Written by Sabine Schuller, Sr. Research Specialist, Rotary International

There must be a million resources about data analytics and statistics ranging from high school textbooks to blog posts commenting on the “big data” trend.  By comparison, advice on non-profit oriented data analytics, never mind fundraising, is few and far between.  For that reason alone Kevin MacDonell and Peter Wylie’s book Score!  Data-Driven Success for Your Advancement is a welcome addition.  

I see this book as a blueprint and encouragement for non-profits to use their data more effectively as they strive to improve their fundraising efforts.  I appreciate the book’s emphasis on how to best introduce or increase data-driven fundraising decisions in a culture that might be new to data analytics and predictive models.  What sets it apart from a statistics textbook is that in addition to providing mathematical background and case studies, it is also a primer on managing change.  Best of all, it’s written in an engaging and absorbing way.

Score! paints a vibrant picture of fundraising office dynamics and its potential challenges, based both on Peter Wylie’s long consulting career and Kevin MacDonell’s personal experience growing into a full time data analytics position.  While Peter Wylie has some strong opinions about the non-profit sector’s pace of adopting data analytics, the authors give credit where credit is due.  They hold up the frontline fundraisers as master storytellers while spotlighting those who play with their nonprofit organization data like it was their personal sandbox.  Score! discusses several ways to communicate a potentially new and disruptive idea to people who may not be data oriented. The authors want the technically skilled data evangelists to be successful and wisely highlight using interpersonal and communication skills in addition to facts.  They also recommend evolutionary, not revolutionary steps. 

Another of the book’s strengths is that it doesn’t just preach to the choir drinking the Kool-Aid.  It also addresses the managers – those responsible for the big fundraising picture.  The accessible writing style and content organized by area of responsibility helps busy managers absorb the content.  Score! is also very good at anticipating and addressing counter arguments, and a manager might have several.  For example, it discusses the pros and cons of options such as hiring a data analyst from the outside the organization, “growing your own”, or using an outside vendor. 

The last part of the book focuses on case studies to explore potential data analysis projects for alumni as well as annual, major, and planned gifts.  In this section, you may wish to pace yourself as there are many figures, tables, and graphs to absorb.  The authors build their chapters carefully and clearly.  They start with fundamental statistical concepts, build a simple example, follow with more advanced ideas, and only at the end talk about exceptions.  Try limiting yourself to one chapter per day (or week) to make sure you can absorb it all and explain the concepts to others.  You should also be aware that all of the nonprofit examples are from higher education.  Their choice is understandable.  Colleges and universities have the most resources and data available for this kind of work and the book is published by the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE).  While that can make it challenging for those in other non-profit sectors, here are several workarounds.  One possible solution is to mentally substitute the name of your industry whenever you see “higher ed” and “donor” instead of “alumni”.  Another possibility is to be open minded and learn about how a different kind of non-profit operates.

With its combination of a strong writing style and unique content, Score! is a book well worth reading, even if you have to do it on your time off.  A current or hopeful non-profit data analyst, would enjoy and learn from all parts of the book.  Fundraising directors and other decision makers in upper management would also profit, though they may choose to read the chapters which most pertain to their areas of responsibility.  It’s even good for “experts” as a reminder that not all have their depth of knowledge and that everyone benefits when they stretch to bridge their organizations’ and co-workers’ gaps.  Most importantly it provides encouragement and strategies for those who want to grow their nonprofits using data oriented strategies.

Want to learn more?  Come to APRA Illinois’ Fall Conference October 3^rd and learn from the authors how to put data analytics in practice for your organization!

http://www.apraillinois.org/event-890645?CalendarViewType=0&SelectedDate=7/26/2014

Other reviews of the book:

• ·         Jen Filla, President, Aspire Research Group http://www.jenniferfilla.com/score-takes-edge-analytics/
• ·         Susan Bridgers, Director of CFR Prospect Research UNC-Chapel Hill http://apracarolinas.wildapricot.org/page-1852016/2992359

Written by Elisa Shoenberger, Prospect Management and Research Analyst at Loyola University Chicago

What a wonderful 26^th annual APRA International Conference! It was a fantastic four days of conference learning and getting to know our peers at the Cosmopolitan in Las Vegas. People came from all over the US and even the world to attend the fifty-four education sessions in six different tracks, from Prospect Research to Campaigns.

