Jump to content

"...use of tape recorders is strictly prohibited..."

Rate this topic


smkranz

Recommended Posts

The latest one of my kids' conservatory performances is now posted to my gallery. It's a short excerpt from a much longer concert:

http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?act=m...si&img=3732

I have noticed on the programs at this particular school, the following admonition:

"The use of cameras and tape recorders during performances is strictly prohibited."

This naturally brings a smile to my face because...well, I don't use a tape recorder :P . I know perfectly well what they mean to say is that making a recording of the performance is prohibited, and I suppose their language is probably just an artifact from days gone by.

Not that it would matter if they got the nomenclature right...I would record my kids' concerts no matter where they performed or what the rules were. I pay (and pay...and pay...) a ton of money to their schools so I have long ago rationalized my "illegal" recording of their concerts. If the schools were to record the concerts themsevles and make them available to students and parents, I'd be perfectly fine with that. But they don't (I'm sure the copyright problems would be way bad), so I'm left to my own devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have long ago rationalized my "illegal" recording of their concerts. If the schools were to record the concerts themsevles and make them available to students and parents, I'd be perfectly fine with that. But they don't (I'm sure the copyright problems would be way bad), so I'm left to my own devices.

The copyright police won't be at your door.

Pre-20th Century classical music like Louis Spohr (1784-1859) doesn't have copyright problems. The music is all in the public domain. That's why you hear classical music in many cheapo advertisements--they don't have to pay anyone to use it.

---------------------------------

from Project Gutenberg:

United States Public Domain and Copyright Rules

Works first published before January 1, 1923 with proper copyright notice entered the public domain no later than 75 years from the date copyright was first secured. Hence, all works whose copyrights were secured before 1923 are now in the public domain.

Works published from 1923-1977 retain copyright for 95 years.

Works first created on or after January 1, 1978 enter the public domain 70 years after the death of the author if the author is a natural person.

Works first created on or after January 1, 1978 which are created by a corporate author enter the public domain 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation whichever occurs first.

---------------------------------

And why, you ask, do corporations get the extra time? Because Disney Corporation freaked out when it realized Mickey Mouse was headed for the public domain, and Sonny Bono pushed the Copyright Term Extension Act through Congress. And the beat goes on....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The copyright police won't be at your door.

Pre-20th Century classical music like Louis Spohr (1784-1859) doesn't have copyright problems. The music is all in the public domain. That's why you hear classical music in many cheapo advertisements--they don't have to pay anyone to use it.

I'm not too concerned about anyone coming after me, though these ensembles also do perform more modern pieces which are still protected by the original copyright. But there is the issue of "derivative works" which would allow copyright protection to, say, a new arrangement of a work in the public domain. I have also been admonished that it applies to, say, a restored and enhanced print of an old public domain film.

Copyright Protection in a Derivative Work

The copyright in a derivative work covers only the additions, changes, or other new material appearing for the first time in the work. It does not extend to any preexisting material and does not imply a copyright in that material.

One cannot extend the length of protection for a copyrighted work by creating a derivative work. A work that has fallen in the public domain, that is, a work that is no longer protected by copyright, may be used for a derivative work, but the copyright in the derivative work will not restore the copyright of the public domain material. Neither will it prevent anyone else from using the same public domain work for another derivative work.

Examples of Derivative Works

The following examples show some of the many different types of derivative works:

...
  • Words and musical arrangement (arrangement is based on a piece by Bach)
  • Musical arrangement (based on a work by Bach)

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html

And why, you ask, do corporations get the extra time? Because Disney Corporation freaked out when it realized Mickey Mouse was headed for the public domain, and Sonny Bono pushed the Copyright Term Extension Act through Congress. And the beat goes on....

...and then he hit a tree :o ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ever there was a case for Fair Use to come into play this is it. You aren't trying to make money from your recording so you can record it legally. It is a very likely example of a improved version of the original so that too allows you to record. Fair Use was created just for such occasions. Your only concern is with the people presenting the program claiming they have a copyright to it. They would have a very hard time proving they have a copyright over something a minor child played. Record away. You have nothing to fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...