Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 24482467; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 03:00:48 -0700 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #503 Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 03:00:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, MILLION_USD,US_DOLLARS_3 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on prxy.net X-Spam-Level: X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #503 1. Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) by Joseph Champelli 2. on copyright of designs by "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" 3. Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) by Bill Sapsis 4. Re: Painted Chrismas Scrim for Christmas Carol Farce by Steve Larson 5. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "C. Dopher" 6. Re: Apple-Xerox by "Alf Sauve" 7. Re: Chorus Line the new version another discussion thread by Chris Davis 8. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 9. Shameless Plug.... by "Stirling Shelton" 10. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Tony Deeming" 11. Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple by Jerry Durand 12. Re: Apple-Xerox by Jerry Durand 13. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by CB 14. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by Steve Larson 15. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 16. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 17. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by Jerry Durand 18. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 19. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by Bill Sapsis 20. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 21. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Steve McBee" 22. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Steve McBee" 23. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jon Ares" 24. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jon Ares" 25. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 26. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 27. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 28. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by Mark O'Brien 29. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jon Ares" 30. my blue sidelights! by Judy 31. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by MissWisc [at] aol.com 32. Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple by Stephen Litterst 33. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Occy" 34. Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) by Ken Romaine 35. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by Bruce Purdy 36. Re: Shameless Plug.... by James Kosmatka 37. Re: Shameless Plug.... (oops, sorry) by James Kosmatka 38. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 39. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Jon Ares" 40. Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick by "Tony Deeming" *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <621d2eb00508280506ee1b745 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:06:20 -0400 From: Joseph Champelli Subject: Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) In-Reply-To: References:

"I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by [Asteroids]." I like this version: http://www.goriya.com/flash/asteroids/asteroids.shtml --=20 Joseph Champelli University of Tennessee FTSI ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" Subject: on copyright of designs Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:27:40 -0400 Warning. This is a long post but I hope that some will find it interesting nevertheless. I have a love/hate relationship with these discussions. Much of them are pointless, and there are old wives tales galore! Disclaimer: I do have expertise in this area but in some instances here I do not. I will try to differentiate when I am making a guess... First, one can use semantics and rationalizations all one wants to, but you can still lose your court case when you find that the law has specific definitions that are not your own idiosyncratic definitions of things. As most people for instance know by now, copyright falls under the category of law of intellectual PROPERTY, so while the argument like "stealing only applies to something like cars" might be a good argument for the playground, it doesn't apply to the courtroom where copyright is defined point blank as property, exactly like a car is (though rules of ownership would vary, the two are both considered equally as property). Then there is the by now decades old out-of-date idea that copyright must be registered. Copyrightable work is considered to be protected "from the moment of creation". Neither do you need a copyright mark or date anymore. For those who might ask then why people indicate copyright and do register, the law pr ovides certain additional punitive penalties if a work has been formally registered and of course in cases where there are competing claims, a formal registered copyright would help in such claims. Then there is the issue of what is copyrightable. When I was little I had the brainstorm that I would copyright my school's report card and then sue the school if I didn't like the grade! Again this sounds nice on the playground. I even thought about variations like copyright on the blank one and then on one with various grades! Later I learned, it isn't a matter of who registered first but who CREATED the work. Then I learned that forms, lists (like the phone book) etc are not copyrightable anyway. I BELIEVE (disclaimer) that in the area of lighting what is seen on the stage is NOT copyrightable, as work to be copyrighted must be "set" into publishable form. What IS covered would be the light plot, and I would suspect, even cue sheets. Photos of the performance WOULD be copyrightable as would be videos as they have all been set in physical form. In other areas of stage design there is another problem, "utilitarian" things as I understand it are also not covered by copyright protection. Furniture and cloting designs fall into this category (here my knowledge is not complete). In fact you see costumes copied all the time and furniture copied