Re: [ARSCLIST] Some YouTube stuff that may be of interst

["Paul T. Jackson" <research@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Digital copies on the Internet are still published copies and all 
copyright code and case law applies...whether home video or just sound 
recordings.
Generally there are always copyright issues with 
publishing/re-publishing someone else's material in digital format, 
whether it was previously written, painted, photographed, or recorded in 
audio or video. [I haven't taken time to check exact dates] Blogs are 
being watched and litigated for infringement, although discussion lists 
seem to have escaped much scrutiny, although are just as culpable.
States have certain laws that vary from Federal Law and may apply in 
this instance. Many of these are still applicable and enumerated in 
Barbara Ringer's (former Copyright Registrar) Legislative Studies 26-28 
"Unauthorized duplication of sound recordings" which includes 
information on architectural and choreographic works "re-publishing."
While recording a piece of music, one is obliged to get a mandatory 
mechanical license from the music owner (via the Harry Fox 
Office/Agency)...but that was the situation wherein you or a group was 
doing the recording of music of other composers for distribution...not 
making a copy of someone else's recording, for which there was no 
copyright until ca. 1978 (1972)...except in the music...and other things 
apply depending on whether this was for personal use, profit, or wide 
distribution. Performance copyright came in about the same time, perhaps 
a bit later, and any recorded performance was also copyrighted in a 
recording.
Like the Copyright Clearance Center for articles and publications, the 
Fox Agency doesn't handle every song or music generated, so if it is not 
listed in their song file, then one needs to locate the (c) owner.
There are a number of guideline books regarding music and recordings as 
well as print material...some are useful, some are reiterations of the 
code itself which isn't always helpful in interpreting consequences of 
certain actions taken...only case law generally helps in this area, and 
I've seen little if anything, that covers situational actions and 
consequences, although Ringer's book did some of this, citing case law.
[DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer, but a former music publisher's 
librarian/information manager, an author, and for nine years, a law 
librarian involved with criminal law research...sometimes involving 
copyrights and patents infringements.]


 Trescott Research – Paul T. Jackson


   Information & Library Development


   26301 SE 424^th St., Enumclaw, WA 98022

http://www.trescottresearch.com <http://www.trescottresearch.com/>



Bertram Lyons wrote:
> Does the fact that this is a home video alter the issues of copyright? If he were to do the same thing (i.e. digitize his 78 collection) and publish it online as an audio database with full sound files (instead of home video), would he be under any sort of copyright violation with the particular labels and songwriters associated with said recordings?
>
> Just curious -
>
> Bertram
>
>
>   
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [ARSCLIST] Some YouTube stuff that may be of interst
> > From: Roger and Allison Kulp <thorenstd124@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri, February 02, 2007 10:06 pm
> > To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=78MAN&page=1
> >
> > I will admit the guy has a lousy player,and some of his records aren't the best shape.
> > I have a better condition "Move It !" 78 myself,but it is interesting,
> >                                                   Roger
> >
> >
> > "If you're not on somebody's watchlist,you're not doing your job"
> >
> >                           Dave Von Kleist
> >  
> > ---------------------------------
> > Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast 
> >  with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut.
> >     
>
>