Copyright Laws

[baz]

Just after typing a reply on the NOBA thread, a thought crossed my mind.

As all of us know, recorded music after 50 years becomes "public domain". For instance, Elvis Presleys' Sun Records recordings have been getting released on many small labels other than BMG who physically own the tapes. Though they may own the tapes, these tracks are now in public domain hence these new cheap compilations.

So, what is the score with archive Television material? If this 50 year ruling applied to NOBA, theoretically anyone could release the 1965 episodes in 2015. I do know BMG and the Presley estate as well as Apple Corps are trying to overturn this ruling so they can keep hold of the copyrights much longer since in the next ten years we could very well see many cheap Elvis and Beatles compilations of their hits which wouldn't make money for the corporations.

I'd be very interested to know then what the law is regarding this with television material.

[John G]

it seems that it works in reverse between Europe and the USA ie.

audio recordings become 'public domain' in Europe after
50 years while visual material does not.
visual material becomes 'public domain' in the USA after
so many years while audio material does not.

This happens when the copyright is neglected, and not renewed .
So you have a situation in the USA where something like
'gone with the wind ' is obviously heavily protected while an obscure film by Judy Garland that every one has forgotten about is now public property. Likewise with TV in the USA if you might have a long running show with hundreds of episodes, (where they have deemed the copyright not worth bothering about on the lacklustre episodes), so they have indeed become public property..

In the UK audio records to go public domain after 50 years if the copyright is neglected, something that appears to have caught some American companies on the hop.
As well as renewing copyright there was a cheap way of getting around this, used by canny operators like David
Bowie , that is if you reissue your material every few years with something different to the original such as
"digitally remastered" you get a fresh new copyright from that date.

[baz]

Thanks very much for that John - most interesting and insightful. It certainly explains why theres many old films available as 3 on 1 DVDs in places like Poundland in Britain.

The new digital remasters copyright certainly caught my curiosity and I wondered if it was so the artistes could eke out their copyrights longer. In effect I guess this means that 50 years after Beatles albums and singles, we will get cheap CDs which could be dubbed from vinyl since the vinyl versions were copyrighted 50 years earlier.

I know the whole copyright issue is a huge minefield and it all gets most confusing. Thanks once more for helping clarify these issues.

[John G]

Thanks Baz but obviously dont take my word for it, as, as you say the whole copyright thing is a minefield.

The "digitally remastered" thing is laughable as obviously they had to digitally remaster it to make it fit on a disc in the first place, and it can mean nothing else at all.

The other term you might come across is "copyright control" . This usually means the artist has not been paid his royalities for his work on the disc...because nobody can find him, but its there if he turns up..

[Peter Chadwick]

The last thing I read about music copyright was that the fifty year period had been extended ''much to the relief of record business giants like EMI, who feared for their precious Beatles catalogue''. Unfortunately, the article didn't go into much more detail than that, but I read it recently in (I think) The Sunday Post, a Scottish newspaper.

[Robbie]

Apparently the John Lennon sketches from NOBA were not included in the Best Of video because Yoko Ono wouldn't allow their use.That might also explain why BBC4 pulled their planned showing of NOBA last year,if it was either the very first show or the 1966 christmas special they were planning on showing.How does this work?Surely it's BBC copyright.Lennon would have recieved a fee for his appearance and future repeat fees.But then it's obviously more complicated than that.

[H Hartley]

True but musical performances are different to guest performances. In the case of John Lennon as a guest, his contract would have probably entitled to one premier showing and two repeat showings, after that he would have to be asked permission. . This another reason why videos got wiped as they knew that once a programme had been repeated it would need loads of negations to show it again.
Unless of course you were ITC , who tied up everything
nicely and benefited all concerned.

[lfbarfe]

Peter said:

The last thing I read about music copyright was that the fifty year period had been extended ''much to the relief of record business giants like EMI, who feared for their precious Beatles catalogue''. Unfortunately, the article didn't go into much more detail than that, but I read it recently in (I think) The Sunday Post, a Scottish newspaper.

It hasn't gone through. Yet. However, creative industries minister James Purnell is sounding worryingly sympathetic to the record companies. Let's hope he sees sense, and isn't bought off by the prospect of glad-handing backstage at a Coldplay gig...

[Barry Hodge]

H said:

True but musical performances are different to guest performances. In the case of John Lennon as a guest, his contract would have probably entitled to one premier showing and two repeat showings, after that he would have to be asked permission...

Was much of Lennon's appearance relegated to readings from his book(s) - as seen in the Anthology and, IIRC, the Rock N Roll Years? (I know there was also the toilet attendant skit.) Would such quotes - as well as "the John Lennon name and likeness" (as displayed at the end of the Anthology progs) - need to be renegociated for rpt performance? Presumably Ono owns the books too.

[Monty Banks]

Robbie said:

Apparently the John Lennon sketches from NOBA were not included in the Best Of video because Yoko Ono wouldn't allow their use.That might also explain why BBC4 pulled their planned showing of NOBA last year,if it was either the very first show or the 1966 christmas special they were planning on showing.

Would that be the reason why a planned repeat of NOBA was pulled at the last minute from the 1986 TV50 repeat season and replaced with a 1962 Points Of View and an episode of The Likely Lads?

[pete]

so does that mean that TOTP could START to eventually be released on DVD's after 2014 ??

[John Williams]

Monty said:

Robbie said:

Apparently the John Lennon sketches from NOBA were not included in the Best Of video because Yoko Ono wouldn't allow their use.That might also explain why BBC4 pulled their planned showing of NOBA last year,if it was either the very first show or the 1966 christmas special they were planning on showing.

Would that be the reason why a planned repeat of NOBA was pulled at the last minute from the 1986 TV50 repeat season and replaced with a 1962 Points Of View and an episode of The Likely Lads?

Apparently the episode was pulled because Peter Cook took umbridge at the BBC scheduling the repeat without clearing it with him (and others on the show) first. This was reported at the time in Private Eye.