<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Simple Copyright Solutions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 22:44:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kirk Longhofer</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1335</link>
		<dc:creator>Kirk Longhofer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:16:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1335</guid>
		<description>I think the issue of DLP vs. LCD really solves itself once you answer other basic questions.  Let me work on a post on what factors matter in projector selection and I&#039;ll try to get that up next week!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the issue of DLP vs. LCD really solves itself once you answer other basic questions.  Let me work on a post on what factors matter in projector selection and I&#8217;ll try to get that up next week!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barco van Rhijn</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1334</link>
		<dc:creator>Barco van Rhijn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1334</guid>
		<description>Interesting... I&#039;m pondering the question of what projector to use in our venue. The issue of LCD v.s. DLP tech is an especially troubling question for me.

Any Ideas or recent posts on this topic?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting&#8230; I&#8217;m pondering the question of what projector to use in our venue. The issue of LCD v.s. DLP tech is an especially troubling question for me.</p>
<p>Any Ideas or recent posts on this topic?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dardginkOneda</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1333</link>
		<dc:creator>dardginkOneda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 23:20:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1333</guid>
		<description>Premium blogpost, great looking blog, added it to my favs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Premium blogpost, great looking blog, added it to my favs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kirk Longhofer</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1332</link>
		<dc:creator>Kirk Longhofer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1332</guid>
		<description>Very helpful.  Also, I just discovered and updated this post to include the information that WCA is no longer offering a blanket license.  Instead, they&#039;re working with you folks AND getting their members a nice little discount.  Thanks for all the work you do.

kdl</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very helpful.  Also, I just discovered and updated this post to include the information that WCA is no longer offering a blanket license.  Instead, they&#8217;re working with you folks AND getting their members a nice little discount.  Thanks for all the work you do.</p>
<p>kdl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CopyrightSolver</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1331</link>
		<dc:creator>CopyrightSolver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1331</guid>
		<description>The language in the religious service exemption  has been a tricky question for several years and has resulted in a lot of confusion and debate on the part of churches, copyright owners, administrators and attorneys. Our attorney researched this particular point this year and received the following statement from the U.S. Copyright Office counsel who forwarded House report on this section of the U.S. Copyright Law. The House report makes it very clear that the exemption musical works (not just of a religious nature) and dramatico-musical works of a religious nature.

Our attorney went to the US Copyright office and their counsel explained that the House Report is considered more authoritative since it was written a year later than the Senate&#039;s and closer to the date of enactment.

The House Report text reads:

&quot;The exemption in clause (3) of section 110 covers performances of nondramatic literary or musical work, and also performances of &quot;dramatico-musical works of a religious nature.&quot;

Basically, the other text version was written in a confusing manner and with a confusing comma.

The PERFORMmusic license is worth it just not to have to keep up with this stuff :)

Thanks for the kind words and for getting the word out!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The language in the religious service exemption  has been a tricky question for several years and has resulted in a lot of confusion and debate on the part of churches, copyright owners, administrators and attorneys. Our attorney researched this particular point this year and received the following statement from the U.S. Copyright Office counsel who forwarded House report on this section of the U.S. Copyright Law. The House report makes it very clear that the exemption musical works (not just of a religious nature) and dramatico-musical works of a religious nature.</p>
<p>Our attorney went to the US Copyright office and their counsel explained that the House Report is considered more authoritative since it was written a year later than the Senate&#8217;s and closer to the date of enactment.</p>
<p>The House Report text reads:</p>
<p>&#8220;The exemption in clause (3) of section 110 covers performances of nondramatic literary or musical work, and also performances of &#8220;dramatico-musical works of a religious nature.&#8221;</p>
<p>Basically, the other text version was written in a confusing manner and with a confusing comma.</p>
<p>The PERFORMmusic license is worth it just not to have to keep up with this stuff <img src='http://churchtechmatters.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Thanks for the kind words and for getting the word out!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kirk Longhofer</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1330</link>
		<dc:creator>Kirk Longhofer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:57:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1330</guid>
		<description>Have to disagree with CopyrightSolver above... just a bit here.

The law specifically uses the phrase &quot;works of a religious nature, in the course of services at a place of worship or other religious assembly.&quot;

It&#039;s a two part test, as I read it. In order for the exemption to apply, the work must be &quot;of a religous nature&quot; and be played &quot;in the course of a service.&quot;  What constitutes a &quot;work of a religious nature&quot; would be up for debate in front of a jury, which is where we certainly do NOT want to be!

The last time I actually paid to have an attorney do the research, there was nothing on-point to whether a &quot;non-religous&quot; work would be covered under the exemption.

