All-Star Usa Cheer New Music Rules..

[Official OWECheer]

There was supposed to be an updated statement as of May 15th. It's now the 17th and they need to realease it so gyms can plan

LOL these are the same people whose crappy time management has turned Worlds into a 4-day competition. I'm not shocked.

 

[CoachFire]

Having worked at both small and large gyms I can say this will cripple if not shutter the tiny mom run gyms who mix their music in the kitchen. Honestly I understand the purpose of the new rules but it seems to me that there should be some way to alter expectations slowly as they have with the cropped uniforms and other thing as to give people time to adjust. Just my opinion

 

[AngelsMum24]

LOL these are the same people whose crappy time management has turned Worlds into a 4-day competition. I'm not shocked.

Rumor is it will be released Friday. We will see.

 

[AngelsMum24]

Having worked at both small and large gyms I can say this will cripple if not shutter the tiny mom run gyms who mix their music in the kitchen. Honestly I understand the purpose of the new rules but it seems to me that there should be some way to alter expectations slowly as they have with the cropped uniforms and other thing as to give people time to adjust. Just my opinion

It's not a USASF issue. It's an Event Producer issue and deals with copyright law. Do I agree it sucks? Yes, because as a small program it's going to cost me about $300 more than I budgeted for music per team. Am I getting a little creative to deal with it? Yes.

My question is how are dance studios and teams with televised performances getting around this? I've been reading up on the music copyright laws and cases in reference. Dance studios are still 'sampling' music when they make their mixes and add in sound effects/transitions, too.

 

[Eyes On The Prize]

It's not a USASF issue. It's an Event Producer issue and deals with copyright law. Do I agree it sucks? Yes, because as a small program it's going to cost me about $300 more than I budgeted for music per team. Am I getting a little creative to deal with it? Yes.

My question is how are dance studios and teams with televised performances getting around this? I've been reading up on the music copyright laws and cases in reference. Dance studios are still 'sampling' music when they make their mixes and add in sound effects/transitions, too.

Are there court cases where music being sampled for dance is brought up?

If the big music producers were smart/had the time, they'd start selling royalty-free/stock songs to the smaller producers/gyms/schools to use for their music. If they consistently turn smaller programs/schools away because they cannot fit them into their schedule, make some stock mixes, sell them, and collect the money from them while you're working on the big gym's mixes. In theory, it's a win-win for everyone. Passive income is an amazing thing and this new ruling has created a potential gold mine for the people who can do it.

 

[Official OWECheer]

Are there court cases where music being sampled for dance is brought up?

If the big music producers were smart/had the time, they'd start selling royalty-free/stock songs to the smaller producers/gyms/schools to use for their music. If they consistently turn smaller programs/schools away because they cannot fit them into their schedule, make some stock mixes, sell them, and collect the money from them while you're working on the big gym's mixes. In theory, it's a win-win for everyone. Passive income is an amazing thing and this new ruling has created a potential gold mine for the people who can do it.

THIS. It's also an option for smaller producers that can make decent tracks.

 

[Souldier]

Will still push the cost of your mix up regardless.
There are plenty of sources out there right now. whether varsity allows you to use anyone other than their own "approved" vendors has yet to be determined.

Are there court cases where music being sampled for dance is brought up?

If the big music producers were smart/had the time, they'd start selling royalty-free/stock songs to the smaller producers/gyms/schools to use for their music. If they consistently turn smaller programs/schools away because they cannot fit them into their schedule, make some stock mixes, sell them, and collect the money from them while you're working on the big gym's mixes. In theory, it's a win-win for everyone. Passive income is an amazing thing and this new ruling has created a potential gold mine for the people who can do it.

ill

 

[Eyes On The Prize]

Will still push the cost of your mix up regardless.
There are plenty of sources out there right now. whether varsity allows you to use anyone other than their own "approved" vendors has yet to be determined.

ill

For the teams that do their music for free (the rec teams, school teams, small small gyms) yes it will push the cost up. But the cost is already going up because people need to buy royalties if they want to use songs. Or they can try to find free stock music which honestly, will be a lot of work every year to switch things up. Or they need to make their own which I can't see happening. Music prices will probably go up across the board except for the teams that get completely customized mixes every year like the mega gyms get.

Hypothetically, a music producer could price their songs for $10 each. I feel like 10-15 songs is a decent amount of songs for one mix. 10-15 songs is only $100-$150 for music royalties which split amongst a small team (20 people) is only $5-$7.5 per athlete. If 500 teams across the country (which isn't a lot of teams when you take into consideration rec, school, and all stars all need music) buy 10-15 songs from one producer, that is $50,000-$75,000 of extra income a year. And this is passive income which means they make this while doing other things to make money.

ETA: I'm not trying to solve the issue of the increase in music costs because, unless you want to get really creative, it might be unavoidable. I was strictly talking about what opportunities the big time music producers now have because they are positioned in a really good place right now.

 

[Souldier]

It's not a USASF issue. It's an Event Producer issue and deals with copyright law. Do I agree it sucks? Yes, because as a small program it's going to cost me about $300 more than I budgeted for music per team. Am I getting a little creative to deal with it? Yes.

My question is how are dance studios and teams with televised performances getting around this? I've been reading up on the music copyright laws and cases in reference. Dance studios are still 'sampling' music when they make their mixes and add in sound effects/transitions, too.

