Mariana has a contemporary voice. Leave out the initial capitals, as who puts their own rules. It generates an intimate atmosphere with two verses; and you get a smile with a reference pop. It spins in your head and questions your heart.
Her books, eight published books, are all (happily) exhausted, she says in her blogs. But there are more that are cooking, next is called HINGE, in his answers he gave us an advance.
Kindly answered our interview and here we share them.
In collective management societies have a place of lost objects. They say the black box. An account that receives all the money that has not been distributed. The money that nobody claims ... and that all artists dream that they assign to them.
The collective management societies are in principle administrators. Its main function is to collect and pay the holders of content that others exploit. The societies of authors administer repertoire on behalf of the authors and charge for them. Each country has its own collective management societies.
In music in particular, they charge for each time a composition is played on television, radio, concerts or public places.
They always represent a repertoire. If the repertoire is represented by the collective management society in Colombia -Ej. Sayco- they charge users of that content-stations, digital platforms, bars, concert entrepreneurs-every time they use music in their territory.
What if the repertoire that sounds in Colombia is represented by another collective management society different from Sayco (for example, the Society of Authors and Composers of Mexico - SACM)? Sayco charges for that use and then (by an agreement between them and the SACM) they transfer the collection to them.
That in big brushstrokes, rough and accelerated.
But let's talk about what they charge for the repertoire that is not represented by nobody.
There are three stupidly expensive things in the world: what is on sale at an airport, what is related to a wedding party and advertising.
The first two have a simple explanation: state of necessity.
For advertising it is not that simple.
All copyright treaties say that moral rights can not be negotiated. And I insist that artists have an almost obscene fixation with moral rights. An unnecessary obsession, to say the least.
(Link the copyright does not matter)
But the reality is different. There is a moral right with which one trades. He disguises himself as something else and puts on contracts without blushing. The moral right of anonymity.
Advertising is worth three times more than a normal commissioned work because, in addition to the exhibition and use that the piece will have, the author is required to remain anonymous.
Well ... he is required to do it voluntarily. In the same way that the KGB asked for the favor of collaborating voluntarily. A voluntary act full of nuances.
More common than you think
The way to prove this is simple. When was the last time you saw a video commercial that has credits at the end? What do the actors mention? What do you mention the name of the director? The screenwriter?
- If someone has an example, we would be fascinated to receive it-
To date, we have not seen the first one.
Making a commercial for television - or for YouTube today - is not an easy task. Any high quality audiovisual production requires a production deployment, a creative effort of preparation and postproduction. Regardless of whether the final result is four seconds or two minutes. A television commercial is an audiovisual work by all angles by which you look at it.
And even so. No one appears in the credits. Unlike film or television where in the end roll credits with the name of the one who participated in the project - even the lawyer in some cases.
The answer lies in advertising contracts. Which most agencies include when they order a piece.
The clause says that the artist / director / creative / illustrator / editor will refrain from claiming authorship credits. That he will exercise his moral right to remain anonymous; and - here comes the poison - in case you want to exercise your moral right of attribution, you will have to pay a fine of jet-hundreds Thousands of dollars.
It is illegal?
Is it abusive?
Yes, maybe a little three quarts and lots ... yes. In a way it is.
Why the fine?
To prevention. As moral rights can not be waived. To leave in writing that one wants to remain anonymous is a temporary remedy. At any time the author could demand that they give him the corresponding credit. He would have all the authority to do it. I could do it at any time and that would leave the agency - and the end customer of the campaign - in an unsustainable limbo. That's why they opt for the fine. Which is more of a threat than anything else ... like the KGB and its techniques of voluntary submission.
And why would someone accept that clause?
For a good price.
Victims or patients
I put this issue on the table for two reasons: (i) it gives me infinite tenderness when the copyright books say that moral rights are inalienable and that you can not negotiate with them; (ii) a poison taken voluntarily makes us patients and not victims.
Advertising is a huge market with multiple opportunities for creators in the orange economy. Like any market has its rules of the game. In this case: the assignment or limitation of specific rights.
The advantage: If the rules are known, the conditions (of use and economic conditions) can be negotiated better.
PD: In the end Taylor Swift is the ghostwritter of "Over" by Kings of Leon? Even in the best families sometimes the authors keep the credit.
What does a literary agency have to do with theater? Everything ... or a lot. Without an agency there is almost never a dramatic text (unless we ourselves believe it).
The literary agencies are the least explored actor in the theater sector. The texts revolve around these and still few people know how they work or how to relate to them.
The work of a literary agency seems simple; but it is far from it. They are silent observers. The vanguard. Industry players that go five steps ahead of the public; sometimes as miners who unearth a precious jewel buried.
The most common evil of cultural projects is the lack of attention to their strategies of cultural promotion and marketing.
There is an evil that pummels most cultural projects without mercy. The lack of audience. The world does not know its existence. Some cultural projects are widely known; for its quality -or its lack of quality-, for its messages, for the impact they generate. Others, simply, always move off the radar.
Many of the projects that are being formed take note of what the large dissemination spaces are doing and replicate it. The verbatim. Without wondering if those strategies are valid for the stage in which your own project is.
In many Blogs of self-help, with corny self-improvement phrases, they affirm: "Do not compare your Chapter One with Chapter Twenty of someone else" ...at least in that they are right.
Promotion strategies have sizes and not all of them are left to everyone.
To my acting students - I am a copyright professor at an acting academy - I always ask them: When was the last time you went to a play because you saw a sign in a bakery? They rarely have an answer. Rarely do they concentrate on thinking about how they make the decision to go to that new work, in which their friend is the protagonist or wrote her dramaturgy teacher.
The bad habit that condemns cultural projects is not to sit down to think about their promotion strategies at the same time as the creation of the content. Leave it to the end. Leave it at random.