Re: arsclist IP in recordings

[Patrick Feaster <pfeaster@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Paul T. Jackson wrote:

> Unlike the United States' 95-year protection for sound recordings, 

This is a common misperception.  There is no 95-year term connected with
the protection of sound recordings in the United States, since pre-1972
sound recordings are excluded from federal copyright law (except for the
underlying compositions).  Instead, these recordings fall under a bizarre
array of state laws based on a variety of different principles, some of
which end up contradicting each other -- particularly when master
recordings are lost or have changed hands.  So there is no overarching
United States term of protection that's at odds with European law.
Rather, there are some state statutes that could be interpreted as barring
particular imports.  But a state statute that bars European reissues would
also get in the way of interstate commerce.  The "common law copyright"
term in Colorado is 56 years for sound recordings, so a Colorado-based
reissuer would be in much the same legal position as one in Europe.
California, on the other hand, grants equal protection to a recording
whether it's from 1971 or 1891, although in practice nothing nearly that
early has been the subject of conflict, and mp3.com (headquartered in San
Diego) openly uses 1923 as its rule of thumb.  A nationwide standard is
long overdue, and maybe this current situation will result in one, for
better or for worse.

Note that sound recordings made since 1972 ARE subject to the 95-year
copyright  term, which is undoubtedly the reason for the error.  But that
doesn't apply to anything that's expiring in Europe right now and won't
be a REAL issue until 2022.


 - Patrick

-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.