URINETOWN: Copyright Controversy — Page 4

I agree that saying this controversy would hurt Jennifer and Hunter's theatrical careers is pretty extreme. It doesn't seem as if Rando and Caffara told the cast of Urinetown at the time "Please don't go around the country and recreate the direction/choreography from this show." It's been done for years and this is the first time someone has publicly complained about it - I think.

Doesn't anyone suspect a publicity stunt? Aren't they doing a reading of a new show with Hunter Foster in the lead?

---

"You KNOW there are about 5,000 theatres out there going "oh SH*T" right now hoping no one "important" saw their last season... "

This brings up an amazing point. SO many theaters around the country suffer from the "Not Me" syndrome. They all think that getting caught at things will never happen to them. "Oh, we're just a small little theater in Florida." Well, theaters get caught! Several years ago a theater in Florida went belly up because of a cancelled production of SIDE BY SIDE BY SONDHEIM that they rewrote without permission. Now this. As mean as it may seem, I wish MORE theaters would get "caught" so that theaters everywhere would start following the rules.

---

just to throw in my thoughts here...(a topic compelling enough to post on!)

I was fortunate enough to be involved with a production that Carrafa directed and choreographed...and even HE didn't just "restage" the original with us...we had different sets, different "types' of casting (and cast size), lighting, etc....He really built upon -- and reimagined the Broadway production....trying new things, throwing out what didn't work for us, what he wished he would have done before.....it was genuinely a creative process, between the cast and him. So, it's hard for me to accept the argument -- "but of COURSE you have to do the original staging and choreography!!!" Ours rethought and added a lot that wasn't in previous productions -- and that was with the original choreographer!! I can only imagine what a completely different personality in a director and choreographer (with a great imagination of course!) could bring to the peice. There is a LOT that could be open to interperation...It is so often called "Brechtian"...and look how often that man's work has been rethought, imagined and completely overhauled!

Can't believe the nerve of Brian Loeffler to accept a Jeff award for his work if he did indeed just copy Carrafa and Rando's work! That's really just too much...!!

I think it is heinous for a professional choreographer to copy the Broadway version, pass it off as his own, and then accept an award on top of it.

I do think that there should be some new provisions set in place when rights can be negotiated with licensing agencies to protect these works if the creators so choose. Like was mentioned on a previous page, maybe directors, choreographers, etc. should get a percentage of the royalties. Rather than include them in regardless of whether or not a theatre uses their work or not (which might reduce the cut the authors would get), have their work as an additional option. Just like MTI does with licensing the logo pack or Audrey II plants, if theatre groups want to be able to use the original designs of a show they can choose to pay extra for that right. Credit would also be required to be given in the program to the designers whose work was borrowed from. Then if a show copies the original design without obtaining the rights they can be reprimanded. These fees would obviously be scaled like all other productions rights with professional groups paying more and amateur and school groups paying discounted rates. This would also reward groups for being original because they would pay less for rights.

To make this a worthwhile investment the licensing agencies need to provide materials that can be used to successfully recreate the original designs. If want your set design to match the original -- you will receive a "how to guide" with blueprints. If you want to recreate some of the memorable dance sequences, you get a video or step by step guide. The same will apply to costumes, etc. I think it would be a great step forward to include the rest of the creative team in the royalties -- but only if they can provide these worthwhile aides. The author and the composer provide you with everything they have done -- the libretto and full score -- so the other creators should as well if they expect to be compensated.

My only concern is that the cost for rights is already steep enough and adding additional costs may be too much for many school and community theatres to handle. It is a sticky subject all the way around, because in some instances there aren't many alternatives other than variations of the original staging -- and at what point does it become infringement? Piracy should always be punished, but would strictly enforcing these laws where staging is concerned hurt the amateur level of the artform in the long run?

---

This is no different than the ridiculous article I read in the Times a few years ago that stated that NY Phil violinists wanted to get paid more because they played more notes.

When you pay the license fee, you're paying for the whole kid and kaboodle, and if you can get your hands on more than the company gives you (script/score) and you get a chance to recreate it, more power to you.

My reply to the choreographers" STOP BEING MONEY HUNGRY and EGO DRIVEN
deal the accolades (or jeers) you got for the original, and get over yourselves.

This is from a professional dancer/choreographer

---

I feel very bad for Jen Cody. I honestly think nothing will be made out of this in the end. I am rubbed the wrong way by the creators. It just seems like they want money. I have never heard of this type of thing in the past. It may just be me. I have no problem with what Hunter said. Just becuase he is a bway actor means he cannot speak his mind?

---

I find it interesting how Carrafa is so mathematical about how much of his choreography was used..."only 10 percent was original," "90 percent of the moves were mine"...gimme a break! LOL! Maybe he should be an accountant or a math teacher!

I know it's been addressed before, but most regional productions and community productions are going to borrow from the original production(s). It happens all the time. In fact, I don't think I've been in and/or seen a non-Broadway/off-Broadway production that DIDN'T borrow from the original. In this case, the director and choreographer of the original production just happened to attend a performance and notice the similarities. Could you imagine if every director/choreographer team of every single original production of every licensed show decided to attend a performance of a regional or amateur show?

I do agree that the directors and choreographers should have acknowledged the originals in the advertising and programs...it probably would have brought about less controversy!

And now I'll shut up!

To suggest just how interesting an issue this has become, PLAYBILL has published Hunter Foster's recation to the controversy.

I think it's unfortunate that in Jennifer Cody's defense, Foster offers only one example of the differences in the choreography. He might have suggested a variety of places where the productions differ. On first blush, this seems a rather weak defense.


Hunter Foster Reaction in PLAYBILL

Updated On: 11/17/06 at 11:25 AM

I find very interesting how many people have joined BWW to respond to this thread.


"This is no different than the ridiculous article I read in the Times a few years ago that stated that NY Phil violinists wanted to get paid more because they played more notes."

Yes, it's actually quite different--the violinists weren't passing off the music as their own.

"When you pay the license fee, you're paying for the whole kid and kaboodle, and if you can get your hands on more than the company gives you (script/score) and you get a chance to recreate it, more power to you."

IF you get your hands? You mean IF you search out pictures and video clips to copy? It's not as if they were using the first folio.

"My reply to the choreographers" STOP BEING MONEY HUNGRY and EGO DRIVEN
deal the accolades (or jeers) you got for the original, and get over yourselves. "

They are not money hungry--they are angry that someone has stolen from them and taken the credit--in this case, an award. That's like Phillip Seymour Hoffman accepting a Pulitzer for IN COLD BLOOD. And by that rationale, Robbins and Bennett have no right to ask for any royalties.

"This is from a professional dancer/choreographer"

Do you choreograph your own shows or do you copy what the original choreographer did?

Don't make robbiej go black! (Inside joke, sorry)

""believe me."

"It's not completely uncommon for a director to leave a production and then sue when they use some of his work. "

I don't believe you."

Kay, well--do your research. It has definitely happened.

Isn't there an old saying "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" - or something to that effect? Why be so negative about someone "recreating" choreography/staging and call it stealing and copying. It's all in the perception.

Also, if you watch the interview of Ann Reinking on the Fosse DVD, she talks about the unwritten rule of dancers passing on choreography from dancer to dancer. That's how older choreography stays alive for later generations to enjoy.

I'm on the side that think Rando and Caraffa are going to the extreme about this issue. Why can't they just be flattered that someone thought there work was so good that they wanted to recreate it and pass it on to others and future generations.

---

I agree that they should be credited if a director/choreographer recreates their staging and that someone recreating their work should not win an award.

---