APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2006-04 > 1145807105


From: "Lynne Darrouzet" <>
Subject: RE: [APG] Use of conference CDs: No sympathy
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 10:45:05 -0500
In-Reply-To: <37f.18c2361.317ce97c@aol.com>


The copyright act also requires originality on the part of the author to
have a copyright. I fail to see the originality in recording someone else's
extemporaneous remarks.

And even if you are the copyright owner, do you have the right to sell or
publish my voice and image without my permission? Even if I have the
copyright ownership of a client report, do I have the right to publish
information about my client without their permission? I think not.

So what I don't understand about this conversation is: why is it so hard to
ask permission? Given the complexity of not only the copyright laws
involved, but privacy laws and who knows what else, why would a small
genealogical society want to take the risk - not only legal risk but
alienation of their colleagues?

Lynne Darrouzet, JD, CG

-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 9:30 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [APG] Use of conference CDs: No sympathy

In a message dated 4/23/2006 4:24:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

Pat(s), Joan, Elizabeth, Ken, Kathleen, Amy, et. al.

I'm amazed that all of us professional researchers have been batting about
with opinions, rather than going to the source for the facts. In this case,

U.S. Copyright law (an "original" record), available at
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ even includes definitions of terms (see
Section 101).
----
Kory-

Pat has already addressed many of the issues you raised so I won't dwell on

those. However, to comment on the above...in the very beginning of this
thread copyright law was cited -- the discussion has then expanded from the

wording in the law.


No question about it the laws are complex and that is what provides
attorneys and courts with work, but most of the issues you have raised have
already
been addressed in various court cases that Pat has cited. Where my problem

lies with your quotes from the law is in your interpretation...


<< the law defines a public performance in terms that would make a
small genealogical gathering (in a home or elsewhere), regardless of
whether
the attendees paid or not, indeed a public performance:

Section 101: To perform or display a work "publicly" means - (1) to PERFORM

or display it at a place open to the public or AT ANY PLACE where a
substantial number of PERSONS OUTSIDE OF A NORMAL CIRCLE OF A FAMILY and
its
social acquaintances IS GATHERED. . . .>>

A small closed gathering of volunteers at a historical society library or
meeting room or in a member's house would not generally constitute meeting
in a
place "open to the public" and would not constitute a "substantial number of

persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social
acquaintances." Your quote above refers to a type of event where a society
would advertise
and allow disparate members of society to attend whether for a fee or
without charge. That is not the type of situation being discussed here. I
don't
know about you--I don't randomly open my home to strangers and historical
societies frequently hold closed meetings for instructional purposes among
their
volunteers.


<<No, the copyright does NOT rest with the recorder of a lecture. It rests
with the creator:>>

Pat has already addressed your misunderstanding of this claim--and we've
also discussed it previously in this thread. If you didn't create it, you
can't
copyright it--unless the lecturer also is the one who made the recording,
he
doesn't hold copyright to the recording.

<<And, please don't call it a "work made for hire" unless there is a
specific
contract to that point:>>

No one in this thread has discussed a work made for hire--that is something

different entirely.

I guess where this leaves us, since many who have commented in this thread
seem to want to reference tiny sections of copyright law out of context and

bend them to support a previously held or desired opinon--is that we need to
ask
whether anyone on the list or anyone they know has ever successfully
brought
suit to support these views that don't appear to be supported in copyright
law or case law precedents.

Joan


==== APG Mailing List ====
The Association of Professional Genealogists
http://www.apgen.org/publications/apg-l/index.html




This thread: