On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Mike Richter wrote:

> The essential point is that the college presumably had all rights
> initially unless there was a soloist under contract, in which case that
> agreement would also have to be checked. Some rights were granted to
> Columbia for publication; they are what probably need to be waived.

Mike raises an interesting point.  Consider the situation where a school
records a performance of an undergraduate who, over time, becomes an
internationally recognized performer. Their graduate recital can be part
of the dissertation and right might have been transfered to another
agency. Should a school be allowed to raise funds by selling copies of
past student recitals?

Some schools have adopted the practice of making a single copy of student
performances available to the family (heirs) as a way of raising, they did not charge for the copy, but asked for a
donation...most interesting.

So, if Pavarotti sang with your University Symphony...your performance
contract would, more than likely, prevent you from doing anything with the
performance...and, has been suggested before...even prevent you from
recording it. On the other hand, if a guest artist granted permission for
one copy to be maintained by the hosting institution...well, somebody is
going to get a copy...maybe not a digital master...

If students and faculty were the only performers, a case could be made
that they were doing this as part of their studies...and not subject to
any contract. Consider a student football player, who later turns pro. If
they are featured on a film of their "performance" as a college player,
should the player have rights to a percentage of sales of that footage.

Several years ago...things have gotten a bit better now...but if your
student orchestra had some students who were union members, you could not,
as per a union prohibition, issue any recordings of that orchestra...
even if those students were not being paid performance and/or recording
scale. I know, as many years ago I tried to interest CRI in using student
orchestras...they had two concerns, an agreement they had with both the
union and distributors who had agreements with the unions. Potentially, at
that time, it could have been seen as a threat to the use of an all union
orchestra and it was seen as a violation of the rights of the students who
were union members.