While I attended many fascinating and insightful presentations, my favorite session was “Venturing into High-Tech Research” by Christopher Haight from Cornell University. Mr. Haight talked about the high tech industry focusing on both individual players and companies themselves. He outlined five groups of individuals that researchers should think about for prospecting: Investors, Founders, Early Employees, Bankers, and Lawyers. With respect to founders, he pointed out that they are often quite young when they get their big payout and exit the company. These founders may be disinclined to give a gift. Moreover, they may have sold many shares of their own company to get the financing for it to expand or go public. Mr. Haight suggested that organizations change the way they ask for gifts or imagine a gift’s structure. Instead of asking for outright gifts, organizations can ask for shares in a company. Imagine if your institution had asked for 1% or even 0.50% of Facebook! I believe his session was recorded so you may be able to check it out for yourself in the near future.

We also participated in great roundtable discussions in conjunction with APRA talks, our version of TED talks. Before the roundtable discussion, we heard three short talks on leadership. Josh Birkholz from Bentz Whaley Flessner presented his research about the power of leadership with character for companies’ bottom lines.  Sandra Campero of Arizona State University talked about trusting your own instincts and helping other people become leaders in their own right. John McBride from the University of Chicago talked about having the confidence in oneself to succeed. After these insightful presentations, we had the opportunity to discuss leadership in general and in our specific shops with our fellow researchers. One fellow researcher mentioned that he brought his dog to work! He said that bringing his dog to meetings helped to reduce the overall anxiety of his fellow colleagues. What a fantastic idea!

In addition to attending these fabulous sessions, this was a special APRA conference for me personally. Not only was it my third conference, but I was also fortunate to be asked to speak on a pre-conference panel  called “Managing Planned Giving Relationships,” which promoted a dialogue between gift officers and researchers to facilitate and expand planned giving programs in our respective organizations. My fellow panelists were Lawrence Henze, Principle Consultant at Target Analytics, Camille Licklider, Executive Director of Gift Planning at Northwestern University, and Tina Pugh of Nature Conservancy. Our panel suggested that organizations steward planned giving prospects when they give an annual gift, not when they are identified as a planned giving prospect. The message of the moment: stewardship, stewardship, stewardship! It was also fascinating to learn how some factors correlate with certain planned giving types. For instance, people who tend to give political contributions tend to elect for annuities while people with stronger giving to religious organizations more often choose bequests.

The conference wasn’t only mind-blowing ideas; we also had opportunity to get to know our fellow researchers. APRA IL hosted a happy hour on Thursday after sessions at the Cosmopolitan’s fancy Chandelier Bar, where we had the opportunity to meet many of the colleagues we’ve talked to via phone for APRA IL meetings.

During our happy hour, we each shared our favorite parts of conference so far. Catherine Cefalu, Lead Prospect Research Analyst at University of Chicago, noted that her favorite part was geeking out over keynote speaker Una Osili, Director of Research at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. Amelia Aldred, Prospect Research Analyst at University of Chicago, fondly recalled following the APRA 2014 Twitter feed. She said, “I liked hearing people’s thoughts about different sessions and I introduced myself to several prospect researchers simply because I liked their Twitter feed so much.” She also noted how much fun she had following #APRAhooligans, a “fun joke Twitter feed about APRA, full of pirates and ninjas and even Carmen Sandiego. So much geeky fun.” She also had a blast “walking the Las Vegas Strip with my colleague Sarah Johnson. She is an organized crime history enthusiast, so we went to a bunch of sites where famous mobsters worked and cut dealsundefinedvery fun!”

APRA International Conference is the only way to do Vegas!

Until next year!

 

Written by Elisa Shoenberger, Prospect Management & Research Analyst, Loyola University Chicago

We’re counting down the days to the 27^th International APRA Convention in Las Vegas. We here at APRA-IL are very excited about the upcoming conference. It’s four glorious days of lectures, workshops, networking, and socializing. In order to prepare for the conference, we have asked our fellow APRA-IL members to reflect on their memories of and lessons from conferences past.

