The Green Room - Copyright laws Vs. Censorship in local theatres.

Reply #20 - Sep 20^th, 2008 at 3:12pm

sparkledust Offline
Scenery
I Love P.A.!

Posts: 4

(yes, I am delurking for this first time!)

>>I agreed with the whole situation and mentioned to the manager that she should have gotten permission first, but Mr. Simon and his attorney's reactions beyond the issue of his rights as the author was totally unprofessional and childish.>>

And that is the whole issue. It doesn't matter if Simon and his attorney acted like world's biggest jersk, and it wouldn't matter if he implied consent in his autobiography (I don't think any of us would like to be held legally accountable for random blog posts we've made that may have signaled legal intent, but we considered were innocent musings at the time), the issue is they changed his words without asking. Period.

And they should have asked. For that reason alone, i don't think anyone gets to judge Simon or his attorney for what appears in hindsight as petty or argumentative behavior. He would have likely allowed a change, were he asked, and it shouldn't have been performed if he didn't.

There is no excuse for changing a playwright's work. Never.

Personally, when ever I see it in Utah, I call attention to it. And I am sure that in many cases it IS with permission. But as a hope-to-be-playwright someday, I think it's my obligation to notify the author's representative.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #21 - Sep 20^th, 2008 at 11:27pm

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

The kerfuffle at the Grove is actually one I use as an example in my intro to theater class...

Sparkle is correct, the tone of the response to a copyright violation isn't germane. Sorry that those rude New Yorkers got your panties in a twist Toddles, but a contract is a contract.

Redbeard is also right on.... approaching a playwright with a change is entirely kosher and often successful.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #22 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 10:34am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

I don't think anyone is singling out the Grove's production of "Rumors" for blame or condemnation. I think that now, as well as then, if anything, people are a little surprised that one Utah theater got into so much trouble for what so many Utah theaters quietly get away with. I also think the statement about the hoping the High School cut the words is, at best, a curiosity. It may help in the court of public opinion, but where actual civil law is concerned, it clearly has no legal standing or relevance whatsoever. A vague implication that, in hindsight, he hoped a High School would cut the words in no way constitutes express individual permission for a wholly unrelated community theater production with a cast of adults to do the same.

Finally, regarding Neil Simon's response (which Tshep is right has no legal relevance, I'm speaking merely in terms of how it colors people's perceptions of him), I think it's important to remember that we are talking about response to a violation, not an inquiry. Two very different situations, and when you violate somone's copyright it's kind of unreasonable to be upset that they're upset. He probably overreacted, and was obviously rude. But I think it's easy to see why.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #23 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 11:30am

Angelus Offline
Scenery
WWBD: What would Buffy
do?
WVC, UT

Gender:
Posts: 43

Toddy wrote on Sep 20^th, 2008 at 2:54pm:

But yes, you are correct, most playwrights are readily agreeable when asked permission first.

The smart ones are, anyway. You would think, as a writer, that you would want your work performed and seen by as many people as possible, right? As long as the theatre has asked for permission first and those proposed cuts don't change your message or vision or whatever, then what's the big deal? More people are enjoying your work and you are making more royalties.

"Freud would have said the exact same thing... except he might not have done that little dance."&&&&Strude - Mullet Free Since '83

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #24 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 11:37am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

Angelus wrote on Sep 21^st, 2008 at 11:30am:

Toddy wrote on Sep 20^th, 2008 at 2:54pm:

But yes, you are correct, most playwrights are readily agreeable when asked permission first.

The smart ones are, anyway. �You would think, as a writer, that you would want your work performed and seen by as many people as possible, right? �As long as the theatre has asked for permission first and those proposed cuts don't change your message or vision or whatever, then what's the big deal? �More people are enjoying your work and you are making more royalties.

That actually depends upon the nature of the material being cut. how important it is to the play, and what you meant to accomplish with the play. Selling out doesn't necessarily make you smart (and if what they're njoying itsn't "your work" anymore, then that doesn't help). On the other hand, if the changes we're talking about do mean compromising your artistic integrity, then yes, it makes good sense to allow it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #25 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 2:23pm

Toddy Offline
Diva
There's A Fairy Who Hides
In My Gaaaaaaarden!
Utah

Gender:
Posts: 4667

sparkledust wrote on Sep 20^th, 2008 at 3:12pm:

(yes, I am delurking for this first time!)

>>I agreed with the whole situation and mentioned to the manager that she should have gotten permission first, but Mr. Simon and his attorney's reactions beyond the issue of his rights as the author was totally unprofessional and childish.>>

And that is the whole issue. It doesn't matter if Simon and his attorney acted like world's biggest jersk, and it wouldn't matter if he �implied consent in his autobiography (I don't think any of us would like to be held legally accountable for random blog posts we've made that may have signaled legal intent, but we considered were innocent musings at the time), the issue is they changed his words without asking. Period.

