Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

View From The Congregation


Recommended Posts

Does this mean that for Songs of Praise, Choral Evensong or any royal wedding to be broadcast the BBC has to get the consent of everyone involved, including every member of the congregation (who perform the hymns)?

 

When I have played the organ for editions of Songs of Praise, I had to sign a contract and a consent form - I am fairly certain of this. I have no knowledge of what was required from the congregation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There is no law that stops you recording copyright music. Section 182(1) Copyright, Designs and Patents Act

1988 applies when:

 

1. You wish to use the recording other than for 'private and domestic' use,

 

or

 

2. You do not get consent of the performer(s).

 

'Private and domestic' means just that and is interpreted strictly. I do not agree with the widely held view that a video recordist paid to take a wedding video is merely an agent of the bride and groom, even if the video is for their own 'private and domestic' use. I say this is a commercial arrangment and outside the exemption. Others take a more liberal view on this point.

 

Making recorded copies of a church concert for members of the choir to enjoy is, emphatically, not 'private and domestic' and contravenes the Act, even if it is not done commercially.

 

For the sake of completeness I also mention Section 185 which deals with exclusive rights in recording contracts and under which some modern church music has restrictions. Performing rights last for fifty years from the date of the perfomance in question.

Barry Williams

 

I wholeheartedly agree with Barry's strict interpretation of the law. Some years ago I had a group of students with a video camera come off the street while I was giving a lunchtime recital. I challenged them and refused to continue until they left. I never got to see what they recorded as they refused to show me.

 

On another point, video at weddings has another implication. We generally have the boys choir for weddings, and I require that there is NO video recording unless permission has been granted (and the fee paid), as I need to get clearance from parents for video (and still) photography which might include the boys. We run a pretty strict child protection policy, and it is essential that we maintain this strict stance. This has paid off well with the schools too, who now have no hesitation in letting us in to recruit. Fortunately our clergy are well behind this policy and announce at the start of the wedding why the restriction applies. Last year we had a run-in with a groom and professional video photographer before a service, which was in fact quite unpleasant, but essential for both the legality of protecting our recording rights and to protect the boys.

 

Jonathan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had similar problems. Bride and groom would say they weren't having a video, but some old granny would always trun up and video, including an occasion when a relative actually walked between the choir stalls filming each child in turn, DURING THE SERVICE!! Mostly it was a wheeze not to have to pay the extra due to the choir and organist (miniscule in comparison with the flower bill!), so in the end, rather than charging the videoed couple double, we charged everyone one and half times the rate, then they could do what they wanted. Parents of the kids were always onside because if they didn't send in the consent form (on which we made it clear they might appear in a video), thier child didn't get selected for the wedding, and therefore missed out on the cash.

 

I also had to sign for Songs of Praise and Daily Service (they could use my playing at any other time, no other fee due etc.), but strangely enough, local BBC radio never did this. I can't imagine the rules are any different, but they were a little more freer with the rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Videos at weddings - now this is the subject of an bi-annual ongoing battle I have with my Parish Priest. He says I charge too much. I explain the copyright and performing rights rules to him with regard to vidoe recordings. He refuses to understand, because he is a berk!

I have found for the most part that it is almost impossible to invoke an extra charge for this retrospectively. My wedding fee is realistic enough to incorporates a video charge on all occasions.

 

I can't remember the last time I had to give a refund because there were no video cameras in use at the wedding at all. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an exemption for 'reporting current events' (Schedule 2, 2. ( 1 ) ( B ) ). Maybe the local radio came under that.

 

 

I also had to sign for Songs of Praise and Daily Service (they could use my playing at any other time, no other fee due etc.), but strangely enough, local BBC radio never did this. I can't imagine the rules are any different, but they were a little more freer with the rules.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
Videos at weddings - now this is the subject of an bi-annual ongoing battle I have with my Parish Priest. He says I charge too much. I explain the copyright and performing rights rules to him with regard to vidoe recordings. He refuses to understand, because he is a berk!

I have found for the most part that it is almost impossible to invoke an extra charge for this retrospectively. My wedding fee is realistic enough to incorporates a video charge on all occasions.