Rodney Young, Prospect Data Project Coordinator at DePaul University, wrote, “I thoroughly enjoyed my time at the APRA International Conference 2012 in Minneapolis!  It was a great time to connect with Prospect Research & Management professionals across the nation.  I learned about best practices, innovative ideas, and challenges in different types of institutions.  The connections made at APRA International led me to join the APRA-IL chapter and get involved.  I highly recommend APRA International for anyone who wants to take their career to the next level!”

Elisa Shoenberger, Prospect Management and Research Analyst for Loyola University Chicago and presenter at this year’s conference, wrote about her memories of her first conference in 2012: “At APRA International Conference 2012 in Minneapolis, I was really gratified to meet other people in my field. I met people whose experience varied widely. Some people had been in their roles for years while others just started. The environment was so positive and collaborative. At ‘The New Researchers Symposium’, I remember asking for help on international research. One of the session leaders was willing to help; she shared a PDF of international resources, such as websites and tips! It was really useful! While I was getting wonderful advice and insight, I remember explaining what a donor pipeline was to a researcher I met on the bus. Even I had something to share with my follower APRA conference goers. But it’s not all about work either! There are a lot of great social opportunities. I remember taking a 6:00am walking tour of Minneapolis with my fellow researchers. We wandered over to the Sculpture Garden at the Walker Art Center to see the giant spoon and cherry sculpture. I can’t wait to go this year!”

Amelia Aldred, Research Analyst at University of Chicago, wrote about her best memories of APRA International 2013 in Baltimore, Maryland. She had a great time “meeting lots of new researchers at the New Researcher Symposium and comparing notes on how we got into prospect research.” She reflected on one session in particular: I went to “a session about family trees at the time, I thought, ‘This is interesting, but when will I use it?’  Then the week after APRA, I was assigned to create a family tree of one of our main donor families!” She also had a blast eating Baltimore crabs with her team and generally "geeking out."

Catherine Cefalu, Lead Prospect Research Analyst at the University of Chicago and presenter at this year’s conference, made some helpful recommendations to first time conference goers:

“This year is going to be my fifth time attending the APRA conference, and my second time presenting at a session. Here are some of the things I've learned over the years:

• Do your research on the sessions and speakers, interesting places to eat near the hotel, and things to do in your spare time.
• Bring your business cards: both for networking with colleagues, and for the WealthEngine Money Ball!
• Dress in layers in the session rooms; the A/C tends to be pretty chilly.
• It’s okay to spend time by yourself; I nearly ran myself ragged trying to Meet Everyone and Do Everything my first year.
• Don’t be afraid to ask people to lunch or dinner, or to visit local APRA chapter happy hours. Last year, I had a great time hanging out with RIF UK.
• You’ll probably lose your conference program at some point. Keep an extra one handy.
• Plan carefully what you bring with you when you head down to the conference for the day the elevators are often mobbed after each session.
• Not every session you sign up for has to be relevant to your current job or organization. I work in higher education, but like to attend at least one member/cause-related session per year.
• It’s okay to leave a session if you think you might get more out of another one going on at the same time (unless it’s completely full -check at the registration desk if you’re unsure). I wouldn't recommend walking out of the New Researcher Symposium, though…
• Take good notes so you can debrief with colleagues when you get home!
• There is a sad tendency for some sessions to devolve into complaining about gift officers. Venting can be tempting, but don’t let yourself get sucked into a toxic conversation. Remember: partners in fundraising!
• Visit the vendors and snag some swag! And pens. Get as many pens as you possibly can.
• Plan adventures!”

We can’t wait to see you all there and hear about your experiences. See you soon!

Written by Amelia Aldred, Research Analyst, University of Chicago 

On June 6, 2014 at the Rotary International's World Headquarters in Evanston, APRA Illinois held their annual Basic Skills Workshop, a day-long seminar series designed for new and aspiring researchers, as well as NGO professionals who wear multiple hats.  The program included three lectures on prospect research basics, a panel discussion with seasoned researchers, and a networking lunch.  Attendees also received a copy of the book Prospect Research is a Verb by Meredith Hancks.  A happy hour at a nearby restaurant followed.

