someone else at LOR can resolve at least part of this issue of copyright law for us.

You might want to shoot an email over to Dan and crew, and then report back here with their answer.  They are the only ones who can definitively answer your question as stated.

BTW--ASCAP/BMI doesn't represent all the recorded selections out there.

[George Simmons]

I don't understand your software comparison. I'm not distributing my purchased music to others - I'm using it on my own property for my own entertainment. If I turn the loudness up too far and others hear it and object it's a matter between me and the city ordinance regulating loudness - not a matter for the music's copyright holder. Their requirements were satisfied when I purchased the rights from them to listen to their music. My low power FM transmitter is a legal device being used for a private non-commercial application, and as such is legally indistinguishable from an ordinary amplifier and loudspeaker arrangement.

[Guest guest]

Yeah, I'd like to see you use that tact in court! LOL

If you're using an FM transmitter, you're broadcasting to the public, even if it is a short distance! You just lost your case! One doesn't need to transmit over FM for their own private enjoyment of a yard display.

George Simmons wrote:

I don't understand your software comparison. I'm not distributing my purchased music to others - I'm using it on my own property for my own entertainment.  If I turn the loudness up too far and others hear it and object it's a matter between me and the city ordinance regulating loudness - not a matter for the music's copyright holder.  Their requirements were satisfied when I purchased the rights from them to listen to their music.  My low power FM transmitter is a legal device being used for a private non-commercial application, and as such is legally indistinguishable from an ordinary amplifier and loudspeaker arrangement. 

[shfr26]

Sorry, I must be in the wrong thread, I swear I just read all this somewhere else.

[Guest guest]

I'm not saying that Dan and LOR hav done anything wrong at all with their packages. I'm just not sure that by selling us the songs and sequences, it gives us permission to produce a show for the public without further permissions from the original copyright holders.

For instance, Hallmark sometimes sells CD's that are a compilation of Christmas songs. They had to get permission to do that. But by us buying them, it doesn't give us permission to do anything but listen to them.

tonyjmartin wrote:

I'm reasonably sure that LOR/Dan wouldn't put their sequence/music packages up for sale without researching the possibility of copyright infringement or obtaining the needed clearances.  But your question is a fair one.

[tonyjmartin]

july1962 wrote:

I'm not saying that Dan and LOR have done anything wrong at all with their packages. I'm just not sure that by selling us the songs and sequences, it gives us permission to produce a show for the public without further permissions from the original copyright holders.

I don't think that LOR has done anything wrong either, as I think it is highly unlikely that the music/selection packages would have been offered for sale by LOR without the issue of copyright infringement being addressed by the company at some point. But lacking a reply from Dan/LOR, or specific verbiage on their sales web page, your question is still a fair one.

[t.vanhouts]

When you buy songs in with the price so you may use the song for private purposel. When you use the song for your display by speakers or radio, you have to pay a certain amount a song. because you bring out the song in public.

When you compose your own song, you can go to the what did you call it? Apacs???? Sorry that a don't know the name for the USA, to set a copyright. you have to pay a certain amount and no one may use your song without permission.

In most cases when you have a display for christmas, you can make a deal with the copyright organization or songwriter that you want to use a few songs during one month. because you don's ask for money and you have no commercial use mostly the are willing to make a deal that there is a payment for one month, depending on how mutch songs you use. But honestly most guys around don't do that.

We 'christmas lighters' are happy to entertain the people who passes by with the dancing lights. We let people feel happy. All for free. And the reactions from the people makes us feel good. Some of us have donation boxes for charities.

Isn't that what its all about those days.

O, and there are also songs free from copyrights. You have to track them down because i don't know where. Also chrismas music.

So, don't make it to difficult. There are certain rules, when we cross that line its our own responsibility. But i have to agree some rules are very difficult and hard to understand.

[LightORamaDan]

First: To the best of my knowledge, Light-O-Rama is the only company in this arena that has gone through the time and expense of acquiring individual synchronization licenses for each of the song/sequence packages sold. All of the other companies will say things like "we purchase a copy of the song on behalf of the customer" or they include a CD, etc...

We negotiate (via an agent) with the publisher and artist to get the license. The cost of the license varies but it is many times more expensive than a license to simply sell the song. The negotiations typically take 6 months to a year. In addition, we must purchase a minimum number of licenses (usually in the 500 to 1000 range)... If they are not sold within 12 months we loose them and must purchase another bunch. This process is a real pain in the butt. In many cases after months of work we are denied the license and our time and agent costs are lost. This is the main reason why we have so few songs available. We are considering alternatives to this process but that is the way it works today.

There is no "global" entity such as ASCAP or BMI that sells synchronization license that cover a collection of songs. Thus, as far as the exact wording of the contract, each publisher and artist has a different contract so there is no exact wording to share.

All of the contracts are written such that the songs can be used in public performances with synchronized lighting effects. Only one of the songs specifies that admission CANNOT be charged. (I am not sure which one it is).... ALL of the songs allow you to produce a public show and to have people listen and watch!

-------

Before anyone asks, this has nothing to do with video sharing sites or posting videos on personal Internet sites. I am not an expert (or even a novice) on that subject so will not comment on that subject.


Dan



Edit: Fixed a few typos (Should probably proof read before I post)

[LightORamaDan]

One other thing that I meant to say...

To answer the original question, if you have a personal display and are not charging admission then I would not be at all concerned. Regardless; If you purchased the song yourself and made your sequences or you have purchased a sequence and audio file from anyone or any company (with or with out any license) then just don't worry about it.

There are a lot of things in this world that we can worry about but this is not one that justifies the effort. As a pre-teen when the Beatles were #1 me and my friends would put on public performances for the poor neighbors with air guitars and air microphones (we sang really loud) with the Beatles blaring from an 8 track hi fi. One day we decide to go big time! Built a stage from parts scavenged from a house next door that had burned down. It was a heck of a show, we even had a color organ that I found in someones trash(and fixed) flashing with the music. Now by law we should have had a synchronization/performance license to do this! No one messed with us and I highly doubt that anyone will mess with you!

One last thing: We tried to charge admission to the concert but no one paid. The raised stage (4'-5') collapsed with us on it, my cousin Ann Rose was under it and got a nail in the head, we had nailed the stage directly to the side of my neighbor friend "Colleen Gray's" house, the list goes on...... When our father's got home from work.... well I do not believe that I was sitting down for a while after that!:shock:

Talk about getting off topic!

Dan

[Guest guest]

Thanks Dan. Is this information provided to those that purchase the music sequences? Are people aware of the rights they have and don't have by making that purchase? I purchased sequences, but admit, I just used them without looking too hard. Usually when permissions like these are granted, you must include a certain verbage on the actual product for the end user to have.

Having said that, the mere fact that you ARE getting these permissions, proves that it would be illegal to NOT get permission. Otherwise, why go to the trouble?