Why is this copyright?

mr ploppy · 10-09-2010, 03:04 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardia...reatinterviews

(contains swearing).

At the bottom it says "Reprinted by permission of Fremantle Media"

It wasn't a scripted TV show, just a short interview. If there was any copyright to claim, wouldn't it belong to the people who spoke those words, not some TV company?

pholy · 10-09-2010, 06:15 PM

IANAL, but I think this is similar to works for hire - whoever pays for the recoding (staff, equipment, etc) gets to hold the copy rights. Unless it is otherwise agreed ahead of time, of course (I think).

Steven Lake · 10-09-2010, 06:58 PM

Well, it works along the same lines as music. While the song itself may be public domain, individual performances of it can be copyrighted. In some cases blanket copyrights can be applied to works by a given group or company. IE, if they produce something, it's automatically covered under copyright, so anything derived from that performance is protected by the copyright, which then requires permission to be granted in order to use it. Yeah, our copyright system is royally boned, but nobody seems interested in fixing it since the current system allows people to bone one another and make insane amounts of cash in the process. It also favors those with the most money. Now if you were to make it prohibitively expensive to maintain the current system, especially by those in the upper level, things would change nearly overnight. But alas, there's nothing out there anymore, save for a total reset of the system (which will happen when hell freezes over), that will fix these issues. So yeah, we're stuck with retarded stuff like this.

Nate the great · 10-09-2010, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardia...reatinterviews

(contains swearing).

At the bottom it says "Reprinted by permission of Fremantle Media"

It wasn't a scripted TV show, just a short interview. If there was any copyright to claim, wouldn't it belong to the people who spoke those words, not some TV company?

The copyright belongs to whoever actually records it, not the subject of the recording.

mr ploppy · 10-10-2010, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate the great

The copyright belongs to whoever actually records it, not the subject of the recording.

So if you go on a chat show or do an interview, you lose the rights to anything you say to the company that is recording it? That doesn't seem right to me. I've seen people go on different chat shows and say the exact same things.

HarryT · 10-10-2010, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

So if you go on a chat show or do an interview, you lose the rights to anything you say to the company that is recording it? That doesn't seem right to me. I've seen people go on different chat shows and say the exact same things.

It's a "performance" copyright, related to your actually saying the words. You can say the same thing twice, but each will have its own separate copyright.

mr ploppy · 10-10-2010, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's a "performance" copyright, related to your actually saying the words. You can say the same thing twice, but each will have its own separate copyright.

And none of those copyrights would be held by the person speaking the words? How does it work with historical speeches, fight them on the beaches and all that?

10-09-2010, 03:04 PM	#1
mr ploppy Feral Underclass Posts: 3,622 Karma: 26821535 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Yorkshire, tha noz Device: 2nd hand paperback	Why is this copyright? http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardia...reatinterviews (contains swearing). At the bottom it says "Reprinted by permission of Fremantle Media" It wasn't a scripted TV show, just a short interview. If there was any copyright to claim, wouldn't it belong to the people who spoke those words, not some TV company?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What copyright do you use?	Moejoe	Writers' Corner	4	10-01-2009 10:16 AM
Copyright?	fishcube	LRF	5	09-09-2009 06:39 AM
In Copyright? - Copyright Renewal Database launched	Alexander Turcic	News	26	07-09-2008 09:36 AM
Government US Copyright Office: Report on Orphan Works. US Copyright Office. PDF	Nate the great	Other Books	0	01-03-2008 07:16 PM

10-09-2010, 06:15 PM	#2
pholy Booklegger Posts: 1,801 Karma: 7999816 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Device: BeBook(1 & 2010), PEZ, PRS-505, Kobo BT, PRS-T1, Playbook, Kobo Touch	IANAL, but I think this is similar to works for hire - whoever pays for the recoding (staff, equipment, etc) gets to hold the copy rights. Unless it is otherwise agreed ahead of time, of course (I think).

10-09-2010, 06:58 PM	#3
Steven Lake Sci-Fi Author Posts: 1,158 Karma: 14743509 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Michigan Device: PC (Calibre)	Well, it works along the same lines as music. While the song itself may be public domain, individual performances of it can be copyrighted. In some cases blanket copyrights can be applied to works by a given group or company. IE, if they produce something, it's automatically covered under copyright, so anything derived from that performance is protected by the copyright, which then requires permission to be granted in order to use it. Yeah, our copyright system is royally boned, but nobody seems interested in fixing it since the current system allows people to bone one another and make insane amounts of cash in the process. It also favors those with the most money. Now if you were to make it prohibitively expensive to maintain the current system, especially by those in the upper level, things would change nearly overnight. But alas, there's nothing out there anymore, save for a total reset of the system (which will happen when hell freezes over), that will fix these issues. So yeah, we're stuck with retarded stuff like this.