 

I can't remember the last time I had to give a refund because there were no video cameras in use at the wedding at all. :(

 

 

This is the easier way of dealing with family videos: simply charge an increased (not necessarily doubled) fee that includes all 'family and friends' videos. This is described in "Everything Else an Organist Should Know" on page 142. It works well. However, a separate fee MUST be negotiated for professional videso and great care taken to ensure that the copyright stays with the couple. The ISM has forms for this.

 

I totally support Jonathan's stance over photographing children.

 

I do not understand why clergy object to proper fees. It cost me far more to pay for singing lessons (over ten years), choral and orchestral conducting (over three years), harmony and counterpoint, organ and piano,etc, all to diploma standard, plus the cost of the exmainations, than it did to get my pilot's licence.

 

Some say 'the labourer is worthy of his hire'. I think that is is reasonable to try and meet the cost of musical training outside the household budget. The argument that talent should be given back to God is nonsense. (See the aforesaid book on page 115 for a discussion of the theology on this point.)

 

Talent without training is worthless. Would you subject yourself to a surgeon's ministrations on the operating table if he told you he had talent but no training? The organist and choirmaster must be competent in many different skills. The mere acquisition of letters does not give or necessarily prove skill. Training is needed and this costs money. Really good training is not cheap.

 

Barry Williams

 

There's an exemption for 'reporting current events' (Schedule 2, 2. ( 1 ) ( B ) ). Maybe the local radio came under that.

 

 

Sorry, but absolutely not. Not never, not no how, at any time whatsoever.

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for this. How do you explain the BBC's actions then in not approaching me for permission? Do you think they are a bit more slack at a local level (we're talking BBC Hereford and Worcester here). DOes it include conducting? I had to conduct a choir for a programme on Tessa Sanderson in Leeds Parish church back in the 1980s.

 

The lengthy document I had to sign for the daily service (which in those days was only 15 minutes long) seemed vastly out of proportion for what I actually did; one hymn and a voluntary, which when I listened to it on the radio, they faded me out after 2 bars!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
Thank you for this. How do you explain the BBC's actions then in not approaching me for permission? Do you think they are a bit more slack at a local level (we're talking BBC Hereford and Worcester here). DOes it include conducting? I had to conduct a choir for a programme on Tessa Sanderson in Leeds Parish church back in the 1980s.

 

The lengthy document I had to sign for the daily service (which in those days was only 15 minutes long) seemed vastly out of proportion for what I actually did; one hymn and a voluntary, which when I listened to it on the radio, they faded me out after 2 bars!

 

Dear M. Guilmant,

 

As I understand it, specific permission is needed for broadcasts that go beyond mere 'news' items. These days formal documents are usually signed covering all the necessary permissions. My interpretation (and that of my co-author) is that permission is needed from all the major perfomers. It seems to be generally accepted that if the choir attend knowing that their singing is to be broadcast then the director's permission will suffice. As far as I am aware this has not been tested at law. I suspect that your experience of the Daily Service was the correct procedure.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites

SCHEDULE 2

Section 189.

Rights in performances: permitted acts

 

 

Introductory

1.—(1) The provisions of this Schedule specify acts which may be done in relation to a performance or recording notwithstanding the rights conferred by Part II; they relate only to the question of infringement of those rights and do not affect any other right or obligation restricting the doing of any of the specified acts.

 

SNIP

 

Criticism, reviews and news reporting

2.—(1) Fair dealing with a performance or recording—

(a) for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another performance or recording, or of a work, or

( b ) for the purpose of reporting current events,

 

 

Or am I reading that wrong?

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga...en_23.htm#sdiv2 refers

 

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood and misled anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
SCHEDULE 2

Section 189.

Rights in performances: permitted acts

 

 

Introductory

1.—(1) The provisions of this Schedule specify acts which may be done in relation to a performance or recording notwithstanding the rights conferred by Part II; they relate only to the question of infringement of those rights and do not affect any other right or obligation restricting the doing of any of the specified acts.

 

SNIP

 

Criticism, reviews and news reporting

2.—(1) Fair dealing with a performance or recording—

(a) for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another performance or recording, or of a work, or

( b ) for the purpose of reporting current events,

 

 

Or am I reading that wrong?

