Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing
Bill, you are reminding me of the groundedness and goodness of the folks we meet whenever we dance and travel cross country. Thank you for pointing out that we can still trust in folks to be honest, have faith in the folk process, take pleasure in the creativity that enlivens us all, and "relieve stress" by not holding on to fear in the first place Karin On 9/27/2013 4:09 PM, Bill Olson wrote: Hi all, I've been reading the mail here for a while, time to speak up I guess. I'm not sure I get what the problem is.. I admit I haven't read all the posts completely, but I guess I want to ask if there has actually been a problem.. i.e.: Has a choreographer had his or her work used in a way he/she deems inappropriate? Has anyone been sued or has legal action been discussed in reference to any of this? Is anyone here REALLY WORRIED about this or is this just an intellectual exercise? I really don't understand the "licensing" of dance compositions.. What is the purpose of this, and what is it meant to prevent from happening?? I for one am happy for anyone to call dances I have composed.. I do not need you to contact me ahead of time and I will not sue you if you call these dances without my permission. If you put them in a book I will not be unhappy and you do not need to get my permission, though that would be nice and proper credit would be nice too. If you claim the dance is YOURS and then sell it for LOTS of money, I WILL be unhappy but I STILL will not sue you.. I doubt that will happen so I am not "preparing for that eventuality". Just my view of things, "if it ain't broke don't fix it" I guess.. bill should I push "send" now oh what the heck, here goes.. Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:11:30 -0400 From: j...@alum.swarthmore.edu To: call...@sharedweight.net Subject: Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing Tavi wrote: regarding to calling a CC BY-NC dance at a paid event: is it in fact noncommercial use? Sounds commercial to me. The text from the license is: "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation." -- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode I think the relevant right would be to "Publicly Perform the Work". You're getting paid to call, so "directed toward private monetary compensation" sounds applicable. Jeff ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013, Bill Olson wrote: > > Hi all, I've been reading the mail here for a while, time to speak up > I guess. I'm not sure I get what the problem is.. I admit I haven't > read all the posts completely, but I guess I want to ask if there has > actually been a problem.. There has not been a problem *in* *the* *contra* *community*, but there have obviously been lots of problems with what is called intellectual property in our larger societies. How would you feel, for example, if suddenly the Disney Corp claimed copyright over contra dances and started sending lawyers to contra dances to extort money from you? This may sound ridiculous, but it's not really because it's not that different from events that have already occurred, and I don't blame people who want to worry about it -- nor do I blame people who want to ignore the issue, because it is in the end rather unlikely. After reading Jeff's latest post, I went back and removed the licenses from my dances again. ;-) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing
Hi all, I've been reading the mail here for a while, time to speak up I guess. I'm not sure I get what the problem is.. I admit I haven't read all the posts completely, but I guess I want to ask if there has actually been a problem.. i.e.: Has a choreographer had his or her work used in a way he/she deems inappropriate? Has anyone been sued or has legal action been discussed in reference to any of this? Is anyone here REALLY WORRIED about this or is this just an intellectual exercise? I really don't understand the "licensing" of dance compositions.. What is the purpose of this, and what is it meant to prevent from happening?? I for one am happy for anyone to call dances I have composed.. I do not need you to contact me ahead of time and I will not sue you if you call these dances without my permission. If you put them in a book I will not be unhappy and you do not need to get my permission, though that would be nice and proper credit would be nice too. If you claim the dance is YOURS and then sell it for LOTS of money, I WILL be unhappy but I STILL will not sue you.. I doubt that will happen so I am not "preparing for that eventuality". Just my view of things, "if it ain't broke don't fix it" I guess.. bill should I push "send" now oh what the heck, here goes.. > Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:11:30 -0400 > From: j...@alum.swarthmore.edu > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing > > Tavi wrote: > > regarding to calling a CC BY-NC dance at a paid > > event: is it in fact noncommercial use? > > Sounds commercial to me. The text from the license is: > > "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 > above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward > commercial advantage or private monetary compensation." -- > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode > > I think the relevant right would be to "Publicly Perform the Work". > You're getting paid to call, so "directed toward private monetary > compensation" sounds applicable. > > Jeff > ___ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing
Tavi wrote: > regarding to calling a CC BY-NC dance at a paid > event: is it in fact noncommercial use? Sounds commercial to me. The text from the license is: "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation." -- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode I think the relevant right would be to "Publicly Perform the Work". You're getting paid to call, so "directed toward private monetary compensation" sounds applicable. Jeff
Re: [Callers] norms/ethics of choreography sharing
t; Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:06:35 -0700 > From: Aahz Maruch <a...@pobox.com> > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] See Saw (was Re: Code's Compiling) > Message-ID: <20130926150635.ga17...@panix.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013, James Saxe wrote: > > > > So it appears from the above that CALLERLAB has officially deprecated > > use of "See Saw" to mean a left shoulder Dosado for ten years (as of > > tomorrow). I don't have a copy of the CALLERLAB Basic/Mainstream > > definitions from just before that time, but it seems clear that the > > prescribed for "See Saw" would have been (left) gypsy-like in some > > cases and (left) dosado-like in others. > > > > Ten years may seem like a long time to younger members of this list, > > and to people who first took MWSD lessons within the last ten years, > > it may seem like the definitions they learned describe the way things > > were from time immemorial. But by 2003 MWSD had already substantially > > diverged from "traditional" SD for forty years or so. > > Well, I certainly appreciate the history lesson. Memory is unreliable, > of course, but I don't remember ever doing See Saw in MWSD as a left > dosado, starting in 1986 at UCDavis nor the Stanford Quads a year later > (just to nail down the timing and locations more precisely). From what > I can tell, Callerlab seems to be more in the descriptivist camp than > prescriptivist, so almost certainly the definitional changes you describe > followed majority practice that started earlier. > > If anyone's curious, I can do more digging into people's memories on the > MWSD side. > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 > http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > > > -- > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:31:49 -0700 > From: Aahz Maruch <a...@pobox.com> > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Norms/Ethics of Dance Choreography Sharing > Message-ID: <20130926153149.ga12...@panix.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > [late again] > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013, Don Veino wrote: > > > > I freely offer that some of the distinctions may or may not make sense to > > others, but feels right to me in this environment. The grey area one > above > > would probably be stifling to several of the choreography review and > > criticism threads which are otherwise very helpful were it made "not OK." > > > > I'd love to hear what others think! > > Not sure what I think yet, but because of this and Sam's thread, I've > stuck "CC BY-NC-SA" on the dances I'm writing -- can't hurt. > > I prefer that over Sam's CC BY-NC because the SA requires a pass-along > license: if there's ever a situation where copyright is relevant, I want > to force the copyleft. > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 > http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > > > -- > > ___ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 109, Issue 47 > >