The first session, "Wealth Screening," was given by Jennifer Fry, Director of Prospect Discovery and Information at Northwestern University.  Ms. Fry emphasized that wealth screening is a complicated endeavor that requires researchers to create a clear plan that defines their deliverables and outlines each step of the project.  In addition, researchers must communicate clearly to stakeholders both the value of the project and the working conditions necessary for the project to succeed.    Wealth screenings are often costly, in terms of both money and staff time but can allow a research team to discover and deliver a plethora of high quality prospects.  "Any opportunity that you have to do it, you want to do it as well as you can to show its value," Ms. Fry concluded.

The second session, "Prospect Management vs. Prospect Research," was taught by Viviana Ramirez, Director of Prospect Management at Rush University Medical Center. The session detailed Ms. Ramirez's process of creating a prospect management policy from the ground up.  Like a good researcher, she started by asking questions and documenting how prospects were already cycling through gift officers, and then created a policy based on the gaps and pain points in this current system.   Ms. Ramirez stressed the importance of training gift officers and meeting regularly with all the stakeholders.    Throughout the session, she used the image of the Rube Goldberg machine as a metaphor for prospect management policy often cobbled together from multiple sources and stakeholders, but all working together to move a prospect through the development cycle.

The third session, "The Hierarchy of Wealth," was presented by Rebekah O'Brien, Senior Prospect Management and Research Analyst at Loyola University Chicago.  Ms. O'Brien started with a brief overview of wealth and philanthropy in the United States and explained how general wealth and giving trends inform prospect research.  For example, while middle income donors tend to give away a larger proportion of their wealth than high income donors, the size of the high income prospects' gifts are still larger than those of middle income donors.  For that reason, prospect researchers will want to focus their efforts on the very wealthy, but still send any middle income donors to an annual giving team, in order to build a well-rounded portfolio of donors.   Ms. O'Brien also reviewed the difference between wealth and income, and the methods for finding publicly available information about wealth.  Several seasoned researchers chimed in with additional recommendations on information resources. 

The afternoon panel fielded several interesting questions, including how to best prioritize time, calculate capacity ratings, and what they enjoy most about prospect research.

After the sessions, participants went to Pete Miller's bar and restaurant, a local favorite, and swapped researching stories and tips over drinks and appetizers and was a wonderful way to end a full day of learning and sharing.

Many thanks to Amelia for writing this post! If you would like to contribute or volunteer with APRA Illinois, give us a shout.

Research Panel at recent Basic Skills Workshop

Chat with Viviana Ramirez about Prospect Management & Research in Health Care Institutions

Written by Rodney Young | Prospect Data Project Coordinator, DePaul University

Recently, I had the pleasure of chatting with Viviana Ramirez, Director of Prospect Management at Rush University Medical Center.  Viviana will be one of the presenters at the upcoming APRA-IL Basic Skills Workshop on Friday June 6, 2014 (click HERE to register). Viviana has over 15 years of experience in Data Records Management, Prospect Research and Prospect Management, and has been instrumental in developing a robust, progressive Prospect Management system at Rush.  We had a great conversation talking about the unique challenges and opportunities in Prospect Management in the health care industry.  Here's an excerpt from our discussion - enjoy!

Rodney: Tell me about some of the differences in the environment at a health care organization that contrast with a college or university fundraising office.

Viviana: Well, since we are also an academic medical institution, we still do alumni fundraising. Scholarships are still a big initiative, too.  However, with grateful patient fundraising, it's tougher.  An alum has a connection to the institution; but a patient has an experience... and that experience can be good or it can be bad.  Furthermore, we are not supposed to know about that experience because of HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act).  Those regulations can create restrictions concerning what we can or cannot say, or what we are allowed to know about a patient's experience.

We utilize our physicians; our fundraisers are partnering with key physicians so they can obtain relevant information.  We work with a physician as a partner to help with that qualification process.

Rodney:  Wow, very interesting!  What do you enjoy about working in health care that's different than in higher education?