every time you buy at Walmart! So how can the Barny people sue you for making a Barney costume? Simple and clever, they do not use copyright to protect but the trademark laws. I think that when you hear about things like a "look" being protected, much of that comes through trademark law. Architecture being utilitarian is not copyrigtable, but every corporation with a distinctive headquarters takes the image of their building and turns it into a trademark that then IS protected. There are a host of fun ways by wich otherwise non-copyrighted material gets protected anyway. It took me years to find out how museums could claim copyright protection of old master paintings made ling before the idea of copyright was even thought up! The strategy parallels the trademark protection of a building design in a way. It turns out that the painting ITSELF is not copyrightable but the photograph of the painting that would be in a book IS copyrightable! This is the REAL reason why museums don't want you to take pictures. Given the problems in protecting works on stage, especially costume designs, I suspect this too is why theatres so vigorously need to enforce non photography/video rules. On the opposite side of these issues is another matter. It is amazine what people feel they have "invented". I see it all the time with students and often too with the pros. Scholars are also party to this. I knew a woman in Albany NY years ago who was bitching that a theatre in San Francisco "Stole" their Albany community theatre acronym of ACT (I did point out to her that American Conservatory Theatre was around long before her theatre was!). Designers are frequently credited with "inventing" things that any GOOD researcher can find examples of from decades earlier. A case in point would be the "Light Curtain". While Jarka Burian would likely claim this "invention" for Svoboda, Bel Geddes was proposing the technique 30 years earlier. Same for Svoboda's mixture of live action and film as the seminal animated film from the early part of the 20th century, "Gertie the Dinosaur" involved interaction between the animation and the creator, Windsor McCay live on stage talking and acting with the image on the screen. At times the claim of invention gets downright ignorant! I received a paper from a student once with an illustrative sentence talking about "Sleeping Beauty made famous by Walt Disney". I pointed out that it was Walt Disney made famous by "Sleeping Beauty". A imilar example from disney comes from the film "Fantasia". Every generation remembers that it was created for THEM due to the way Disney would release the film every 7 years or so! I remember the film so vividly from my childhood that I was shocked to learn of it's REAL release in 1945 almost a decade before I was born. This happens all the time with music too. I'd pitty any opera company attempting to do William Tell and having half the audience wonder why they made an opera of "The Lone Ranger!". In short on this point, especially with lighting designers, their "innovations" have often been "invented" by others long before. Another aspect of the debate which may help my fellow designers. People "steal" my work all of the time. I can tell because I track the search terms by which people find my website. It is amazing how brash the theft is! My favorites are the super brash folk who actually write to me for info on ho they might better steal the designs! I could fret and be insolate myself and also deny that my own work sometimes/often has been inspired by giants before me, but rather I use a strategy that I picked up from Peter Foy. In the 1960s he pointed out to me that the techniques of theatrical flying are not secret. Many of the techniques are even simple and obvious. What you get when you hired Foy or now his successors are a team of people with years of experience in making the simple actually work and in a way where people do not get killed! People can copy my designs all they want, but they would never be successful copies unless they are better than me, and if they are better than me they'd likely not want to copy! People hire me for ME, and for whatever damage it could do, I am unique! There is another side here which I would acknowledge. Others may have already hinted at this. If someone were to copy my work badly (as it would be) then my own reputation gets diminished as folk might then associate the bad copies with me. I imagine the examples given by the LDs on the list would be particularly gruesome in this regard. A Lighting design that worked because of the on-site talents of the LD, then applied to a different show after the LD left, might cause folks to re-evaluate the quality of the original LDs work. Where I have seen this tragically is in theatre architecture and consulting! There are examples of a theatre built for a specific function, only to have the function totally changed with critics years later blaming the architect. The case in point would be "the egg" in Albany NY, an engineering marvel that cost $100,000,000 in 1960s money. The building is a giant spheroid supported on three points 7 stories above ground and large enough to hold a 500 seat and a 1000 seat theatre inside. Harrison and Abromowiz were the architects and Oenslager was the consultant. I was the first TD in the facility in the 1970s and I would get heartbroken when some mucky-muck would come through, clap their hands or something, and then proclaim "Oenslager should be SHOT for such work". The problem is that the building was never intended to be a theatre facility as it is now used. It was designed to be a bicameral meeting center for the NY legislature. What Oenslager did (as had been done in Moscow) was to suggest that with a little extra attention, stage rigging could be added to support the occasional secial show if and when desired. I remember that Oenslager died literally the week after they told him that surprise, the facility would now be a full-time theatre. At the time my teacher was Oenslager's associate. I asked him why the house and proscenium was all light polished wood, a terrible choice for a theatre. His words exactly "You must understand, legislators don't want to meet in a dark and dingy theatre". So in short... 