Does Choreography Get Copyrighted?

Recently, my sister was auditioning for her high school's production of Chicago. The school's resident choreographer taught students a dance to "All That Jazz" which my sister performed for my mom and I when she returned from her audition yesterday. The choreographer had told them that he would do a couple moves that would pay homage to the original. Upon seeing the dance, I immediately recognized it as the choreography used in the revival that I had memorized by watching numerous videos of performances on youtube from places like Good Morning America and the Tony's.

So, my main question is this: is it legal for them to copy the same dances? Can choreography be copyrighted? I know that it's different if the person who owns the copyright is dead, but I don't believe they used the same choreography in the original production as the revival. I am not sure if it is possible to copyright choreography because I only know of copyrighted text, but I would think it quite unfair if this were done for a professional production without crediting the original choreographer. Can they really do this?

Updated On: 1/19/10 at 07:45 PM

Choreographers can also require their choreography to be done in every first class/major regional production.

See, A Chorus Line or anything created by Jerome Robbins.

---

It's all on paper.

---

Interesting... I wouldn't call this a major production, being a high school, but I've seen another high school's production of Chicago on youtube and they used different choreography. I don't think they would have bet that any student would discover that it was the same choreography. I do know it took a while to get the rights for the show, I wonder if this was involved at all.

Not sure how common Labanotation is in the theatre world but it's a fascinating way of notating on paper even the most complex of choreographed works. Here's a four measure sample of how movement is put down on paper.
Labanotation basics

The notation all depends on the original assistants and dance captains and what method they use to document the shows. Since many choreographers continually have the same assistants and dance captains you will find that their shows are usually documented in very similar styles. However, it still doesn't mean they are all correct. For instance, I know the bible that gets sent out for Crazy for You is rather complex, and in some points just incorrect as the notes are older notes and don't reflect all the changes that were made throughout the rehearsals. I know this because the choreographer who set the last production of the show I did had been in one of the tours, had learned the show from one of the original dance captains, and knew which portions of the bible were wrong.

The Stroman shows also come with a list of the various assistants and dance captains that she has handpicked as people she recommends on hiring to set the show, and I know a good number of those people have set numerous productions around the country due to being on that list.

I don't know if A Chorus Line has a similar list, but I wouldn't doubt it.

As far as I know, no, it's not required that the original choreography is re-created for her shows. I believe it is an option, and of course one you have to pay extra for to get the bible. Some of her shows, like The Producers, I personally wouldn't pay extra for, but others, like Crazy for You I think are well worth it. In my opinion, I think Stroman was at her best choreographically with the shows where she was only choreographing and not pulling double duty as director/choreographer. If I were producing regionally I would willingly pay the extra for something like Crazy for You just for "I Got Rhythm." I think that was one of the best Act I closers I have seen in a long time in the production I did a couple of summers ago. Just eight minutes of moments that kept topping the previous. And when you think she can't possibly have something to top the bit that just happened the choreography proves you wrong.

Her choreography was considered a major part of the success of both Crazy for You and the Hal Prince revival of Show Boat, and is available to be licenses for both of those scripts. And I'm sure once Young Frankenstein is available it will also be licensed with the choreography option.

"To answer your question -- YES, choreography IS copyrighted."

Copyright protects â??original works of authorshipâ?? that are
fixed in a tangible form of expression. While choreography CAN be copyrighted, it is not protected unless it has been "written down" or notated. (It is unclear if a videorecording of the choreography would count).

Also, keep in mind, there are broad exceptions to copyright law when involving the classroom. So even though it would violate copyright law for a local theater to use unlicensed chroepgraphy from the Broadway production for just one number from the show, it would not for a teacher who is teaching it as a class excercise.

*EDIT

Also, there is the Fair Use doctrine that would allow elements to be thrown in. Because of the subjectiveness of dance and reptition of movements, unless the entire work is copied EXACTLY there would most likely not be any infringement.

Updated On: 1/20/10 at 10:51 AM

Actually, the case law on copyright infringement of choreography (which was first explicitly included in the copyright law under the 1976 law), indicates that the test for infringement is not whether the copy is identical to the original, but whether it is "substantially similar." The case law is not clear on whether the choreography has to be notated in written form or whether the requirement that it must be "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" is met by, for example, a video recording of the choreography.

Not necessarily pertinent to Chicago, but I know Disney is very strict on how much of their original staging and choreography you use. When I worked on "Beauty and the Best" many of the dance numbers were very similar to and in the style of the original, they did not have exact movements or combinations that were the same as the original. This was done due to the contract that went along with the right to do the show.

Don't quote me word or word on this I believe the contract also stated that if we copied the show and were found out we could/would be shut down until those parts were changed.

So I would say yes it is copyrighted, and assume that if you use it, it's copyright infringement.

Updated On: 1/20/10 at 03:46 PM

Hm, I hope the choreographer realizes what he's doing. I was only wondering because I don't want the school to get in trouble for anything. Of course, I've seen youtube videos of high schools doing productions of shows where everything is practically carbon-copied from the original, but I don't think that it's a good defense that it's okay if everybody else does it.

As someone who has been studying theatre copyright issues in school and has tracked the Urinetown cases, there is much to this that people are not aware of. First off getting a copyright for choreography is complicated, there is hundreds of critical components that must be met to get copyright protection for any type of dance, for example if any of your work contains anything that is in the common vocabulary of dance you are automatically rejected, let’s say your work has two steps unique here and there, but then there is a waltz step or a time step varied, the US copyright office will not honor it as copyright.

Hence the issue with John Carrafa and Urinetown who applied for copyright protection then after US Copyright office examined it, they rejected his copyright after they found many steps that were directly copied from other choreographers.

Also, in terms of copyright protection it should also be noted that during the Urinetown lawsuit and the Most Happy Fella lawsuit those trying to gain copyright protection were doing it for one purpose and one purpose only. To require that the writers of the work cut the other creative’s into the royalty of the show.