Is it okay to film the curtain call?

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:06pm

Is it acceptable to take out your phone/camera/iPad and film away?

My instincts tell me no, but why not?

It's totally obnoxious in my view, and of course the theatres don't allow it, but I've just had a heated discussion with a friend and I can't think of any particularly good reasons to back up my stance.

Updated On: 2/23/14 at 03:06 PM

[Hairspray0901]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:16pm

I'd say no...but that doesn't really stop people.

well, for one, the costumes, set and stuff are copy written---that's at least the explanation i've gotten regarding taking photos of the curtain before the show.

i could also see it as distracting to others? I'm always too afraid to take photos during curtain call with the fear of an usher yelling at me and making me delete the photos in front of them - that'd be embarrassing.

Also--it's just illegal to record the show by any means, including curtain call. Updated On: 2/23/14 at 03:16 PM

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:21pm

Officially No and the ushers and security will enforce this, even at the final curtain, due to copyright and the producers want you to buy an expensive programme.

Personally during the performance taking photos, is distracting for both audience and cast and can be dangerous to the cast, but I have never had a problem if the audience want a photo during curtain call, even the cast don't seem to mind.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:21pm

Officially No and the ushers and security will enforce this, even at the final curtain, due to copyright and the producers want you to buy an expensive programme.

Personally during the performance taking photos, is distracting for both audience and cast and can be dangerous to the cast, but I have never had a problem if the audience want a photo during curtain call, even the cast don't seem to mind.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:25pm

You would be violating several laws and rules.

1) It is unlawful to record (audio and/or visual) anything inside a theater (live performance or moviehouse) in New York City without prior written consent. This is mostly because of copyright law. Even during the curtain call, you are recording the copywritten property of the director and/or choreographer (blocking/choreography) and the designers (set, lighting, costumes, sound), and writers (composition and orchestration).

2) Not just abiding by the city's laws (and national copyright law), it is also every Broadway theater owner's policy that no audience member is permitted to use recording devices in their building.

3) It is required by the AEA to notify AEA performers when there will be press in theater for the purposes of recording and photo-taking.

So you could start there.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 3:32pm

To obnoxious I would add self entitled.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 4:42pm

I think the "no pictures because the sets and costumes are copyrighted" is ridiculous, and I'm a member of USA 829. There are high-quality pictures of our work all over the internet and for sale in the lobby, someone ****ty cell-phone picture does absolutely nothing to threaten my work.

That being said, no, it's not ok to film or take pictures during the curtain call. It's still part of the performance, and inconsiderate to the people that you came to see (as well as the audience members around you).

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:09pm

"I think the "no pictures because the sets and costumes are copyrighted" is ridiculous, and I'm a member of USA 829."

Just because you think it's "ridiculous" is irrelevant. It's the written law and one that everyone must follow.

[Jon]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:23pm

It's illegal.

They really want you to buy a souvenir program.

The same reason many museums don't allow cameras. They want you to buy post cards in the gift shop.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:27pm

"Just because you think it's "ridiculous" is irrelevant. It's the written law..."

Absolutely nothing I said suggests that it isn't the law, nor that people shouldn't follow it. However, everything I said is my opinion on the matter (this is a DISCUSSION board, no?), and an extremely common opinion among my colleagues.

"...and one that everyone must follow."

Except of course if you work on the show or are a backstage guest. In that case, snap away!
Updated On: 2/23/14 at 05:27 PM

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:35pm

No. Anyone who films any part of a Broadway show should be kicked out of the theatre and never allowed back in again.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:43pm

It's not about buying the souvenior program. This is why it matters:

There are two major protections gained by the designers:

1) Not allowing amateur video or still photography will aid in the protection of copyright, which will reduce the risk that the designers' work will not be duplicated by future productions. This may seem "silly" to some because their work is often findable in souvenior programs, press photos, and b-roll footage.

2) Not allowing amateur video or still photography means that the majority of video or still photgraphy will be circulated from approved press captures. These are professionally taken and usually showcase the production in the best way possible, considering everything from the lighting to the choreographic poses to the actor's faces. This reduces the risk that the designers' work will be shown in poor reception. (For example: Joe takes a video using his cell phone of a moment of a Broadway show, and shows it to Jill. Jill comments that the costumes look ghostly and ugly. Jill formed this opinion of the costume designer's work based off of a pixelated, washed-out video shown on a tiny cell phone screen. Had she seen professional b-roll footage with appropriate lighting, her opinion of the costume design may have been positive instead of negative.)

All of this may seem "silly" or "foolish" but nonetheless, it is a protection granted to the creative team and authors, and even if they didn't really care, their lawyers would advise them to take the "safe than sorry" route.

[Matt1]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 5:47pm

I would say no. It is not legal and it is still part of the show.