Viviana:  Unlike fundraisers, I don't get to sit in on meetings where there are physicians talking about cutting edge research...there are some really mind-blowing things going on in health care today.  There are such great stories; for me, I sit and look at the hospital across the street and thinking, "Right now, there are miracles going on over there.  Right now, somebody's life is being saved." Whenever you have "one of those days", you can still say "I work at a pretty cool place."  The compelling stories are what make it worthwhile.

Rodney:  Tell me a little about the relationship between your Prospect Management & Research team and the fundraising staff.

Viviana:  Well, it's based on the state of a fundraiser's portfolio. If their portfolios are properly updated, they don't hear too much from us.  

Rodney: What if their portfolios are not looking the right way?

Viviana: We have more meetings to determine what strategies are being utilized, what haven't we looked at, and consider what other sources we should look at to improve the portfolio.

Rodney: What's difficult when it comes to fundraiser relationships?

Viviana:  It’s very similar to other institutions. When you're doing the work to add names to someone's portfolio, and they're not moving on them, that’s always the challenge!

HIPPA is the other challenge. Just because we see patient information doesn't mean we're privileged to it.  We have to be mindful of the information we put into our centralized database so we are not violating HIPPA regulations.

Rodney: Is Rush currently in a campaign?

Viviana: Not now, but we are in year 4 of a 5-year strategic plan.  At the end of our campaign, we needed goals, so we developed a 5-year plan.  The goal is to be an office that can regularly raise $40 million per year.

Rodney: What is the "post campaign" environment like for you guys?

Viviana: It's interesting because we're getting close to the end of stewarding gifts that went towards the last campaign.  I think it's toughest on the fundraisers. There is a transition that occurs because their pitch for raising dollars goes away.  So now they have to rethink how to engage and excite donors when we're no longer working towards a campaign.  There are different initiatives, but some areas don't have an initiative.

Rodney: So you're getting people ready for the next campaign as well, right?

Viviana: Yes, we're thinking about our donors, especially the ones who give at a major gift level annually.  You also want to look for those people as they will be key in the next campaign.  

Rodney:  What are some other post-campaign initiatives your team is working on?

Viviana: Data collection is very important.  One of our initiatives is to develop a standard way for development officers to rate prospects beyond the wealth screenings and what research is doing.  As we start to build these gift tables, we want to make sure that there is some level of "truth", and people feel confident that those ratings make sense.

Rodney: When it comes to tools for analytics, is that something your organization has not invested in yet?

Viviana: After some investigation, I have decided to go with Tableau.  What I like about it is that there are different levels in which you can use it.  I am also interested in the other services that Tableau provides which allow other people in our office to use it; we really need that collaborative piece.  We have a couple of people in annual giving that are data heavy; they need a tool where they can segment and look at trends to forecast.

Rodney: On a closing note, if there are people who are in higher education who want to transition into healthcare Prospect Research & Management, what would you suggest to them?

Viviana: Learn about HIPPA regulations, that's very important.  Also learn about "grateful patient" strategies--there are so many out there.  Also, the world of research is changing; when I went to the APRA conference, I paid attention every time they talked about analytics.  Fundraisers and executives are always expecting somebody to do data analytics; that is business intelligence work. It requires a certain amount of database skills.  You have to go beyond the Excel spreadsheet and learn how data tables relate to each other.  Don't be afraid of Microsoft Access...make the leap!

Rodney:  Yes, I totally agree!  It was a huge leap for me!

Viviana: Also, for researchers, learn how to write great, concise briefs for when your executive people go on visits.  Know what THEY need to know; figure out what types of information is most helpful for each development officer.  Every fundraiser has their own way of connecting.

Rodney: Well, thank you so much Viviana, for this great information!  I look forward to your presentation at the upcoming APRA-IL Basic Skills Workshop.

Don't forget to register for the APRA-IL Basic Skills Workshop on Friday June 6, 2014!  Click HERE to register!

Written by Elisa Shoenberger:

In early April, APRA Illinois held its Spring Educational Event:  “Financial Industry Overview and Happy Hour” at two locations: the University of Chicago and Lewis University. The event was composed of a lecture, webinar, and followed by a happy hour. The event was a big hit. Over 30 prospect development professionals and librarians from all over Illinois came out to the events.

I attended the event held at the University of Chicago and had a great time!

