Perhaps you have heard the trending story about an off-key, off-beat production of the hit Broadway musical “Hamilton” at a south Texas Church. The Door McAllen Church in McAllen, Texas recently put on a production of the Lin-Manuel Miranda creation apparently without authorization. Several news outlets have reported on the production (see here and here, for instance) that replaced portions of the play with scriptural messages. A now viral hashtag, #scamilton, has shot up on Twitter and TikTok, as social media users on those platforms make fun of the off-key singing, tortured line-reading, and other second-tier performances that one might otherwise expect from a small church production of a Broadway show. Perhaps unsurprisingly, some of that social media commentary has criticized the underlying Christian message of the production. As a Christian intellectual property attorney, it felt especially important for me to share my thoughts on #scamilton.
But first, let me explain the applicable law. Hamilton–the music, the costumes, the script, the choreography, and other creative elements–are protected by the United States Copyright Act. So, the entire dramatic performance, and its constituent parts, are all the exclusive intellectual property of their owner. This means that the owner of those rights may exclude anyone else from duplicating, distributing, publicly performing, or publicly displaying those creative materials. In fact, the exclusive rights even extend to the creation of derivative works, like a production of a play with altered lines or lyrics. Houses of worship must follow the copyright laws of the country, although Title 17, section 110 of the United States Code provides an exception when the house of worship plays worship music in the course of a worship service in a sanctuary. That exception, however, is quite narrow, extending only to the public performance of music in that setting. The exception does not protect a house of worship from claims of infringement for the misappropriation of other works, like dramatic works, that the house of worship publicly performs without authorization from the rights holder.
In the case of The Door McAllen Church’s production of Hamilton, it sounds like the church may have obtained the right to publicly perform the Hamilton music, but not the Hamilton production. Media reports suggest both that the church believed that it had a license, but Lin-Manuel Miranda–the creator and presumably at least one of the rights holders–said that they did not have a license. Well, they can both be right, insofar as the church may have had a license, just not the right license. Licenses to publicly perform popular music are easy to obtain, and special organizations like BMI or ASCAP will readily give a license of that kind to any willing to pay. The right to publicly perform a dramatic work–not just the music, but the music as part of a much larger performance–is often much more difficult to obtain. This makes sense: the producers of Hamilton probably want to control the quality and uniformity of the production. It therefore makes sense that they would not extend a license to a church that lacked the apparent resources to provide the high production values that the Hamilton people probably desired in a licensee. Even if somehow the Door McAllen Church had a license for a dramatic performance, those licenses never authorize the creation of derivative works, by, for example, altering the lyrics to give a different message than the creators intended.
As an intellectual property attorney, I always want to get the word out on respecting intellectual property rights, and as a Christian, I think that message is especially important. Sadly, I suspect many churches do not consider what rights they have to acquire or whether they are infringing the rights of others when they pick brand names, play music, engage in public performances, and the like. The Christian message should include a respect for the law, especially those meant to encourage creativity like copyright law. Now as for this particular production of Hamilton, I suppose different Christian churches have different ways they decide to reach people, but as for me, I don’t think the Love of Christ requires that kind of embellishment. For my part, I figure let’s let Hamilton be Hamilton–spitting King George, jolly LaFayette, and all–and let’s let Jesus be Jesus.
If you’re a church thinking about using creative material from movies, TV, or popular culture, here are some things for you to consider before you do:
- Appreciate the work of others. Intellectual property laws exist, among other reasons, to encourage creative activity and to appropriately compensate the significant cost of developing the property in the first place.
- Consider the context. Use of another person’s copyright-protected work usually leads to infringement. There are some narrow contexts and circumstances–for example, playing a short clip of a movie during a sermon–that may be acceptable “fair use.” However, fair use rarely applies and it does not give churches any special authority to otherwise violate the law.
- Get permission. Even if your specific use may be permitted by law, most of the time it never hurts to ask permission. Permission–or getting a license–is the easiest way to know what you are doing is allowed.
- When you get permission, understand the scope of authorization. Even when you do get permission, it’s important to understand that the permission extends only to what is expressly authorized. Oftentimes, licenses put common restrictions on use of copyrighted work, like prohibiting alteration of the work or setting the conditions of when and where the work can be performed or displayed.
- Veterans Day Intellectual Property - November 11, 2024
- A Christian IP Attorney Considers #Scamilton - August 19, 2022