If you can point us to anything on-point with regard to a &quot;non-religious&quot; work being covered by the exemption, I&#039;d love to hear about it.

We&#039;re probably actually arguing a moot point for the vast majority of churches out there.  Most will have need for a blanket like you offer, and therefore would be covered whether the exemption applies or not!  At less than $200 per year, there&#039;s really no reason NOT to have the license in place.

Thanks for chiming in.  You guys provide a great service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have to disagree with CopyrightSolver above&#8230; just a bit here.</p>
<p>The law specifically uses the phrase &#8220;works of a religious nature, in the course of services at a place of worship or other religious assembly.&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a two part test, as I read it. In order for the exemption to apply, the work must be &#8220;of a religous nature&#8221; and be played &#8220;in the course of a service.&#8221;  What constitutes a &#8220;work of a religious nature&#8221; would be up for debate in front of a jury, which is where we certainly do NOT want to be!</p>
<p>The last time I actually paid to have an attorney do the research, there was nothing on-point to whether a &#8220;non-religous&#8221; work would be covered under the exemption.</p>
<p>If you can point us to anything on-point with regard to a &#8220;non-religious&#8221; work being covered by the exemption, I&#8217;d love to hear about it.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re probably actually arguing a moot point for the vast majority of churches out there.  Most will have need for a blanket like you offer, and therefore would be covered whether the exemption applies or not!  At less than $200 per year, there&#8217;s really no reason NOT to have the license in place.</p>
<p>Thanks for chiming in.  You guys provide a great service.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CopyrightSolver</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1329</link>
		<dc:creator>CopyrightSolver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1329</guid>
		<description>Hi Don -

Kirk is providing great information here and we are all appreciative.

I would like to correct one small error in Kirk&#039;s response to you. The criteria for being able to use music under the church exemption is that the music be played during an actual religious service. The music does not have to be of a religious nature in order to be covered under this exemption.

So to be clear:

You DO NOT need a performance license in order to play any music during a religious service, regardless of whether or not the music is religious in nature.

You DO need a performance license whenever you are preforming music outside of a religious service, regardless of whether or not the music is religious in nature.

If you have any questions about performance licenses for churches and ministries, visit www.CopyrightSolver.com. We are here to help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Don -</p>
<p>Kirk is providing great information here and we are all appreciative.</p>
<p>I would like to correct one small error in Kirk&#8217;s response to you. The criteria for being able to use music under the church exemption is that the music be played during an actual religious service. The music does not have to be of a religious nature in order to be covered under this exemption.</p>
<p>So to be clear:</p>
<p>You DO NOT need a performance license in order to play any music during a religious service, regardless of whether or not the music is religious in nature.</p>
<p>You DO need a performance license whenever you are preforming music outside of a religious service, regardless of whether or not the music is religious in nature.</p>
<p>If you have any questions about performance licenses for churches and ministries, visit <a href="http://www.CopyrightSolver.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.CopyrightSolver.com</a>. We are here to help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendra Yahrmarkt</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1328</link>
		<dc:creator>Kendra Yahrmarkt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:17:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1328</guid>
		<description>Great info! I&#039;ve been studying (C) for the church for a couple years and you&#039;ve hit the main points and resources. A change however - WCA no longer offers Performance licensing with their membership.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great info! I&#8217;ve been studying (C) for the church for a couple years and you&#8217;ve hit the main points and resources. A change however &#8211; WCA no longer offers Performance licensing with their membership.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uberVU - social comments</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1327</link>
		<dc:creator>uberVU - social comments</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1327</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Social comments and analytics for this post...&lt;/strong&gt;

This post was mentioned on Twitter by ifeelgod: New Church Tech Matters post: Simple Copyright Solutions http://ipmzh.th8.us ~ the legal use of copyrighted... http://bit.ly/07HwT4i...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Social comments and analytics for this post&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>This post was mentioned on Twitter by ifeelgod: New Church Tech Matters post: Simple Copyright Solutions <a href="http://ipmzh.th8.us" rel="nofollow">http://ipmzh.th8.us</a> ~ the legal use of copyrighted&#8230; <a href="http://bit.ly/07HwT4i.." rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/07HwT4i..</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Steinbrueck</title>
		<link>http://churchtechmatters.com/2009/11/23/simple-copyright-solutions/#comment-1326</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Steinbrueck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://churchtechmatters.com/?p=1429#comment-1326</guid>
		<description>Thanks for making the confusing copyright laws and their solutions understandable!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for making the confusing copyright laws and their solutions understandable!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