1. Copyright is a very complex area but definitions are set by law and not by someone's dictionary. 2. There are lots of mis information about what is and is not protected. 3. There are other ways to protect intellectual work. 4. People will steal so your value should come mostly from you and not the specific work. 5. Stealing the work or a change of circumstances in the cdreation might diminish your own reputation. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:31:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Back in the day.....I was addicted to Asteroids. Played it on the road, at home, wherever I could find a machine. Had a running contest with an LD buddy of mine. Took photos of high scores and mailed them back and forth. Wasted entire days in the arcades (now long gone, thankfully) in Times Square. It was great. It was a nightmare. And now, thanks to this list, I have 2 sites where I can go and play whenever I want to. And it's OK, because I'm all grown up now and don't have to revert to my old ways. I have self.....control. I....can....stop...myself......any..........time........I Aaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh On 8/28/05 8:06 AM, "Joseph Champelli" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > "I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by [Asteroids]." > > I like this version: > > http://www.goriya.com/flash/asteroids/asteroids.shtml > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:41:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Painted Chrismas Scrim for Christmas Carol Farce From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: The play is a comedy about the Farndale women trying to put on a production of A Christmas Carol. It does not "need" the scrim. As a matter of fact I designed the show using flats. I created the snowy street scene usually associated with the Dickensian setting. The real secret to the success scenicly of the show is the myriad of props and smaller scenic pieces. They need to be supportive of the show, but yet cleverly done. We did the show in a 250 seat black box with much success. The real success lies in the inventiveness of the director and the actors. Steve > From: "C. Dopher" > Reply-To: "Stagecraft" > Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 12:51:11 -0400 > We need more info. Why a scrim and not a muslin drop? Why the Christmas > Card setting? Is it supposed to BE a Christmas Card illustration, or is it > supposed to evoke warm fuzzy nostalgia (for a reality that never existed)? > > If it's stock snow London rowhouse exteriors you want, try searching for > Nutcracker front scrims. > > Cris Dopher > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:17:45 -0400 Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick From: "C. Dopher" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1125143026.7380.291.camel [at] xpc.home.erwinrol.com> I'm going to go ahead a toppost this because I'm not replying to any specific points. I read about five of these posts and deleted the rest. Erwin and Tony: This is an argument you cannot win in this forum, where so many of us have a vested interested in protecting our work so that if someone wants to reproduce our work they will HIRE US to do so. Everybody else: are there any actual experts in intellectual property theory and law here? No? Hello? Hello? Is this thing on? Cris Dopher, LD On 8/27/05 7:43 AM, "Erwin Rol" wrote: > I find this discussion about copyright on lighting designs very > interesting, especially now we live in a time that everybody believes > they have the right to be the owner of every idea they come up with. Reply-To: "Alf Sauve" From: "Alf Sauve" Subject: Re: Apple-Xerox Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:29:14 -0400 History time. Back in the EARLY 60s. BEFORE microprocessors. A gentleman named J.R.R. Licklider wrote some papers on man-machine interface and predicted that people would have "machines" on their desks that would allow them to interchange messages and files between each other over an ubiquitous worldwide network. He was also a director with ARPA and obtained some of the original funding for research into graphical pointing devices. I seem to remember that before Win95 was released Microsoft paid several million (USD) to Wang Laboratories for the rights to the desktop GUI or parts thereof from one of Dr. Wang's since forgotten products, the PIC-Personal Image Computer. Which parts of the GUI pardigm Wang could possibly claim as theirs was never clear, but obviously there was more than one company that contributed to the graphical interface we now all "enjoy". Alf ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:37:11 -0400 From: Chris Davis Subject: Re: Chorus Line the new version another discussion thread In-reply-to: Message-id: <5.1.0.14.0.20050828112941.00a137a0 [at] mail-hub.optonline.net> References: Now this should be *really* interesting. It's really a shame that Tharon won't be able to do the show, I'd love to see what she would changed from her original design. Not to sound maudlin, but I hope this isn't the end of the road for her as I consider her a living legend. As for Natasha, this sounds like an excellent choice. A little ultraviolet never hurt anybody :-) At 12:47 PM 8/27/2005 -0400, "C. Dopher" wrote: >My emails with the original (3rd) assistant reveal that while Tharon and >Richard Winkler were originally slated to do ACL'06, things have changed. >Tharon is too ill to do the show; Katz will be lighting it. Neither are any >of the original assistants involved, probably due to politics, though if I >were Natasha, I wouldn't want the original assistants assisting ME in my >"recreation" of ACL's lighting. > >While the word "recreation" is still in play, I doubt very much in will be, >at least as lighting goes -- I've not seen anything by Natasha that didn't >use ultra-violet, it seems to be her signature color. I would be deeply >impressed if she could shift her own design sensibilities enough to actually >replicate the show's original look. > >Cris Dopher __________________________________ Chris Davis cdavis [at] queenstheatre.org Production Manager/Lighting Supervisor Queens Theatre In The Park http://www.queenstheatre.org ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 15:58:32 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.085920.9684.175742 [at] webmail25.lax.untd.com> Dear Cris, The answer YES. I have been an Entertainment Lawyer for over 20 years and I am sure that there are other Designers on this list who have learned the hard way how to protect their work. Its the biz of shobiz. /s/ Richard, LD+JD [Cal Bar# 106112] Reply to:___________________________ Everybody else: are there any actual experts in intellectual property theory and law here? No? Cris Dopher, LD ------------------------------ Message-Id: <200508281627.MAA02261 [at] playhsn.cincyplay.com> From: "Stirling Shelton" Subject: Shameless Plug.... Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:31:56 -0400 Mark Your Calendars: Take a moment to mark your calendar for the Fall Ohio Valley Section Conference on Saturday, October 1, 2005. The College-Conservatory of Music at the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati Ohio, will be the host for the conference in Cincinnati. Session will include topics such as PLC control of staging, automated lighting fixtures, special techniques in makeup and wig design, costume rendering with markers and tips for easy construction of finely detailed scenic models. Along with a full day of sessions, the conference will feature the Peggy Ezekial Design Awards and a membership meeting. Watch the website for more details. Please join us and make this event a major success! We have the program; all we need now is you! Things to do on Friday before the conference or Saturday after the conference: Tours of the Shops and backstage (with prior arrangements) Special Tickets prices and Hotel Packages are available: Contract Stirling for more info: Stirling.Shelton [at] cincyplay.com Cincinnati Playhouse in the PARK: The Marx Theatre season begins with the irreverent, fast-paced and hilarious musical A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, September 6 - October 7 (opening night: September 8). Often described as the funniest musical ever written, Forum features a book by Burt Shevelove and Larry Gelbart (creator of Tootsie and MASH) and is the first Broadway musical for which Stephen Sondheim wrote both lyrics and music. This Tony Award winner for best musical is a marvelous mixture of mischief, mishaps, mistaken identities, misunderstandings and mayhem. Audiences will return to ancient Rome where a crafty slave attempts to win his freedom by arranging the elopement of his brainless, innocent master to an equally brainless, innocent courtesan. Singing, dancing and (almost) a human sacrifice all combine in an evening's entertainment - tragedy tomorrow, comedy tonight! The Thompson Shelterhouse season begins with Randal Myler's Love, Janis (September 22 - November 6; opening night: September 29). "Piece of My Heart" . "Try (Just a Little Bit Harder)" . "Me and Bobby McGee" . "Ball and Chain" - Janis Joplin, the icon of 1960s rock music, is brought back to life in both music and words. Love, Janis paints a stunning portrait of the artist not only through her legendary songs, but also in the poignant and honest letters she wrote home to her family. The show was inspired by the book of the same name by Laura Joplin and was described by the New York Post as "a potent, fresh and enormously crowd-pleasing evocation of the legacy of Janis Joplin." Stirling Shelton Technical Director Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park 2827 Gilbert AVE Cincinnati, OH 45206 513-345-2255 ext 302 ------------------------------ From: "Tony Deeming" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:55:49 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: > -----Original Message----- > From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net]On Behalf Of C. > Dopher > > I'm going to go ahead a toppost this because I'm not replying to any > specific points. I read about five of these posts and deleted the rest. > > Erwin and Tony: This is an argument you cannot win in this > forum, where so > many of us have a vested interested in protecting our work so that if > someone wants to reproduce our work they will HIRE US to do so. > > Everybody else: are there any actual experts in intellectual property > theory and law here? No? > > Hello? Hello? Is this thing on? > > Cris Dopher, LD > 8-))))) Chris - don't get me wrong - a lot of my 'argument' is from the top of the fence. I don't doubt that there are professionals who want to and do wish to copyright their designs, BUT my point is that I believe it to be inherently difficult to do so, and to PROVE that someone has actually stolen a design in most cases would be nigh on impossible. Also I believe it even more difficult to copyright an idea, especially as there are very few real 'new' ideas out there..... End, now. TD ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050828102129.029ddcd8 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:23:10 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple In-Reply-To: References:

At 04:05 PM 8/27/2005, you wrote: > > > I'm happy to add a Linux section if there's some specialty software > > > becoming available. > >I'm holding out for Apple ][+, Commodore 64, and Atari 800. Our DMX box will work with any of those! I've even used a Palm III to control it. :) Now if only the guy who borrowed my Apple ][ hadn't trashed it when he was done with it ("Oh, you wanted your wedding present back?"). -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050828104447.029dcc30 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:49:30 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Apple-Xerox In-Reply-To: References: At 08:29 AM 8/28/2005, you wrote: >I seem to remember that before Win95 was released Microsoft paid >several million (USD) to Wang Laboratories for the rights to the desktop >GUI or parts thereof from one of Dr. Wang's since forgotten products, the >PIC-Personal Image Computer. The first "computer" I did serious programming on was a Wang 720B ( http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/wang720.html ), I did the school's first computer dating program on this, figured out how to directly address the hardware so the display would do "interesting" things, and also had a Space Wars game that caused a lot of guys (and teachers) to spend a lot of lunch and after school time playing with their Wang. :) This was 1972-74. -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20050828105808.00ce1ce8 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:58:08 From: CB Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick >The best is a videotape of the entire performance, or at least the parts >where you want to protect the lighting. ...and then showing up in court with your very own copyright infringement! Getting permission to videotape your show, much less someone else's show, seems to be a copyright infringement unless you have every permission down to the ITASE stagehand that swept the stage before performances. I tried to find out who to ask permission for an archival copy on VHS from the FOH cam, and I never did get all the answers straight in my head. Seems everyone and everything gets signed off on, and you'd need an attorney to ever show the thing. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:14:44 -0400 Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I believe that you can videotape a show for archival purposes only, can't you. Steve > From: CB > Reply-To: "Stagecraft" > Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:58:08 > To: "Stagecraft" > Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > >> The best is a videotape of the entire performance, or at least the parts >> where you want to protect the lighting. > > ...and then showing up in court with your very own copyright infringement! > Getting permission to videotape your show, much less someone else's show, > seems to be a copyright infringement unless you have every permission down > to the ITASE stagehand that swept the stage before performances. I tried > to find out who to ask permission for an archival copy on VHS from the FOH > cam, and I never did get all the answers straight in my head. Seems > everyone and everything gets signed off on, and you'd need an attorney to > ever show the thing. > Chris "Chris" Babbie > Location Sound > MON AZ > > Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates > negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... > > ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:23:09 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.112316.24994.177138 [at] webmail33.lax.untd.com> There is no legal mechanism to copyright an idea; traditionally, it must be 'fixed in a tangible medium', but more ethereal intellectual property, such as choreography, can be protected by filing the Benesh Notation or Labonotation transcript of the choreography, just as you can file sheet music with the Copyright Office to protect music. And though it is theoretically possible to copyright a particular design by depositing in the copyright office all the written materials that were used to effect the design upon the stage, it is far easier to proceed under State Law, and show a jury a 'Substantial Similarity' between your design, as it appeared, and the infringer's design as it appeared. Reverse Engineering using different equipment to achieve the identical look and cue sequence could be a good defense to a claim of patent infringement, but it is not determinative elsewhere. The law is a seamless web. Where Copyright Law (a Federal remedy) fades out, Unfair Competition Law (a State remedy) often fades up. Even though titles and character names are unprotected by the Copyright Act, for example, they are protected by State law and other Federal statutes if your use of unique character names causes the first user harm OR there is a likelihood of confusion OR Consumers could be misled OR a registered (or even not yet registered) trademark or servicemark was diluted. In all of the remedies listed above EXCEPT COPYRIGHT, the Plaintiff must show (1) Duty (2) Breach of Duty (3) Causation, and (4) Damages. In Copyright, you do not have to show that you were damaged, as Statutory Damages are presumed, and the amount of Damages is listed in the act. To collect in an infringement case, what you have to show is that you owned the Intellectual Property that the Defendant copied. /s/ Richard Reply to:___________________________ I believe it even more difficult to copyright an idea TD ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:26:28 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.112723.24994.177174 [at] webmail33.lax.untd.com> NO! That is rarely 'Fair Use', and you could EASILY be sued. /s/ Richard Reply to:________________ I believe that you can videotape a show for archival purposes only, can't you. Steve ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050828113532.02987f68 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:38:09 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick In-Reply-To: References: At 11:23 AM 8/28/2005, you wrote: >In Copyright, you do not have to show that you were damaged, as >Statutory Damages are presumed, and the amount of Damages is listed >in the act. To collect in an infringement case, what you have to >show is that you owned the Intellectual Property that the Defendant copied. >/s/ Richard I know someone who posted part of a company's internal memos in a news group to show they were doing illegal stuff. They sued him under copyright law and won (even for things they claimed he copied but never posted). They got all that evidence thrown out of their case and he was fined several tens of thousands. Sounds like most (all?) laws, he with the bigger lawyer wins. -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:42:12 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c5ac00$380498d0$6601a8c0 [at] Dell> In-Reply-To: > if your use of unique character names causes=20 > the first user harm OR there is a likelihood of confusion OR=20 > Consumers could be misled OR a registered (or even not yet=20 > registered) trademark or servicemark was diluted. For example, a certain cable public affairs network and a certain = vitamin supplement can both use the name "C-SPAN" because consumers are unlikely = to confuse the two. Likewise, Ford can make a vehicle called the Navigator at the same time = that Netscape markets a web browser under that name. Ford can also = manufacture an SUV with the same name as Microsoft's browser. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:46:00 -0400 Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hey Richard. Why don't you do a session on some of this stuff at USITT? Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile On 8/28/05 11:58 AM, "ladesigners [at] juno.com" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Dear Cris, > The answer YES. I have been an Entertainment Lawyer for over 20 years and I am > sure that there are other Designers on this list who have learned the hard way > how to protect their work. Its the biz of shobiz. > /s/ Richard, LD+JD [Cal Bar# 106112] > > Reply to:___________________________ > Everybody else: are there any actual experts in intellectual property > theory and law here? No? > Cris Dopher, LD > > > ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:53:34 -0400 Message-ID: <000101c5ac01$ce9fc890$6601a8c0 [at] Dell> In-Reply-To: > Hey Richard. Why don't you do a session on some of this > stuff at USITT? That's a remarkably good idea. Please bring lots of printed materials that I can illegally photocopy and distribute to my students, if I ever again have students. :) Seriously, it is a good idea. ------------------------------ From: "Steve McBee" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 13:59:51 -0500 Message-ID: <000001c5ac02$b28415c0$a8f79904 [at] steves> In-Reply-To: Richard, I actually have a tangent question to this one. If it is a = 'work-for-hire', then does the creator or the owner have the copyright? If I'm designing = the lights for a show, I have to have some idea of what needs to go where as well as the look of the show. I just don't design something and then = hope that someone will produce a show because they saw a light plot for an = empty stage. It would be great if that happened, but I've never seen it, even = for a rock concert. Someone has the concept, they have some idea of what = the lights need to look like for each scene, and it is up to me to turn that idea into reality, usually with lots of discussion between me, the = director, the tech director, and the other designers. Doesn't that make the light design only part of the whole look of the show? I'm probably not clear enough, but if I were then I'd be writing scripts instead! Thanks, Steve ------------------------------ From: "Steve McBee" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:03:30 -0500 Message-ID: <000501c5ac03$34a8bc40$a8f79904 [at] steves> In-Reply-To: True, but when was the last time you went to "AutoShack". Which is now called AutoZone. Guess who sued in court for that one. Take care, Steve ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000d01c5ac03$9248efa0$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" Cc: stagecraft [at] jeffsalzberg.com References: Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:06:18 -0700 > > Ford can also manufacture > an SUV with the same name as Microsoft's browser. Ah yes. The Ford Exploder. (So many similarities...) - Jon Ares www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001b01c5ac04$7a19b940$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" References: Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:12:47 -0700 > NO! That is rarely 'Fair Use', and you could EASILY be sued. > /s/ Richard > > Reply to:________________ > I believe that you can videotape a show for archival purposes only, can't > you. The "Archival Use Only" excuse... one of the great urban legends (old wive's tale?) of the amateur theatre. Speaking of, I am mighty annoyed, frustrated, etc that certain Portland Public Schools' productions of "Pajama Game" and "Guys n Dolls" have been airing incessantly all summer long on the PPS cable access channel.... I am annoyed (not just because they're bad) because I have to repeatedly defend my own department's policy that we do NOT videotape shows. (Archival or not.) I had one tipsy parent last spring nearly come to fisticuffs over the issue - his daughter's last show of her high school career, etc. (Though I wish we could have taped it - it was great - Steve Martin's WASP.) - Jon Ares www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:12:52 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.121319.24994.177546 [at] webmail33.lax.untd.com> I await the invitation. Louisville will be my 32nd conference. It's programming is most likely full; the Phoenix conference should have room on the schedule. Just come up with a Commission to sponsor it. (Sponsor the session -not me- I'll pay for my own airfare and lodging) /s/ Richard > Hey Richard. Why don't you do a session on some of this > stuff at USITT? That's a remarkably good idea. Please bring lots of printed materials that I can illegally photocopy and distribute to my students, if I ever again have students. :) Seriously, it is a good idea. ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:15:27 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.121628.24994.177580 [at] webmail33.lax.untd.com> That is correct. /s/ Richard > if your use of unique character names causes > the first user harm OR there is a likelihood of confusion OR > Consumers could be misled OR a registered (or even not yet > registered) trademark or servicemark was diluted. For example, a certain cable public affairs network and a certain vitamin supplement can both use the name "C-SPAN" because consumers are unlikely to confuse the two. Likewise, Ford can make a vehicle called the Navigator at the same time that Netscape markets a web browser under that name. Ford can also manufacture an SUV with the same name as Microsoft's browser. ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:23:08 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.122344.24994.177652 [at] webmail33.lax.untd.com> Well, as you well know as a California resident, normally the 'one issue' CONSUMER wins if its a tie with big business. But not always. /s/ Richard Sounds like most (all?) laws, he with the bigger lawyer wins. -- Jerry Durand 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050828123520.fx9mowsg84cw80sw [at] www.email.arizona.edu> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:35:20 -0700 From: Mark O'Brien Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick References:

In-Reply-To: Quoting Jon Ares : >> Ford can also manufacture >> an SUV with the same name as Microsoft's browser. > > > Ah yes. The Ford Exploder. (So many similarities...) > Yes, If only Mozilla would come out with a free SUV that got better gas mileage, did not break down, and drove better... Mark O'Brien Opera Technical Director University of Arizona, School of Music 520-621-7025 520-591-1803 Mobile ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000b01c5ac08$563e3380$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" References:

Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:40:25 -0700 > If only Mozilla would come out with a free SUV that got better gas > mileage, did > not break down, and drove better... I hear Google is already on the job..... (But it will be in Beta forever....) - Jon Ares www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ Message-ID: <43122920.5070204 [at] post.tau.ac.il> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 23:14:08 +0200 From: Judy Subject: my blue sidelights! First I'd like to say I'm pleased everybody kept the title of my message "plagiarism and thanks Herrick" because that way Herrick was (justly) thanked over and over again! My blue sidelights were definitely stealing! Yes, it was at the same venue. No, they did not pay ANY lighting designer for Sylphides. They just put up the same lighting I had done for Giselle, evidently figuring it was good enough so why pay anybody to light the new production? And no, nobody had done that before; it was not just alternating blue, it was one of those complicated things you do when you are really, really thinking hard - 'fraid I don't remember the details though I should still have the magic sheet somewhere....The joke was on them, however, since it really was not appropriate for the new ballet. ------------------------------ From: MissWisc [at] aol.com Message-ID: <205.8cdcee1.304377e6 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:26:14 EDT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick <> So in order to protect MY copyright to my lighting design I have to/get to infringe on the copyright of the play by making an "illegal" video? (ducking for devil's advocate cover) Kristi ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:28:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple In-reply-to: Message-id: <2237.172.137.84.248.1125260904.squirrel [at] 172.137.84.248> References: > --------------------------------------------------- > > Don't forget the 6809 based Radio Shack 64K Color Computer. One smokin' > machine! Yeah, ours had that problem, too. It does that if you don't write the code correctly. Steve L. ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "Occy" References: Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 13:59:16 -0700 Chris, years ago Jefferson Starship came to my venue with the band gear and sound and no lights for a one off. Play in mind the venue is 16,000 seats. And we asked where are the lights? They had played there the year be fore when we had a in house system if need be and production figured that that would do with the in house system which we had gotten rid of on this season. Well when every one is looking green in the face about the lights at 10am on a Saturday. The phone lines are hot and someone found Ted Nuggents lighting rig was store about 90 miles away complete ready to ship to Ted's next show in 3 days. Since the rig had already been out on tour we weren't allow to change anything. The rig came with nobody so my crew and put it together, flew it and I focused it for Starship. Who gets the design? Ted's designer, Starship's designer, or me who did the work and saved a lot of people bums? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve McBee" --------------------------------------------------- Richard, I actually have a tangent question to this one. If it is a 'work-for-hire', then does the creator or the owner have the copyright? If I'm designing the lights for a show, I have to have some idea of what needs to go where as well as the look of the show. I just don't design something and then hope that someone will produce a show because they saw a light plot for an empty stage. It would be great if that happened, but I've never seen it, even for a rock concert. Someone has the concept, they have some idea of what the lights need to look like for each scene, and it is up to me to turn that idea into reality, usually with lots of discussion between me, the director, the tech director, and the other designers. Doesn't that make the light design only part of the whole look of the show? I'm probably not clear enough, but if I were then I'd be writing scripts instead! Thanks, Steve ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:03:36 -0400 From: Ken Romaine Subject: Re: Asteroids (was: Re: Linux vs Microsoft and Apple) In-Reply-To: References:

Lessee...Bill Sapsis...self control. Bill Sapsis...self control Bill Sapsis.... Oh hell - I give up - these just don't belong in the same sentence. Ken Romaine On 8/28/05, Bill Sapsis wrote: > ....it's OK, because I'm all grown up now and don't > have to revert to my old ways. I have self.....control. > I....can....stop...myself......any..........time........I > Aaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:52:49 -0400 Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick From: Bruce Purdy Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Richard wrote: > And though it is theoretically possible to copyright a particular design by > depositing in the copyright office all the written materials that were used to > effect the design upon the stage, it is far easier to proceed under State Law, > and show a jury a 'Substantial Similarity' between your design, as it > appeared, and the infringer's design as it appeared. OK, so I'm dying of curiosity on this one! Certainly you could show all the documentation in the world for your original design, but *how* would you "show a jury" what the defendant's show looked like? Take the jury on a field trip to watch the defendant's show, assume that they are visually literate enough to know what they are seeing, and hope their show hasn't closed already? Video tape the defendant's show? (That whole can of worms!) Subpoena their plots, cue sheets etc.? I've rarely seen any community theatre around here actually produce a written plot. If the "Designer" is recreating by heck and by guess what he remembered seeing in your show, happens to get it close, and you sue, how do you prove it? Just curious. Bruce -- Bruce Purdy Technical Director Smith Opera House ------------------------------ Message-ID: <431263AA.6030603 [at] cleveland-theater.