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga...en_23.htm#sdiv2 refers

 

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood and misled anyone.

 

 

Not at all. What you quoted confirms all that has gone before.

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dear M. Guilmant,

 

As I understand it, specific permission is needed for broadcasts that go beyond mere 'news' items. These days formal documents are usually signed covering all the necessary permissions. My interpretation (and that of my co-author) is that permission is needed from all the major perfomers. It seems to be generally accepted that if the choir attend knowing that their singing is to be broadcast then the director's permission will suffice. As far as I am aware this has not been tested at law. I suspect that your experience of the Daily Service was the correct procedure.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Barry Williams

 

Thank you for clarifying this so succinctly!

Link to post
Share on other sites
My interpretation (and that of my co-author) is that permission is needed from all the major perfomers. It seems to be generally accepted that if the choir attend knowing that their singing is to be broadcast then the director's permission will suffice.

The British Library has given me a different interpretation.

 

In 1968 I made, with some friends, a recording of a student performance with orchestra, choir and soloists; this recording has only ever been used privately. All who were asked were happy with this being done, and no-one else objected. The master tape was in the estate of a deceased friend, and is now in the British Library Sound Archive with the rest of his recordings; I can go and listen to it in the BL any time I like (by appointment). But I can't have a new copy of that tape to replace the one I made at the time, which is now damaged.

 

I can get permission from the conductor and soloists - but this is not considered sufficient. The BL wish me to provide them with written permission from every individual performer in the choir and orchestra. And since there is no listing of the performers with the tape, I would also have to document proof that I knew who they all were (naturally, there are no records). In other words, I (who made the recording) and the conductor (who asked for it to be made) cannot now get a new copy to replace the damaged one we already have, even for private use.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
The British Library has given me a different interpretation.

 

In 1968 I made, with some friends, a recording of a student performance with orchestra, choir and soloists; this recording has only ever been used privately. All who were asked were happy with this being done, and no-one else objected. The master tape was in the estate of a deceased friend, and is now in the British Library Sound Archive with the rest of his recordings; I can go and listen to it in the BL any time I like (by appointment). But I can't have a new copy of that tape to replace the one I made at the time, which is now damaged.

 

I can get permission from the conductor and soloists - but this is not considered sufficient. The BL wish me to provide them with written permission from every individual performer in the choir and orchestra. And since there is no listing of the performers with the tape, I would also have to document proof that I knew who they all were (naturally, there are no records). In other words, I (who made the recording) and the conductor (who asked for it to be made) cannot now get a new copy to replace the damaged one we already have, even for private use.

 

Paul

 

 

This seems a very harsh interpretation and could probably be challenged at law. As with so many things nowadays they are playing ultra safe. I know of no case where the issue has been tested as a precedent i.e. who gives permission for a group. In terms of amateurs it is usually accepted that turning up knowing that a recording is to be made implies consent. Paid professionals have the consents (there are often several) written into their contract.

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams

Robert Leach and I are in the process of writing another book, entitled Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know. Is it the case that a chapter on copyright, perhaps rather more detailed than in the previous book, would be welcome?

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert Leach and I are in the process of writing another book, entitled Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know. Is it the case that a chapter on copyright, perhaps rather more detailed than in the previous book, would be welcome?

 

Barry Williams

 

Certainly would help clarify the situation for all.

 

Jonathan

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert Leach and I are in the process of writing another book, entitled Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know. Is it the case that a chapter on copyright, perhaps rather more detailed than in the previous book, would be welcome?

 

Barry Williams

Well I for one would certainly welcome it, Barry. It is a subject all too often treated in a very cavalier fashion by choirmasters (I haven't always been entirely innocent myself in the past, though I hope I'm more careful these days).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert Leach and I are in the process of writing another book, entitled Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know. Is it the case that a chapter on copyright, perhaps rather more detailed than in the previous book, would be welcome?

 

Barry Williams

 

Absolutely. To know exactly where one stands on these matters does help. More and more, it seems to be less predicated on common sense, and more on a strict - perhaps over-strict - interpretation of the law (pwhodges experience, for instance).

 

And if it's anything like as well-written and indispensible as the first book, you can sign me up for a copy now!

