On 09/13/2013 03:08 PM, Jeff Kaufman wrote: Thanks for the links; there's a lot of good information there. Regardless, I'd still like to know if anyone other than Seth has any dances licensed under a CC or similar license (even if it turns out that none of our stuff was every copyrightable anyways). Thanks, Sam -- Sam Whited pub 4096R/EC2C9934 https://samwhited.com/contact

Who's been calling my dances? I want to sue... Um, just kidding, though the discussion is interesting. And, what happens when a dance gets written by more than one person? I wrote a dance I called Second Third Friday, taking the idea of the dance Third Friday by Bill Cochran. My dance goes: A1 Neighbor Balance & Swing A2 Men Allemande Left 1-1/2, Partner Swing (end facing across) B1 Right & Left Through across; Women Chain to Neighbor B2 Right Hand to Partner, Balance, (in minor set) Square Through 2, Repeat, going on to Next Neighbor And, I published it in my first book, /Contra Comments, /only to find out later that Tony Parkes had written the same dance -- for the same reason -- with the variant of a B1 Half Promenade; Women Chain. He called his Friday Night Fever, also honoring the original Bill Cochran dance. And his dance was composed prior to mine. Later I found the same dance with the Right & Left Through, in another book by a Lucille (don't recall her last name and can't find the book right now) and she called it Balance Out #3. I know Tony and I did the same thing, because he acknowledged the Third Friday dance in his publication. So, it gets confusing: when does varying another dance step out of plagiarism into an honest to goodness new dance? And, when two people come up independently with the same sequence, do we worry that Author #1 might sue while Author #2 is free and easy? I have no problem with people going through my books or my cards, or asking for dances. If they want to support me they can purchase the books I've put together for the purpose of having something to sell at dances. Still, I do honor the code of not putting in this forum dances others have composed unless there's a specific reason for discussing it: the segue from one figure to the next, or explanation of how a figure works. Then again, when somebody writes a list of dances looking for authors, I'm likely to copy those into my files as dances for use. And, I think, this follows our generally accepted practice of sharing and caring. ~erik hoffman oakland, ca On 9/13/2013 12:45 PM, Chris Lahey wrote:

Hum, ladies chain is a ii chord, left hand star is a V chord, and balance and swing the next is the tonic? Richard On Sep 13, 2013, at 4:59 PM, Jeff Kaufman wrote:

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Kalia Kliban <kalia(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: Citation? Jeff

Kalia asked: I am not a lawyer either but I suspect that Taco Bell could receive protection for the name of the dish, their advertising slogan, descriptions, and photos of the dish. They might even get protection for the artistic "look" of the dish. They surely could not copyright a list of the ingredients nor the recipe for assembling them. My understanding is that you have the rights to the name of your dance, the teaching notes included with the notation, and possibly the layout of the dance notes on a page. You could also copyright any commentary you write and any photos or videos of the dance being called or danced. If another caller, however, uses a different set of words to call that sequence of figures and does not mention you as the author or the name you have assigned to the dance...I'm not sure you can protect the specific sequence of movements that make up the choreography. Personally, I am always honored if someone calls a dance I wrote. I don't feel a need to be credited for the dance, particularly at the time the dance is called. If I do a good job of choreographing a dance, then I see it, really, as the property of the dancers. The wisdom of the crowd is what makes a dance that works. I only assemble the sequence. But I recognize that some choreographers may feel more "ownership" of the dance. I don't want to call those dances. I would like to know if a dance is "owned" by a specific person so that I can avoid calling it. I think the best dances are embraced by the folk process and will evolve as the dance is passed through the community. No one "owns" those dances. They are being re-created with each generation of dancers. This traditional dance form is a collaborative process. - Greg McKenzie West Coast, USA On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Kalia Kliban &lt;kalia(a)sbcglobal.net&gt; wrote: > On 9/13/2013 1:59 PM, Jeff Kaufman wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Erik Hoffman &lt;erik(a)erikhoffman.com&gt; >> wrote: >> >>> I published it ... only to find out later that Tony Parkes had >>> written the same dance -- for the same reason -- with the >>> variant of a B1 Half Promenade; Women Chain. ... Later I >>> found the same dance with the Right & Left Through, in >>> another book by a Lucille ... >>> >> >> This is part of why I'm skeptical that a contra dance would be >> original enough to qualify for copyright protection: people keep >> coming up with the same dances independently. >> > > Kalia > > ______________________________**_________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers<http://www.shared… >

Are country western line dance copyrightable? Rich ________________________________ From: Jeff Kaufman &lt;jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu&gt; To: Caller's discussion list &lt;callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [Callers] Dances licensed with CC or similar (Sam Whited) On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Sam Whited &lt;sam(a)samwhited.com&gt; wrote: It's not clear whether an individual contra dance, as a series of standard figures, is original enough to fall under copyright.  While choreography can be copyrighted, as you say, the question is whether a new contra dance represents sufficient "choreographic authorship". This 2012 statement of policy from the copyright office has some details:     Simple dance routines do not represent enough original     choreographic authorship to be copyrightable. Id. Moreover, the     selection, coordination or arrangement of dance steps does not     transform a compilation of dance steps into a choreographic work unless     the resulting work amounts to an integrated and coherent compositional     whole. The Copyright Office takes the position that a selection,     coordination, or arrangement of functional physical movements such as     sports movements, exercises, and other ordinary motor activities alone     do not represent the type of authorship intended to be protected under     the copyright law as a choreographic work.     -- http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-06-22/html/2012-15235.htm Other things that might be interesting: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AContra_dance#Copyright_and_Social_Dance… * http://www.copyright.org.au/admin/cms-acc1/_images/9990319194f3b320fa4716.p… (It's about Line Dancing, and is Australian not US, but there's been a lot of international harmonization of copyright laws and contra and line dances are probably similar enough to be in the same category legally.) * https://www.eff.org/cases/electric-slide-litigation (There was litigation in the US over the Electric Slide, but it ended with a settlement.) * http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14083197885283774149 (But: I'm not a lawyer, just another programmer interested in this stuff.) Jeff _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers

On 13-09-13 11:00 AM, Sam Whited wrote: Yes, but it's not clear whether a contradance sequence would qualify (for the purposes of copyright law) as either a "choreographic work" or "original". For example, under A. Defining "Choreographic Work" in [1], note the first paragraph: "Choreographic work" is not defined in the 1976 statute, although the legislative history offers some minimal guidance. The House and Senate Reports use identical language to say that the term is one of several with "fairly settled meanings," and that it is not "necessary to specify that 'choreographic works' do not include social dance steps and simple routines." Contradance sequences might be deemed "social dance steps" or "simple routines", and so not "choreographic works". Or they might not: it would be up to the courts, and the question has probably never come before the courts. And quite possibly never will. So I think it is (and possibly always will be) legally unclear whether a contradance sequence [as distinct from a specific "expression" of that sequence] is copyrightable. Ditto the question of whether calling that sequence, or expressing that sequence "in your own notation", constitutes copyright infringement. -Michael