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:23:54 -0400 From: James Kosmatka Subject: Re: Shameless Plug.... References: In-Reply-To: Mr. Shelton, I didn't see this on NEOhioPAL, so I thought I might point you in that direction. It's the North East Ohio Performing Arts List, located at: http://lists.fredsternfeld.com/mailman/listinfo/neohiopal There's a whole lot of people on there who will probably be interested. Take care, James Kosmatka Student Sound Designer Cleveland State University Stirling Shelton wrote: >For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see >--------------------------------------------------- > > >Mark Your Calendars: Take a moment to mark your calendar for the Fall Ohio >Valley Section Conference on Saturday, October 1, 2005. The >College-Conservatory of Music at the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati >Ohio, will be the host for the conference in Cincinnati. Session will >include topics such as PLC control of staging, automated lighting fixtures, >special techniques in makeup and wig design, costume rendering with markers >and tips for easy construction of finely detailed scenic models. Along with >a full day of sessions, the conference will feature the Peggy Ezekial Design >Awards and a membership meeting. Watch the website for more details. >Please join us and make this event a major success! We have the program; >all we need now is you! > > > >Things to do on Friday before the conference or Saturday after the >conference: >Tours of the Shops and backstage (with prior arrangements) >Special Tickets prices and Hotel Packages are available: >Contract Stirling for more info: Stirling.Shelton [at] cincyplay.com > >Cincinnati Playhouse in the PARK: > >The Marx Theatre season begins with the irreverent, fast-paced and hilarious >musical A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, September 6 - >October 7 (opening night: September 8). Often described as the funniest >musical ever written, Forum features a book by Burt Shevelove and Larry >Gelbart (creator of Tootsie and MASH) and is the first Broadway musical for >which Stephen Sondheim wrote both lyrics and music. This Tony Award winner >for best musical is a marvelous mixture of mischief, mishaps, mistaken >identities, misunderstandings and mayhem. Audiences will return to ancient >Rome where a crafty slave attempts to win his freedom by arranging the >elopement of his brainless, innocent master to an equally brainless, >innocent courtesan. Singing, dancing and (almost) a human sacrifice all >combine in an evening's entertainment - tragedy tomorrow, comedy tonight! > >The Thompson Shelterhouse season begins with Randal Myler's Love, Janis >(September 22 - November 6; opening night: September 29). "Piece of My >Heart" . "Try (Just a Little Bit Harder)" . "Me and Bobby McGee" . "Ball and >Chain" - Janis Joplin, the icon of 1960s rock music, is brought back to life >in both music and words. Love, Janis paints a stunning portrait of the >artist not only through her legendary songs, but also in the poignant and >honest letters she wrote home to her family. The show was inspired by the >book of the same name by Laura Joplin and was described by the New York Post >as "a potent, fresh and enormously crowd-pleasing evocation of the legacy of >Janis Joplin." > >Stirling Shelton >Technical Director >Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park >2827 Gilbert AVE >Cincinnati, OH 45206 >513-345-2255 ext 302 > > > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <431263E4.8000105 [at] cleveland-theater.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:24:52 -0400 From: James Kosmatka Subject: Re: Shameless Plug.... (oops, sorry) References: In-Reply-To: My apologies for that (and this) waste of bandwidth. Forgot to replace the address. ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 02:59:17 GMT Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Message-Id: <20050828.200011.26528.181431 [at] webmail21.lax.untd.com> If it is a 'Work-Made-For-Hire', the entity that paid you to create the design, owns the copyright, and can reuse the design without you. /s/ Richard Reply to:_____________________________ Richard, I actually have a tangent question to this one. If it is a 'work-for-hire', then does the creator or the owner have the copyright? Thanks, Steve ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000e01c5ac51$58cc2730$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" References: Subject: Re: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:23:03 -0700 > If it is a 'Work-Made-For-Hire', the entity that paid you to create the > design, owns the copyright, and can reuse the design without you. Does that language need to be in a contract? Over the years, I have signed many contracts, of course, but many shows have never had such language. (These contracts usually more or less just state that I'll be remunerated by performing such functions, etc.) If a contract does not state they 'own' it, or, if in fact there was never a contract for my work, do they own it? - Jon Ares www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ From: "Tony Deeming" Subject: RE: plagiarism and thanks Herrick Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 09:07:24 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: So how does that figure with Judy's blue side lights?? > If it is a 'Work-Made-For-Hire', the entity that paid you to > create the design, owns the copyright, and can reuse the design > without you. > /s/ Richard > > Reply to:_____________________________ > > Richard, > I actually have a tangent question to this one. If it is a > 'work-for-hire', then does the creator or the owner have the copyright? > Thanks, > Steve > > ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #503 *****************************