Copyrights and the Chil Sung Forms

[Makalakumu]

The discussion of whether or not a martial art is able to have copyright protection is currently taking place on this thread.

This has several implications for our dojang...

1. Can we continue to practice the Chil Sung Forms if SBDMDK claims the forms are copyrighted?
2. Are we able to videotape them and put them up on our website when we get it going?
3. Would the fact that I was a paying member of the SBDMDK federation at the time that I learned them make any difference?

I would like to discuss these questions and how it relates to Superior Tangsoodo on this thread.

upnorthkyosa

 

[MSUTKD]

Miles will be able to help you with this one.

ron

 

[jdwindsurfer]

I talked to our copyright expert here on campus. He cautioned that definitive advice ought to come from a copyright lawyer (not just any lawyer), but here is what he thought about this:

You own the copyright on your own video tapes, however...
What you are performing could be protected.

Since martial arts have been around for eons, they are clearly - in general - part of the public domain (anything before 1923 is automatically in public domain, after that there are variable conditions that could still make it part of the public domain).

If there is something someone added or relabelled or whatever, then the performance could be protected by copyright only if it was in tangible forms (i.e. pulblic speaking is not protected, , but an actual recording is).

If you got any materials through a licensing agreement or contract, then you have to look at the contract and license - copyright goes right out the window - so you should look at what you actually agreed to as part of your association membership.

Since you are not doing it for profit, then that certainly would help for a "fair use" defense, but since your dojang is not really an official nonprofit, then the web site could be construed as an advetisement for profit, so this one is sort of undefined...

If some forms have not "been around and labelled as such" since before 1923, then your best bet would be not to tape them. Instead deal with the stuff that has been around and labelled as such forever. Any materials you got from a governing body and which you made any license or membership agreement with, then that governing document dictates.

This may be as simple as determining that the forms have been around since before 1923 and using the names for them that have been established since then or before. Or - it could be a heckk of a lot more complicated.

Hope this helps,
Jason

 

[Makalakumu]

All of the "traditional" forms are in the public domain. The gichos, the pyung ahns, both bassai, naihanchi 1-3, etc.

The chil sung and yuk ro series were released by the MDK in the 70s and 80s...so "fair use" probably wouldn't apply.

My teacher has made all of these forms optional. They are not officially included in the system of TSD that he teaches in any way. I really like the forms and think they are beneficial to practice, however, I still treat them a little differently from the traditional forms.

I wonder if my teacher's arrangement is the wisest way to hang on to this material?

Also, there are ethical considerations. I can see a parellel between teaching these forms and stealing music off the internet...

 

[jdwindsurfer]

My personal take on this is that the legal issues are important to consider in order to protect yourself, but I am less inclined to worry about the ethical issues.

If you want to use music downloads as the analogy, then what you are doing amounts more to "sampling" than file-sharing. You are taking little bits and pieces of what you have learned from different styles and including them within your chosen style as a way to better communicate your style - like a rapper grabs a discernabel piece of music and uses it as an identifieable piece of cultuiral context - most sampling is intended to pay homage and/or parody to its source.

I think the analogy breaks down once you think about it further. The music industry is based on content. Trading in that content hurts the bottom line for the artist who created it.

Martial Arts training and the industry around it are less about content, in my mind. Every style out there is derivative from other styles and the history of Tang Soo Do is murky, at best, anyway. Many of the commercial dojos or dojangs are actually marketing some bastardized American form of several styles combined, and / or re-packaging martial arts as excercise.

Most of the "pure" practitioners are "passing on" martial arts as a labor of love and either breaking even or losing money, either way making their living off of a parallel career.

To me, a more appropriate way to think about Martial Arts is to compare it to the Open Source movement for software. There, the ethical rules are that you can use the code as long as you are willing to share how you improved it and make it open to the next person to do the same. Also, you can't profit from it or lock it down as you alter it (you can't copyright it, basically).

I think the ethical consideration that is more sensitive is disclosing potentially harmful information (such as strike points) without the context and control of the dojang. Clearly, that is not happening with Hyung, since most of the application is locked away for interpretation.

All of the above is opinion, and I'm sure it could be argued the other way, but I think most martial artists have been financially successful on charisma as opposed to content, and I think most associations and practitioners are behaving more in line with the Open Source movement than with the copyright model of the music industry...

Thanks,
Jason

 

[Novitiate]

Bureaucracy is the antithesis of art
No great artist has ever been an effective lawyer
Conversely, most successful artists are rebels, pariahs, and outcasts

The Tao has some advice to proffer in this instance

Whatever you want to weaken
Must first be convinced of its strength

What you want to overcome
You must first submit to

Allow them their copyright and do not fight
Dan Brown recently won his defense against Baigent and Leigh
In which he (In my opinion… having read all of their books years ago)
Blatantly stole the outline of the Da Vinci code
"Art" won out over Bureaucracy
And The Holy Blood, Holy Grail (Baigent and Leighs nonfiction book) went from selling 3500 copies a year to 8500 a week They lost their suit, but they won publicity

As I have suggested the bread and butter of artists is Variation on a theme and personal influences.

My suggestion to you,
Change the name of the forms (perhaps copywrite them) and allow for artistic expression and growth which is the earmark of a living artform
Ultimately The way of the Federation
Is stagnation and obsolescence

 

[Makalakumu]

If I made them optional, would you all choose to learn them? Do you find any benefits from training these hyung? Some people would say that less is more in this case. What do you think?

Personally, one of the things I like about the Chil Sungs is that it brings another aspect of chinese martial arts into our system. The classical Okinawan kata were inspired by southern kung fu, while the Chil Sungs and Yuk Ros are inspired by northern systems.

 

[IMP]

My view is this;

Mr. K, if you made the Superior Tang Soo Do class, no one can teach exactly the same way you do. For instance, even if somone else in the area was teaching Tang Soo Do, they may not have Green Belts practice as long as you do, or teach the same things at the same rank. Just a thought.

Ian