Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 4/2/2006, 10:36 PM
LOL, seems like this keeps surfacing.
Pick up the phone, call Jamie Paulk Calhoun at SESAC, and ask her how as Director of Business Affairs, she can possibly make commentary on issues non-related to SESAC. Better still, call her boss, Dennis Lord. When I saw this posted, I called them both. The woman is an idiot, in my opinion. She can't make comment on anything not SESAC licenced, and SESAC has SO few sync licenses it's not worth even commenting on. Her point might have been (which it was, on the phone with me) that SESAC likely wouldn't go after an infringement of 10 copies for a wedding video. She claims that the person who mailed her was saying it was *his* wedding, and he was making copies for family.
This was posted several months ago on the VU forums, and it seems to have resurfaced again today on several fora.
Makes me damn glad that SESAC doesn't have any of my sync licences, only my publisher is a member, and only then because they do a lot of elevator music. (which some of my music embarassingly falls into)
FrigidNDEditing wrote on 4/2/2006, 11:10 PM
LOL - I knew it was too good to be true.

I like elevator music.
- -
-
\___/

Dave
farss wrote on 4/2/2006, 11:39 PM
Not that I have a clue who SESAC is other than that they probably have zero to do with what goes on down here but I've had much the same sort of response on a much more significant copyright question down here.
The response involved a fair bit of mirth, I think they thought it quaint that I'd even bothered to ask, that forced them to recite the "official" position. I in turn recited the "official' position to the client who, shall we say, I got the impression found someone not so wet behind the ears.

So I've still got my house and my ethics intact but I'm a bit poorer and really not much wiser, kind of felt like I'd been the victim of some insider joke. It seems the big fish know just how naughty you can be and the little fish are left to founder.
What remedy does one have, insist that the law is enforced?
How can you when it's not criminal law?

Bob.
apit34356 wrote on 4/3/2006, 12:47 AM
Farss, really it is not a criminal matter but more or a civil one. These "music unions" basicly sue individuals that they believe have broken the the laws governing copyrights and similar issues. "Music unions" do not win all their cases as rumors implies, but they operate their PR similar to the tax system. Fear is a powerful tool in forcing people to pay even when individuals do not think its fair. Now, the usa feds are interested in illegal operating mass producers of music and movies, but they also dance around organized crime distributions of music, just check any large number of truck stops for music and videos, you will discover something interesting. The survey the bars and food stops around these stops. Surprising, the "music unions" and feds never visit.