 

NH

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nigel ALLCOAT
Absolutely. To know exactly where one stands on these matters does help. More and more, it seems to be less predicated on common sense, and more on a strict - perhaps over-strict - interpretation of the law (pwhodges experience, for instance).

 

And if it's anything like as well-written and indispensible as the first book, you can sign me up for a copy now!

 

NH

 

The book is a capital console companion. Invaluable for so many reasons. Don't delay.

 

Best wishes,

Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I for one would certainly welcome it, Barry. It is a subject all too often treated in a very cavalier fashion by choirmasters (I haven't always been entirely innocent myself in the past, though I hope I'm more careful these days).

 

 

And clergy, Vox!

 

Barry, my church pays an annual fee to Calmus, which allows limited photocopying of melody lines for reporoduction in service booklets. However it does not permit the copying of full scores or even 4 part scores of hymns. However, what is the precise rule about copying an out-of-print score when the composer is either still living or has nor reached his/her statutary 75 years in the blue yonder? Thanks.

 

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
And clergy, Vox!

 

Barry, my church pays an annual fee to Calmus, which allows limited photocopying of melody lines for reporoduction in service booklets. However it does not permit the copying of full scores or even 4 part scores of hymns. However, what is the precise rule about copying an out-of-print score when the composer is either still living or has nor reached his/her statutary 75 years in the blue yonder? Thanks.

Peter

 

In the past, I have found publishers and/or composers more than happy to grant a limited licence (usually free) for a specific service sheet, provided they are destroyed after the service. The exception to this are some of the publishers of modern worship songs, who are often difficult to contact, and who always charge a fee, although not much, but it can add up. The best publisher I have found for granting permission is OUP.

 

Jonathan :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
And clergy, Vox!

 

Barry, my church pays an annual fee to Calmus, which allows limited photocopying of melody lines for reporoduction in service booklets. However it does not permit the copying of full scores or even 4 part scores of hymns. However, what is the precise rule about copying an out-of-print score when the composer is either still living or has nor reached his/her statutary 75 years in the blue yonder? Thanks.

Peter

 

There are several Barrys on this Board, but I shall assume you intend the query is for me to answer.

 

No music passes into the public domain until the statutory period (which is seventy years after the composer's death) has passed. Until then the music remains in the copyright holder's ownership to do exactly as he or she wishes, which includes refusing all permissions. This happens rather more often than is realised, usually with music written for a specific occasion. The copyright holder is not necessarily the composer as assignment is possible.

 

Jonathan's suggestion is the best practical solution, where possible. If the copyright holder cannot be traced then the Music Publishers' Association are invariably helpful. MCPS has a good data base of composers, but not for the less good type of church music. The law is to be found at Section 57 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Please see pages 139 and 140 of Everything Else an Organist Should Know for a discussion of this point.

 

When the composer's work has passed into the public domain one needs to consider three other copyrights. There are separate copyrights in the words/edition/arrangement and another in the typography. The words/editing/arrangement follow the same rule as the music. The typography has a copyright of twenty five years.

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd been ignoring this thread thinking it was all about nave organs...

 

I haven't played for many weddings recently but there's one coming up. I suspect the couple want to play a CD of a popular song from the 1960s during the signing of the registers. Whilst I am prepared to fight my own corner with regard to the video recording of my performance who is responsible for protecting the rights of the, say, Scarabs :) in this situation? I presume the church has a licence in place for the playing of the track.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Williams
I'd been ignoring this thread thinking it was all about nave organs...

 

I haven't played for many weddings recently but there's one coming up. I suspect the couple want to play a CD of a popular song from the 1960s during the signing of the registers. Whilst I am prepared to fight my own corner with regard to the video recording of my performance who is responsible for protecting the rights of the, say, Scarabs :) in this situation? I presume the church has a licence in place for the playing of the track.

 

 

This is the church's problem and as organist you need not worry about it. It is likely that the current practice of not charging a fee for playing recorded music in church during divine worhsip will apply in these cirucmstances.

 

Barry Williams

Link to post
Share on other sites
the statutory period (which is seventy years after the composer's death)

Strictly, the end of the year in which that anniversary occurs - so Widor is still in copyright, for instance, though the 70th anniversary date was in March.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...