[vegas2]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 6:08pm

It probably does not violate federal copyright law, because it probably qualifies as fair use.
I don't know what state or municipal laws might be involved.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 7:43pm

"It probably does not violate federal copyright law, because it probably qualifies as fair use."

Fair use does not apply to footage that is obtained illegally.

[vegas2]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 7:59pm

If you film it yourself, the footage is not illegally obtained.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 8:01pm

I say yes you should and damn the rules. Imagine how great it would be if someone had taken video of Laurette Taylor's performance of The Glass Menagerie. Art belongs to the people and when it's locked away and controlled by the tight-asses at Lincoln Center Library, then it becomes dead.

Vivant YouTube!!

[Emma White]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 8:18pm

Is it legal? No. Is it "okay," as in, are you a terrible human being if you do it? Well that depends on what your thoughts are on bootlegs. Some people on this board (myself included) believe that bootlegs aren't a terrible thing - as long as they're not being sold.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 8:29pm

Yeah, I'm aware of the pros and cons of bootlegs - I was just wondering specifically if those issues remained at curtain call, as the performance is over and it could be argued that you're not really disturbing anybody. CapnHook has disabused me of that notion, however.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 8:43pm

All of this being said, I have a large collection of boots. It is a personal collection used for education and research, not for monetary gain. The people who filmed them violated the law. My obtaining them did not (they were not purchased). The whole bootlegging issue has been discussed to death.

[JBradshaw]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 8:57pm

I understand the no picture rules at curtain calls - I got screamed at yelled at by an usher when I snapped a picture of Liza during the curtain call of "Victor/Victoria" when I was 14 - and it seems ushers tend to enforce the no picture rule which is fine since it's their job. Why is it these rules tend to not apply when it's a lead, esp a 'name', has a first or last performance in a show?

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 9:06pm

"If you film it yourself, the footage is not illegally obtained."

Except it is, since the use of cameras and recording devices during a performance "is prohibited by law."

"Why is it these rules tend to not apply when it's a lead, esp a 'name', has a first or last performance in a show?"

You are either seeing the professional shots that the producers have arranged to have taken, or it's a case of the ushers only being able to catch and stop so many people.

[vegas2]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 9:18pm

"probited by law" -- what authority are you quoting?

This language isn't in the fair use statute -- 17 U.S.C. 107 -- or in the case law.

Your response assumes that state or municipal law prohibits filming a curtain call. As I said in my original post, that may be the case. But in most cases it is unlikely to violate federal copyright law.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 9:42pm

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 113 › § 2319A
18 U.S. Code § 2319A - Unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances

(a) Offense.— Whoever, without the consent of the performer or performers involved, knowingly and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain—
(1) fixes the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance in a copy or phonorecord, or reproduces copies or phonorecords of such a performance from an unauthorized fixation;
(2) transmits or otherwise communicates to the public the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance; or
(3) distributes or offers to distribute, sells or offers to sell, rents or offers to rent, or traffics in any copy or phonorecord fixed as described in paragraph (1), regardless of whether the fixations occurred in the United States;
shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, or if the offense is a second or subsequent offense, shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both.
(b) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property; Restitution.— Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323, to the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other similar remedies provided by law.
(c) Seizure and Forfeiture.— If copies or phonorecords of sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance are fixed outside of the United States without the consent of the performer or performers involved, such copies or phonorecords are subject to seizure and forfeiture in the United States in the same manner as property imported in violation of the customs laws. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue regulations by which any performer may, upon payment of a specified fee, be entitled to notification by United States Customs and Border Protection of the importation of copies or phonorecords that appear to consist of unauthorized fixations of the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance.
(d) Victim Impact Statement.—
(1) During preparation of the presentence report pursuant to Rule 32(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, victims of the offense shall be permitted to submit, and the probation officer shall receive, a victim impact statement that identifies the victim of the offense and the extent and scope of the injury and loss suffered by the victim, including the estimated economic impact of the offense on that victim.
(2) Persons permitted to submit victim impact statements shall include—
(A) producers and sellers of legitimate works affected by conduct involved in the offense;
(B) holders of intellectual property rights in such works; and
(C) the legal representatives of such producers, sellers, and holders.
(e) Definitions.— As used in this section—
(1) the terms “copy”, “fixed”, “musical work”, “phonorecord”, “reproduce”, “sound recordings”, and “transmit” mean those terms within the meaning of title 17; and
(2) the term “traffic” has the same meaning as in section 2320 (e) [1] of this title.
(f) Applicability.— This section shall apply to any Act or Acts that occur on or after the date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

[vegas2]

Posted: 2/23/14 at 9:56pm

Most curtain calls are not live musical performances, so this statute does not apply.

Plus, that's not a copyright statute.

Updated On: 2/23/14 at 09:56 PM