Re: [ARSCLIST] Brunswick Records rights/Universal

[Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>]

steven c wrote:

> Not being a lawyer, I can't say for sure...but I suspect it was because
> the recordings were originally cut in the UK, and if over 50 years old
> were p.d. in that country. I don't know enough about international
> copyright law to say whether or not that makes them p.d. in the US
> as well...but, as I understand it, the basis for the suit was that
> EMI had reissued the same material (taken from recordings in their
> own archive)...?

Per the CLIR paper, whether the recording is PD in its country of origin 
is not altogether irrelevant, but copyright may be restored (which 
appears to be a passive verb in this case) even if it does not apply 
where created, published, or darn near anything else.

I strongly urge anyone addressing these questions to spend some time 
with CLIR 135; it may be depressing, but it comes close to mandatory 
reading - and it is nearly readable by mere human beings!

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/