Copyright: Questions

From SeltzerWiki
Revision as of 18:07, 19 January 2007 by WendySeltzer (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Have a question or comment? Add it here.

Class 2 Question Regarding today's discussion on Fixation Challenges and Recording of Stand Up Improvisations, would a security camera recording the stand up routine not for the material but for protection be considered a fixation in terms of affording copyright? The stand up comedian (or other author) is aware of the security camera on the premises and has given authorization for the camera to take video/audio images of his improvisation; therefore, does the purpose of the recording matter in affording copyright?

Response:

Fun question. We start with the statutes. Sec. 102 "Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression..." and the definitions in sec. 101: "A work is 'fixed' in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration...."

As you note, a key is "by or under the authority of the author." It would likely be up for argument whether the performer's awareness of the camera implicitly authorized the fixation for copyright purposes. If he did, note that he and not the security camera operator would be the "author" of the resulting copyrighted work. If he didn't, there's no copyright at all. If he authorized the taping, and didn't sign away any rights, do you think he can he stop police from copying the security camera footage to investigate a theft discovered after the performance?