The first session was “Initial Public Offerings: The Big Payday” by Catherine Cefalu, Senior Research Analyst at the University of Chicago. This was a presentation that she gave at the 2013 APRA International conference in Baltimore, Maryland. In her talk, she did a wonderful job of explaining how and why a private company would go public and what it means for Prospect Research. I will note some highlights but I highly recommend checking out the actual talk in the future.

Ms. Cefalu stressed that Research needs to be conscious of  IPO events coming up for its donor base for several reasons. First, an IPO is a liquidity event for a donor, which would make the donor better positioned to make a gift. Second, it’s a company event which means that it will generate a lot of publicity for the company. Third, it’s a transparent event so there will required public disclosures. This is particularly great for Research since you will get a view into the finances of the company and may learn about the financial impact for your donor. Fourth, an IPO is a huge life event for the donor so it’s good to be aware that it is happening. Fifth, it may impact when a donor will give a gift. Ideally, a donor may give a gift after his or her company has gone public.

The second session was a webinar titled “Money Businesses: A Capitalist Primer” by Valerie Anastasio, Senior Advancement Officer of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. In her talk, she focused on the Financial Industry as a whole, and urged Prospect Research to take a closer look at it since it has such major gift potential for nonprofits. First, the financial industry’s share of the GDP was 8% in 2011. The combined assets of the top 5 US banks were $7.8 trillion as of December 2012. Finally, private equity firms raised $1.3 trillion in the past 5 years. She explained various revenue streams for individuals working in the Financial Industry, which included commissions on trades, fees (transactions, administration, overhead), interest on loans, incentive fees (percent of profit), and prosperity trading.

Compensation can be quite impressive for investment service companies. However, Ms. Anastasio made the point that researchers should also look at individuals working in related industries like the legal field and information technology, because these industries are crucial in the success of the financial industry. For the full presentation, you should definitely check it out at ShareTraining.

In Hyde Park, after these two wonderful presentations, participants headed out to Mellow Yellow, a local restaurant, for some networking. What a day of financial industry learning! I’m looking forward to our APRA-IL Basic Skills Workshop in June and our APRA- IL Fall Conference in October!

Written by Elisa Shoenberger, Loyola University Chicago

When Prospect Management and Research encounter complex situations of wealth at work, my colleagues and I constantly comment, “Wouldn’t it be great if we could sit down with someone who’s an expert and ask them?” It happens in discussions of patents, compensation at big law firms, royalties from books and other media, and more. In this series, I will do just that: I am going to seek out and talk to people or attend lectures on these topics and report back to you my findings as they are related to Prospect Management and Research.  For this edition, I attended a February 2014 lecture on copyright law at Harold Washington College by Michael Graham, IP Attorney and Adjunct Professor at DePaul University.

 

Before we delve into the particulars of copyright law and what it means for Prospect Research, a copyright should be distinguished from other intellectual property protections: patents and trademarks. According to the US Patent and Trademark office, patents are “a limited duration property right relating to an invention, granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in exchange for public disclosure of the invention.”[i] On the other hand, a trademark is “a word, phrase, symbol, and/or design that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.”[ii]A copyright “protects works of original authorship, such as writings, music, and works of art that have been expressed in a tangible medium.”[iii] In other words, copyright protects the ways in which ideas are expressed, not the ideas themselves.

 

Protecting authorship through copyright originates in the U.S. Constitution: “The Congress shall have Power...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”[iv] Copyright is about the promotion of the progress of arts and sciences. The Constitution explicitly provides that copyright is limited in duration. However, during that period of time, the right is exclusive for its owner, creating a kind of monopoly. Additionally, as Professor Graham notes, there is no mention of profits in the Constitution with respect to a copyright. Which begs the question again, of how copyright rights impact one’s wealth?

 

So what exactly can be copyrighted and what does it mean to hold a copyright? According to Professor Graham, copyright covers “original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression.” The following are some types of works subject to copyright protection: non-dramatic literary works, musical works (words and music), pictorial, graphical and sculptural work, computer program, dramatic works, and architectural works. Some items that are excluded from copyright are: ideas, historical facts, names, titles, short phrases and slogans, blank forms, and clothing.

 

A copyright is actually not a single right, but a bundle of rights. A copyright owner has the right to:

1.      Reproduce the work

2.      Create derivative works (like allowing a book to become a movie)

3.      Perform the work publicly

4.      Display the work publicly

5.      License or transfer ownership (with a written agreement signed by the owner)

6.      “[C]laim paternity and prevent mutilation of visual arts.”[v]

 

Over the past half century, the duration that copyright is held has been extended, thanks in part to certain corporate interests including Disney. Originally, copyrights lasted 42 years with renewal. However, now for works created after January 1, 1978, “copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first.”[vi] If the work was created prior to 1978, it gets much more complicated. As a consequence of these copyright extensions, older, previously public domain material has suddenly become covered by copyright.

 

For creators of potentially copyrightable material, registration of the copyright may be worth consideration. Prior to the 1976, registration of the copyright was required or the material was considered in the public domain. After 1976, registration was not required. Registration is fairly easy and inexpensive. You can register a copyright online for $45 with the US Copyright office.

 

Though registration of the copyright is no longer required, there are special rights granted to the copyright owner if they register it before an infringement occurs. If you register before infringement and successfully win a case against infringement, the Copyright Act provides that a court may order the opposing party liable for your legal fees. And legal fees can be considerable: a simple case can cost $500,000 while even cases that only get to the discovery phase can cost upwards of $100,000. These cases can be more expensive than the value of the copyrighted material itself. Moreover, while it is hard to establish how much is lost with infringement, a court can award statutory damages if the copyright owner has registered.

 

In this age of the internet, fair use has become a front and center copyright issue. Fair use is based on the idea that there are certain things people should be allowed to use even copyrighted works if it promotes the progress of arts and sciences as provided in the US Constitution. Fair use depends on several factors, such as how much of the new work uses the old, what is the purpose of the new work, and whether the new work transform the older one into a new work.  However, air use is really only defined by the judge making the ruling.

 

One notable trend in copyright is the issue that there is now more of an emphasis on copyright proprietors (companies) than copyright creators. You may have heard news coverage of “copyright trolls,” disreputable, practically anonymous companies that go after creators in order to make money through litigation. You can read more about it at EEF. https://www.eff.org/issues/copyright-trolls

 

However, this issue extends beyond copyright trolls. Major corporations are battling over copyrights between one another and individuals, and even estates litigate over copyright. For instance, the Marvin Gaye estate is battling Robin Thicke over copyright infringement of Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give it Up.”[vii] The estate alleges that Robin Thicke infringed Gaye’s songs with his summer hit “Blurred Lines” and other works. The case is still pending between the Gaye estate and Robin Thicke.

 

So what does this mean for Prospect Management and Research? Remember that the copyright is intended to promote the progress of arts and sciences, not necessarily to generate a profit. Copyright protect the expression of many ideas, not the idea itself. There are many rights associated with copyrights including the right to copy and license it to other people. Registration is optional but gives copyright owners special rights if there are infringement lawsuits. Fair use is a tricky field that will continue into the future.

 

Most importantly, holding a copyright may not necessarily impact your wealth. Most copyrights are often not worth as much as it costs to take infringers to court. As noted before, a simple case could cost $500,000. And that’s if all goes well. Some copyrights maybe worth fighting for, such as Harry Potter books, while others may be more trouble and expense to defend like a Facebook profile photo. On the other hand, due to the high legal fees, IP and patent attorneys may be worth looking at in your constituency for purposes of Major Gift research.

 

With this emphasis on copyright proprietors, it may also be worth looking at content owning companies, like Disney, who would hold many copyrights or families that may hold valuable copyrights. Those companies may profit extensively from the licensing of their copyright rights and may be worth the time for your organization to investigate their corporate giving or company foundations. Moreover, the people within the company may be Major Gift leads.

 

And keep an eye out for estates that may hold valuable copyrights. If you have famous singers, authors, and other copyright creators in your database, you may want to look a little harder at their families because “their copyright rights last at least 70 years after the death of the authors and may remain valuable property rights for longer than other assets.”[viii]

 

That’s all for now!

 - Elisa

Written by Joey Cherdarchuk | Director at Darkhorse Analytics