|
|
Post by johnforbes on Dec 28, 2014 7:25:03 GMT
As far as I can tell, the copyright law of the UK, states that the copyright in a broadcast program ends 50 years from the end of the year in which it is broadcast.
IF, and I repeat, that's a big IF, Morris has found other missing eps, would that mean he could get them restored and sold as dvd's, downloadable content etc, without paying a penny to the BBC ? If so, it may be a reason why no other missing eps have been handed over if he indeed has any still in his possession.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Dec 28, 2014 9:46:15 GMT
No. Regardless of copyright law, Doctor Who, the TARDIS, and various other things associated with the series are still BBC trademarks and could not be commercially exploited without the BBC's permission.
|
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Dec 29, 2014 7:06:45 GMT
That's right Tony. The cans are over that legal threshold, but certain materials on the film are not ! Actors permission not needed, Though any music might well need clearance........
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Dec 29, 2014 8:12:58 GMT
That's right Tony. The cans are over that legal threshold, but certain materials on the film are not ! Actors permission not needed, Though any music might well need clearance........ The copyright expiry date for music is 70 years, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Dec 29, 2014 9:34:15 GMT
That's right Tony. The cans are over that legal threshold, but certain materials on the film are not ! Actors permission not needed, Though any music might well need clearance........ The copyright expiry date for music is 70 years, isn't it? I know spearhead dvd had problems with a Fleetwood Mac track. Not sure on length ? |
|
|
|
Post by Simon Jailler on Dec 29, 2014 16:28:36 GMT
Would the same issue also apply to the Doctor Who theme music and any incidental music (not pop music such as Procol Harum in Ambassadors when transmitted or the Beatles in Ep 1 Evil of the Daleks, playing on a radio in the cafe) ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Dec 29, 2014 18:12:44 GMT
Would the same issue also apply to the Doctor Who theme music and any incidental music (not pop music such as Procol Harum in Ambassadors when transmitted or the Beatles in Ep 1 Evil of the Daleks, playing on a radio in the cafe) ? Apparently, the 1996 TV Movie ran into problems when the American producers learned that the BBC didn't actually own the rights to the Ron Grainer theme, Warner/Chappel Music did. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Dec 30, 2014 2:44:19 GMT
No. Regardless of copyright law, Doctor Who, the TARDIS, and various other things associated with the series are still BBC trademarks and could not be commercially exploited without the BBC's permission. Oughtn't this to be stickied into an FAQ at the top of the Forum? Maybe we could have a poll for such things, generate a list of the most likely contenders?  |
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Dec 30, 2014 9:37:44 GMT
No. Regardless of copyright law, Doctor Who, the TARDIS, and various other things associated with the series are still BBC trademarks and could not be commercially exploited without the BBC's permission. Oughtn't this to be stickied into an FAQ at the top of the Forum? Maybe we could have a poll for such things, generate a list of the most likely contenders? As someone who's asked some of those FAQs in his turn,I'd say "Yes". |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Dec 30, 2014 9:44:34 GMT
Oughtn't this to be stickied into an FAQ at the top of the Forum? Maybe we could have a poll for such things, generate a list of the most likely contenders? As someone who's asked some of those FAQs in his turn,I'd say "Yes". As have we all at various points John, I bet! Heck, I bet this idea to have a stickied FAQ list at the front is one, too!  Reminds me of this, but maybe it's the current Brisbane heatwave... TEGAN: Will it tell us how to fly the Tardis? NYSSA: I'm sure that's in here somewhere, once we find the index file. TEGAN: How do we find the index file? Of course, if we had an index file, we could look it up in the index file, under index file. What am I saying? I'm talking nonsense. NYSSA: Recursion isn't nonsense. TEGAN: Eh? NYSSA: That's an example of recursion, when procedures fold back on themselves. If you had an index file, you could look it up in the index file. TEGAN: If. My Dad used to say that if was the most powerful word in the English language. NYSSA: Recursion's a powerful mathematical concept, but I don't see how it can help us now. TEGAN: If. I F! Stands for index file!  |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Biggs on Jan 1, 2015 0:26:37 GMT
I was wondering this myself. It depends on what country you are in as well. In NZ for example the limit is 50 years for film and sound recordings as well as broadcasts.
I doubt the trademarks would prevent you selling copies, but they would impact on how you could market those copies. Not sure if there is much case law around this scenario though.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmybrown82 on Jan 1, 2015 0:50:46 GMT
so when does Dr Who become public domain anyway (under british law). like i have said (other forum i belong to), all these copyright laws need to be change to something that is reasonable (up to 120 years in the USA) i would make it (would grandfather it in) 50 years plus 1 25 year renewal (must request it in the 49 year of copyright). if it is not renewed, its becomes public domain. who in 2065 (as an example) going to remember justin bieber.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Jan 1, 2015 9:08:15 GMT
so when does Dr Who become public domain anyway (under british law). like i have said (other forum i belong to), all these copyright laws need to be change to something that is reasonable (up to 120 years in the USA) i would make it (would grandfather it in) 50 years plus 1 25 year renewal (must request it in the 49 year of copyright). if it is not renewed, its becomes public domain. who in 2065 (as an example) going to remember justin bieber. So long as the BBC continue to maintain Doctor Who as a trade mark, it will remain illegal for anyone to use the Doctor Who brand name or any of its associated trade marks without their permission. And since it's one of their most profitable brands, they're unlikely ever to let that trade mark lapse. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Jan 1, 2015 9:56:37 GMT
"Progfitable", Tony? How cromulent! |
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 1, 2015 12:10:56 GMT
Makes loads of WONGA Tony |
|