And they should have asked. For that reason alone, i don't think anyone gets to judge Simon or his attorney for what appears in hindsight as petty or argumentative behavior. He would have likely allowed a change, were he asked, and it shouldn't have been performed if he didn't.

There is no excuse for changing a playwright's work. Never.

Personally, when ever I see it in Utah, I call attention to it. And I am sure that in many cases it IS with permission. But as a hope-to-be-playwright someday, I think it's my obligation to notify the author's representative.

Neil Simon never allows changes to his work. There are very few theaters now that will do his work. And sorry but I can take my respect away from Simon because of his attitude. I'm not disrespecting his attitude about the cutting of his play by the Grove, he had every right to be angry. But then turning around and after the theater ceased to do the play and did something else he and is lawyer badgered the owner for the next 4 months ranting about stupid mormons, stupid Utah, etc. THAT IS IMMATURE AND UNPROFESSIONAL! PERIOD! When the owner wanted to do Tony n' Tina's wedding, Samuel French (which also owns the rights to Simon's plays) harrased the owner and refused to give her the rights. A co-owner who knew the author of "T&T" called him and angrily he called Samuel French and demanded they allow the Grove to do the show and to make any cuts she needed. The author's lawyers contacted the owner of the Grove and settled on a royalty fee for the run and she paid it. Samuel French harrased her again advertisement went out and told her to cease doing the play. The author then filed a lawsuit against Samuel French and the court gave him total control of his play. After opening, Neil Simon and his lawyer called the theater, I took the call, and said we were MF assholes and that we all should be strewn up by our balls.

So don't judge a situtation until you know ALL THE FACTS!

Yes, I agree, get permission first, don't do it illegally!

As for Simon, AGAIN LISTEN TO WHAT I'M SAYING, he had every right to be angry, but that ended when she complied and stopped doing the show. But to continue for 4 months to badger her just for the hell of it and to act like two year olds? There is NO justification for that! NONE! In fact the owner's attorneys urged her to file a criminal complaint against Simon and his lawyer for harrassment. But she was done and wanted it to go away. Sorry, but Simon's actions WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN ANY WAY after he got his way with her compliance to stop doing the show. NOTHING JUSTIFIES STUPIDITY AND HARASSMENT!

Crazy world, full of crazy contradictions like a child; first you drive me wild, and then you win my heart with your wicked art; one minute tender, gentle; then tempramental as a summer storm; just when I believe your heart's getting warmer. Your cold and your cruel, and I like a fool try to cope. Try to hang on to hope. Crazy world, everyday the same old roller coaster ride, but I've got my pride, I won't give in; even though I know I'll never win. Oh how I love this, crazy world! -- Henry Mancini

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #26 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 2:42pm

P.Buttercup Ex Member

This is why we should all be doing more Shakespeare.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #27 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 3:09pm

Hedgehog Offline
All Access
Who doesn't love a cuddly
hedgehog? WHO?!
Salt Lake City, UT

Gender:
Posts: 3549

Quote:

This is why we should all be doing more Shakespeare.

Amen! Huzzah for public domain!

I also like that Tony and Tina's is brought up, because it's one of few shows I know where the author has written IN the script an express permission to make changes. Plus, well, it's an improv show, so you CAN'T plan everything out.

I would ask, however, at what point a change in a word is so much different than some truly bizarre artistic changes I've seen. The two top examples, for me, are Mikado at the SCERA Shell from a few years ago, that had Austin Powers, Joseph's Amazing Dreamcoat, and so many other added oddities. As far as I know the "script" stayed the same... but the show, well, I am positive was FAR different from any vision the author had.

The second is when I saw a high school's production of "Guys and Dolls 2040." �It kept the script and songs, but made them techno, very mechanical sounding, set it in the year 2040, and made Sarah an android. Should changes like that gain permission?

Again, let's just all do Shakespeare.

« Last Edit: Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 11:33am by Hedgehog »

Things are rarely "just crazy enough to work," but they are frequently "just crazy enough to fail hilariously. &&&&

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #28 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 4:38pm

Rosie Poppins Offline
All Access
Still I'm incandescent
Salt Lake City

Gender:
Posts: 2623

Just remember I'm here, watcihng. Keep the personal attacks out. Keep on this topic (and if not, feel free to start a new thread)

Thanks for playing nice, yo. Wink

Let me make one thing quite clear: I never explain anything.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #29 - Sep 21^st, 2008 at 5:23pm

The Dark Knight Ex Member

Toddy, with the added unpleasant detail you've given, we certainly have more persepective on the situation and I'm sorry you went through that.

Back to top

IP Logged

BackStage Utah