RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

Yes and no....the question is not what the industry does but how the fact can be demonstrated in the courtroom. If I can show I created a work then I own copyright to it (e.g., a manuscript in my own handwriting or the work published with my name on it). If I can show that I have registered it with the LOC then I own copyright to it. There is a certain set of STANDARDIZED legal documentation or public demonstration that shows the validity fo my claim that I own copyright. The transfer of copyright must be in writing so that it can be verified. (Copyright is an intangible so must have a tangible means of verifying transfer).

What do we have for a "master recording". By its nature it IS a recording. How does it differ from a copy? But how do we tell...How does one verify that this copy that is labeled MASTER actually is THE MASTER for the purposes of determining copyright in a court of law. The studios SAY they have the MASTER tapes but how do we verify that. 

The bottom line is that The MASTER copy is really a trade secret and not what you base copyright determination upon.  Illinois has enacted a stupid law, albeit better than Indiana trying to legislate pi 100+ yrs ago.

(Exercise. If I steal a master recording and it goes unnoticed until the statute of limitation runs out do I own copyright. What variations can one do on that?)

"Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 04/17/2003 01:10 PM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>         cc:        <owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>         Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180

You are being quite disingenuous.   
 
The procedures for cutting and using master recordings are
already in place in the industries that make use of them (film,
music, video).  While I do not have the details and can not
answer your questions, I can say that I am fairly certain
that those within the industry have a good idea of just what
the master recording is.

--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 11:06 AM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Cc: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu; owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180


SO I can put MASTER on any copy and it become THE MASTER?

"Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 04/17/2003 08:39 AM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>        cc:                Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180

Actually, I believe that masters _are_ generally labelled as such.

--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:23 AM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Cc: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu; owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180


How do you know it's the master? Or does the master copy have "MASTER COPY" tattooed on the back of it?

And how do you tell it's the master? measure the SNR and say "AH HA...this one has better SNR so it's the master" [neglecting the fact that some tapes degrade faster than others]

"Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 04/16/2003 09:58 AM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>       cc:               Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180

The right is transferred with posession of 
the master recording?

So a duplicating service gets the right
to distribute my work -- and I do not --
because they happen to store masters of my 
works for me?


-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!



> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Schulien [mailto:schulien@speakeasy.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 12:22 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: [dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #180
> 
> 
> "Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org> writes:
>  > Yes, but we're now  under the Berne Convention, so *everything*
>  > is copyrighted.
> 
> All new creative works are copyrighted, but there is a large body of
> pre-Berne works that were published without notice of copyright,
> and immediately entered the public domain without ever having had
> copyright protection.  In particular, a large body of radio 
> and television
> programming falls into this category.  The television programs in
> particular were sold to television stations as 16mm film copies, and
> video copies are available from a number of public-domain 
> media vendors.
> For instance:
> 
> http://www.fesfilms.com/TV.html
> 
> Many of those television programs only exist in the form of surviving
> 16mm prints, the original 16mm negatives and master videotapes having
> been long ago discarded.  However, according to this law, the right to
> control distribution and performance is transferred along with the
> "physical master recording."  Do the owners of the landfills 
> containing
> those negatives and tapes have the right, under Illinois law, 
> to control
> the distribution and performance of those works?  What if 
> those negatives
> or tapes have been incinerated?  Is the use of those works now
> completely illegal?
> 
>