RE: [Videolib] Public Performance licensing question

Syp, Marc P. (MSyp@SLPL.LIB.MO.US)
Tue, 11 May 2004 17:22:37 -0500

Jessica is right to suggest that the licensing company keep an updated list
of titles on a website. That way you don't have to deal with updated paper
copies and the info can be "up to the minute" and reflect recent changes.
Swank does keep a complete library of their titles online, including the
formats in which they are available, so I wouldn't think that it would be
too difficult (that's being glib, I know) for Movie Licensing to tag which
titles are covered under their blanket licenses. Maybe an even easier thing
for these licensing companies would be simply to maintain a list of
EXCEPTIONS and mail them out periodically. Don't ask me why they don't do
it!

Incidentally, I don't know who you have your license from, but usually you
can pay a small fee to them for each showing of a title that's not from one
of the distributors on your list (e.g., Fox). Check with them, as it may
allow you to do that Star Wars marathon for a small fee.

Thanks,
Marc Syp
Supervisor, Film Library
St. Louis Public Library
314.206.6704

-----Original Message-----
From: videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu
[mailto:videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu]On Behalf Of Tatar, Becky
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 3:23 PM
To: 'videolib@library.berkeley.edu'
Subject: RE: [Videolib] Public Performance licensing question

Who knew what a can of worms this would open up! My question is - what can
libraries do in good faith? I know that under our license agreement we
can't show movies from 20th Century Fox - they are not on the studio list.
It isn't likely anyone is going to come after us if we do show a Fox film
(our teens would really like a Star Wars Marathon!). But the license does
not include Fox, so we won't show Fox. Period. However, I don't think that
the other 10 or so studios are going to send us pages and pages of films
that are ok for us to show. How would this list even be kept current? I
would bet that if we called and asked, we would be just as likely to get a
response that said any film they had would be ok, as a response that said no
list was available, or let us check with legal, or ... well, you know. It
doesn't seem quite fair to say "the movies from this studio are ok" and then
later come and say, "oh, you know - our movies are ok to show except for
this and this and this." Especially if nothing like that is mentioned in
the original agreement.
I know that I know nothing about this, and that rights issues are incredibly
complicated, but this is just my perspective as a public librarian who wants
to do the right thing.

Becky Tatar
Unit Head, Periodicals, Audiovisual
Aurora Public Library
1 E. Benton Street
Aurora, IL 60505
PHONE: 630-264-4100
FAX: 630-896-3209
www.aurora.lib.il.us
E-mail: bltata@aurora.lib.il.us

-----Original Message-----
From: Jessica Rosner [mailto:jrosner@kino.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:26 PM
To: videolib@library.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Public Performance licensing question

Well our title was THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST which we have under special
contract but Zeitgeist is and should be worried about NOWHERE IN AFRICA
in which they licensed Home Video ONLY to Columbia
Also none of the Chaplin DVD's released by Warner Bros are covered and we
deal with the Chaplin Estate on other things and they would FLIP OUT
There are I am sure literally hundreds if not thousands of exceptions
so I think some of us distributors & rights holders need to approach
them about this and find a way so that this does not keep happening.
Ironically it can work BOTH WAYS in that Kino releases APPLAUSE
& LOVE ME TONIGHT but they WOULD be covered by any contract that
covers Universal as we own no PPR rights on them.

-- 
Jessica Rosner
Kino International
333 W 39th St. 503
NY NY 10018
jrosner@kino.com
212-629-6880

> From: "Syp, Marc P." <MSyp@SLPL.LIB.MO.US> > Reply-To: videolib@library.berkeley.edu > Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:54:27 -0500 > To: "'videolib@library.berkeley.edu'" <videolib@library.berkeley.edu> > Subject: RE: [Videolib] Public Performance licensing question > > > We were basically given a list of studios... anything outside of that list > has to be checked. What was the title that was an exception? > > Thanks, > Marc Syp > Supervisor, Film Library > St. Louis Public Library > 314.206.6704 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu > [mailto:videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu]On Behalf Of Jessica > Rosner > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 10:48 AM > To: videolib > Subject: [Videolib] Public Performance licensing question > > > For any of you that have blanket licenses for studio product > Can you tell me if you get a master TITLE list of all films covered > or it is just assumed that films released by the Studios mentioned > such as Warner Bros or Columbia are covered > I have just run into a case where one of our films which was not > covered was assumed to be and I am trying to figure out how > libraries are supposed to check specific titles > > Feel free to mail me off list > > THanks > -- > Jessica Rosner > Kino International > 333 W 39th St. 503 > NY NY 10018 > jrosner@kino.com > 212-629-6880 > > _______________________________________________ > Videolib mailing list > Videolib@library.berkeley.edu > http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib > _______________________________________________ > Videolib mailing list > Videolib@library.berkeley.edu > http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib

_______________________________________________ Videolib mailing list Videolib@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib _______________________________________________ Videolib mailing list Videolib@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib _______________________________________________ Videolib mailing list Videolib@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib