# Pennsylvania college cancels play after author objects to white actors **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 21, 2015, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138 "2015-11-21T01:03:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/161 "2015-11-23T22:50:26Z")
> [@treis](#): > > The point is that he’s an asshole. I don’t care if he is an asshole acting within his legal rights or outside his legal rights. Oh, OK. I am more interested in rights than the matter of who might be an asshole. But as to that, if Suh is within his strict IP rights, then it wasn’t he who had people putting work in on a production they weren’t actually entitled to perform. > [@treis](#): > > Clarion made a good faith effort to respect Suh’s wishes. I don’t see where you’ve shown this. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/162 "2015-11-23T23:52:07Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > What IS he going to do? I don’t know. You would have to ask him that. > > What COULD he do? As i made quite clear in an earlier post, he could sue them for copyright violation and, if the play has been registered with the US Copyright Office, he could win substantial financial damages, well above any actual monetary losses. I’ve already spelled out for you how the law works, and provided a link. I’m not sure what other evidence you want. What I’m getting at is this: what damages beyond the cost of the play do you think he can get? I’m not a lawyer but the law classes I took in school were business oriented. He is entitled to compensation for his work. I don’t think being butt hurt is an area that generates a lot of compensation. ---
**Author:** ![Dendarii\_Dame](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bbce88/32.png) [@Dendarii\_Dame](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dendarii_Dame)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/163 "2015-11-23T23:52:37Z")
> [@Claverhouse](#): > > How exactly do you think the theatre works ? Playwrights do not ‘sell’’ their works to anyone. > Not in the last 150 years. I’m a playwright, and I do. Anybody remember **Plays Magazine** from school? Well, I’ve sold them rights to more than a dozen of my plays. Current subscribers can produce them without royalties, and cast them however they want, although notes are provided which say how many male or female characters there are. When I was a kid, I was in one of their plays as “Irving Cohen”. I didn’t fit the role as I am female and gentile. If anyone was offended, nobody said anything. > **[Play Scripts for Students - Plays Magazine](https://www.playsmagazine.com/Default.asp)** > > Plays Magazine offers a diverse range of play scripts for students of all ages. Gain access to thousands of plays for only $69.00 a year. Subscribe today! Whenever possible, I don’t limit characters to being only for male or only for female characters. Any student who wants to can play them. And for the play about the Mayflower I just sold, it’s fine with me if the Pilgrims are played by children of color or if a girl plays Captain Jones. Whatever. This reminds me of the time some kids in my school put on selections from **The Wiz** for a competition. The judge told them they shouldn’t have done that show, since only the girl playing Glinda was African-American. She was, IIRC, the only African-American in our chorus. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/164 "2015-11-23T23:53:58Z")
> [@treis](#): > > The point is that he’s an asshole. I don’t care if he is an asshole acting within his legal rights or outside his legal rights. The problem here is not that you think he’s an asshole. You have every right to think he’s an asshole. The problem is that, because you think he’s an asshole, you seem to be bending over backwards to interpret the theater’s position in the most lenient way possible, and giving them every benefit of the doubt even when the evidence is against them, while completely discounting any evidence that supports Suh, and painting him in the worst possible light. As **Peremensoe** suggests, you haven’t really demonstrated the things you claim to have demonstrated. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/165 "2015-11-23T23:55:39Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > What I’m getting at is this: what damages beyond the cost of the play do you think he can get? I’m not a lawyer but the law classes I took in school were business oriented. He is entitled to compensation for his work. I don’t think being butt hurt is an area that generates a lot of compensation. As I have quite clearly demonstrated, with citations, if his work is registered with the US Copyright Office, he could receive a six-figure settlement. Are you disputing the existence of this aspect of copyright law? Are you disputing my interpretation of it? Or are you just obtusely ignoring it because it doesn’t fit with your preferred outcome? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/166 "2015-11-24T00:08:04Z")
The term you’re looking for is “statutory damages.” The Copyright Act of 1976 entitles a copyright holder to get $750–$30,000 per act of infringement without having to prove actual damages. It’s an actual right of a copyright owner not to have to prove damages. Proving the act of infringement is by itself enough to justify an award of damages. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/167 "2015-11-24T00:12:26Z")
> [@Dendarii\_Dame](#): > > This reminds me of the time some kids in my school put on selections from **The Wiz** for a competition. The judge told them they shouldn’t have done that show, since only the girl playing Glinda was African-American. She was, IIRC, the only African-American in our chorus. A couple of years ago, my daughter’s middle school flirted with the idea of putting on \*Hairspray \*but ultimately rejected it because the school (and the drama program) has a lot of Hispanic students, and they didn’t feel like they’d be able to do justice to the black/white tension that’s at the core of the story. They wound up putting on _Charlie and the Chocolate Factory_ instead, with a Persian girl cast as Willy Wonka. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/168 "2015-11-24T00:15:27Z")
Furthermore, the Copyright Act gives the copyright holder the exclusive right to among other things reproduce, distribute, publicly perform, or prepare a derivative work. So, yes, a copyright holder has the absolute right (given certain exemptions of course) to prohibit you from doing any of those things, even if his only reason is being “butt hurt.” (Leaving aside a small number of “compulsory licenses,” which do allow you to use a work without permission so long as you pay the fee. None of these apply to staging a public performance of a play.) ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/169 "2015-11-24T00:49:12Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > The term you’re looking for is “statutory damages.” The Copyright Act of 1976 entitles a copyright holder to get $750–$30,000 per act of infringement without having to prove actual damages. It’s an actual right of a copyright owner not to have to prove damages. Proving the act of infringement is by itself enough to justify an award of damages. Again, IANAL, but if the range is $750 to $30,000 then there is obviously some discussion in court. Or there’s a wheel the jury spins. So I’m asking a real question, what would the playwright be entitled too. There must be some legal mindset to the damages. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/170 "2015-11-24T01:43:49Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Again, IANAL, but if the range is $750 to $30,000 then there is obviously some discussion in court. Or there’s a wheel the jury spins. > > So I’m asking a real question, what would the playwright be entitled too. There must be some legal mindset to the damages. The real answer is that the playwright is entitled to $750 to $30,000 per act of infringement. You might mean to be asking a different question: How much is he likely to win if he sues? That is a very different question, though. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/171 "2015-11-24T01:46:59Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I don’t think being butt hurt is an area that generates a lot of compensation. When you provide sparkling and insightful legal analysis like this, what can we do except bow before your legal acumen? > [@Magiver](#): > > Again, IANAL, but if the range is $750 to $30,000 then there is obviously some discussion in court. Or there’s a wheel the jury spins. > > So I’m asking a real question, what would the playwright be entitled too. There must be some legal mindset to the damages. Yes there is discussion in court. There is always a discussion in court. We can never know exactly what would be awarded in each case unless and until the case actually happens and actually goes to trial. But in a case like this, there would probably be a couple of important factors working against the college. First, this is a college theater department, and the people involved presumably have negotiated the rights to use plays in the past, and are presumably aware of the relevant requirements for using a playwright’s work. It would therefore be very difficult for them to demonstrate that their violation of copyright was accidental or unwitting. It would be even more difficult if there were a trail of emails or other correspondence that made clear the theater knew about the copyright rules, and had also discussed the use of this particular play with the author. And this is often a key issue in cases of copyright violation: the extent to which the violation is deliberate and knowing. In fact, in addition to the $750 - $30,000 range cited by **Acsenray** , [Title 17 also says](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/504): > [@](#): > > In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. So, if Suh had taken this to court, and proven willful infringement, the amount could have been increased above the $30,000 limit. I’m willing to be that the court would probably be unlikely to do that for a non-profit, college-based theater, but the fact is that the statutory damages provision allows for damages beyond actual financial loss. And one of the reasons it does this is to penalize people who knowingly break the rules. If the only damage available were actual financial damages, that might act as an incentive to violate copyright. Say it costs $1000 to license a play for one week. If it were only possible to claim actual damages, a theater director might be tempted to use the play without permission, reasoning that, if they get caught, they’ll only have to pay the $1000 licensing fee anyway. That is, there would be no actual penalty for getting caught. But the possibility of statutory damages actually serves as a disincentive to violate copyright. But never mind all that. You keep going with your Legal Doctrine of Butthurt. It’s working great for you. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/172 "2015-11-24T01:49:46Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > The real answer is that the playwright is entitled to $750 to $30,000 **per act of infringement**. Emphasis mine. This is important too. In the case of a play, each performance would presumably constitute a separate act of infringement. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/173 "2015-11-24T01:53:59Z")
The holder of copyright can also sue for injunctive relief to stop an infringement: > **[17 U.S. Code § 502 - Remedies for infringement: Injunctions](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/502)** ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/174 "2015-11-24T02:17:35Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > The problem here is not that you think he’s an asshole. You have every right to think he’s an asshole. > > The problem is that, because you think he’s an asshole, you seem to be bending over backwards to interpret the theater’s position in the most lenient way possible, and giving them every benefit of the doubt even when the evidence is against them, while completely discounting any evidence that supports Suh, and painting him in the worst possible light. > > As **Peremensoe** suggests, you haven’t really demonstrated the things you claim to have demonstrated. Can you be specific where I’ve given them the benefit of the doubt and what evidence I’ve discounted that supports Suh? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/175 "2015-11-24T02:32:20Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > The real answer is that the playwright is entitled to $750 to $30,000 per act of infringement. > > You might mean to be asking a different question: How much is he likely to win if he sues? That is a very different question, though. OK, well go with that. Mhendo should have a legal opinion rendered by now. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/176 "2015-11-24T03:01:46Z")
> [@Claverhouse](#): > > A creator has the human right to discriminate in any way he sees fit: he or she made the work and therefore can control the work until he is dead. Or if you’re Walt Disney, even long after your corpse has rotted. The director sounds like a complete ass, but I don’t think the race or gender of the performers should matter so the author does as well despite it being his legal prerogative. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/177 "2015-11-24T03:39:38Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Can you be specific where I’ve given them the benefit of the doubt and what evidence I’ve discounted that supports Suh? Well, pretty much every post you’ve made in this thread, but if you want to get specific, let’s look at post 155: > [@treis](#): > > It sounds like there was plenty of communication between the university and plenty of opportunity for Suh to communicate his no whites policy. The fact that he and/or his agent didn’t rests solely on Suh and his agent. > > As for the licensing aspect, the university received a contract, signed it, sent payment, and that payment was received. From a moral standpoint, they did everything correct. From a legal aspect, they have an almost air tight case. The contract constitutes an offer, the university signing it counts as acceptance, and the check was cashed, so the consideration requirement is met. Suh says there was no communication. Clarion says they tried, but were ignored. You have taken Clarion’s version of events at face value, and used that as “evidence” that Suh has absolutely no ground for his complaint. Why are you automatically taking Clarion’s version of events as the most accurate? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/178 "2015-11-24T03:51:37Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > Or if you’re Walt Disney, even long after your corpse has rotted. Well, that IS why he had himself frozen… 😃 > [@](#): > > The director sounds like a complete ass, but I don’t think the race or gender of the performers should matter so the author does as well despite it being his legal prerogative. But the point is, it ALREADY matters, to the casting directors and producers who seem to think not casting minorities is NBD, and the audiences who only seem to notice when the opposite happens. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/179 "2015-11-24T03:54:18Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Well, pretty much every post you’ve made in this thread, but if you want to get specific, let’s look at post 155: > > Suh says there was no communication. Clarion says they tried, but were ignored. You have taken Clarion’s version of events at face value, and used that as “evidence” that Suh has absolutely no ground for his complaint. Why are you automatically taking Clarion’s version of events as the most accurate? Suh’s agent confirmed that he was too busy to work with Clarion. She also says there was “considerable communication” about the score. So I take Clarion’s version of events because Suh’s agent’s comments support that version. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138/180 "2015-11-24T15:12:43Z")
It does sound like Suh’s _agent_ might be at fault here more than anyone, but you are blaming Suh. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-college-cancels-play-after-author-objects-to-white-actors/738138.md?page=10)