This is a "make Jeff Webb more money" issue imho.
Yes these bedroom cheer producers shouldn't be selling "pre made mixes" online with Beyoncé vocals all
over it. Common sense. I can't even imagine why someone would think that's ok. However I've found that most of these producers have very little knowledge of music or copyright law at all. They are cheerleaders with a copy of Sony acid and Spotify. The actual live performance aspect, or the playing of a cheer mix at a venue, It's not that big of a deal. No bigger deal than so and so DJ playing his bootleg version of a remix at a music festival, that's all broadcast on YouTube. No artist or label would have cared. As far as TV. You just mix down the audio and commentators speak over it. Done. The music isn't a key element at that point. Releasing a film like champions league is more complicated. That's one event out of hundreds. The publishing societies blanket license that the VENUE pays should suffice in these situations. The same as it does in every music venue in the US that has a DJ. If you want to be upset with anyone it's the guys who were selling mixes Online. That who hit the radar. They were selling a mix for 300 bucks 100's of times and didn't contribute not one bit of original content to it. I would be pissed as a publisher. I can't really see anyone being mad at varsity. What a great opportunity for them to force you to go thru their "approved vendors". They already have a monopoly on every single aspect of this sport and culture. Why wouldn't they have one on "cheer music" as well. Well played Jeff. Well played. Lol.

 

[njallday]

This is a "make Jeff Webb more money" issue imho.
No artist or label would have cared. .

To the bolded: they absolutely, positively care that other people are profiting heavily off of their music. That is why this is an issue in the first place. That is why cheer "music producers" are in serious legal hot water. That is why Varsity removed all audio from their videos.

I fail to see how any of this is a "make Jeff Webb more money" situation. Maybe you should spend some time reading through the actual lawsuits and legalities of the music industry...

 

[DancerDude0118]

I haven't gone through all the posts on this thread, so forgive me if my questions have already answered before...

So USASF is under USA Cheer, correct? And Worlds is under USASF, so does this music rule also apply to non-U.S. teams who want to compete at Worlds?

Professional cheer mixers (or whatever the proper term for this job is) are already pretty difficult to come by outside the U.S., how are teams suppose to find ones that can create a whole mix with original music?

 

[AngelsMum24]

Are there court cases where music being sampled for dance is brought up?

If the big music producers were smart/had the time, they'd start selling royalty-free/stock songs to the smaller producers/gyms/schools to use for their music. If they consistently turn smaller programs/schools away because they cannot fit them into their schedule, make some stock mixes, sell them, and collect the money from them while you're working on the big gym's mixes. In theory, it's a win-win for everyone. Passive income is an amazing thing and this new ruling has created a potential gold mine for the people who can do it.

The federal appeals court ruled in 2004 that one couldn't sample without express permission from the copyright owner (artist and music label). If it applies to music artists (i.e. rappers), how would it not apply to music producers for cheer and dance alike?

 

[AngelsMum24]

Are there court cases where music being sampled for dance is brought up?

If the big music producers were smart/had the time, they'd start selling royalty-free/stock songs to the smaller producers/gyms/schools to use for their music. If they consistently turn smaller programs/schools away because they cannot fit them into their schedule, make some stock mixes, sell them, and collect the money from them while you're working on the big gym's mixes. In theory, it's a win-win for everyone. Passive income is an amazing thing and this new ruling has created a potential gold mine for the people who can do it.

They're already on it. Look at CheerSounds - The Sound of Cheerleading | Cheer Music Mixes Cheermp3 Custom Cheer Mixes or Unleash the Beats

 

[Eyes On The Prize]

The federal appeals court ruled in 2004 that one couldn't sample without express permission from the copyright owner (artist and music label). If it applies to music artists (i.e. rappers), how would it not apply to music producers for cheer and dance alike?

Thank you. I don't follow the dance world that closely so I was just looking for more reading info :)

 

[AngelsMum24]

This is a "make Jeff Webb more money" issue imho.
Yes these bedroom cheer producers shouldn't be selling "pre made mixes" online with Beyoncé vocals all
over it. Common sense. I can't even imagine why someone would think that's ok. However I've found that most of these producers have very little knowledge of music or copyright law at all. They are cheerleaders with a copy of Sony acid and Spotify. The actual live performance aspect, or the playing of a cheer mix at a venue, It's not that big of a deal. No bigger deal than so and so DJ playing his bootleg version of a remix at a music festival, that's all broadcast on YouTube. No artist or label would have cared. As far as TV. You just mix down the audio and commentators speak over it. Done. The music isn't a key element at that point. Releasing a film like champions league is more complicated. That's one event out of hundreds. The publishing societies blanket license that the VENUE pays should suffice in these situations. The same as it does in every music venue in the US that has a DJ. If you want to be upset with anyone it's the guys who were selling mixes Online. That who hit the radar. They were selling a mix for 300 bucks 100's of times and didn't contribute not one bit of original content to it. I would be pissed as a publisher. I can't really see anyone being mad at varsity. What a great opportunity for them to force you to go thru their "approved vendors". They already have a monopoly on every single aspect of this sport and culture. Why wouldn't they have one on "cheer music" as well. Well played Jeff. Well played. Lol.

Playing the music at the event is not the issue from what I have read on music copyright (like you said the event producers and venues pay blanket licensing fees). It's the music producers not paying licenses for the music, reproducing the work and profiting off the mix, then passing it to the gym owner who then reproduces it to give to athletes/families to practice.