Just A Minute

 
<<<<   7048   >>>>

Re: Missing JAMs

Messages in this topic: 6 View All
kj.naughtonMay 3, 2012
 

 
Hi folks,

I think we have a fairly minor disagreement here. The Berne Convention does not so much harmonise copyright laws; rather it specifies minimum standards. Any country is free to create their own copyright law with different terms to the Berne Convention providing that they offer greater protection.

It's actually the same for most international treaties. Here in the UK we fairly regularly hear examples of EU regulations being implemented into domestic law in the UK in one way (typically a fairly strict way) but differently in other countries (usually a bit less strict). And that usually makes headlines in certain newspapers.

An example in the copyright arena is the USA who have retained the (optional) registration of copyrighted works. The Berne Convention says that copyright is automatic and US law now acknowledges that. But registering copyright is still available and does confer certain advantages above those given in the Convention. That wouldn't be possible if one views the Berne Convention as harmonising laws; it is possible if one views it as setting minimum standards.

My point wasn't to argue whether a particular work is or isn't copyright or whether exceptions are made for non-commercial use or not - I have no view on that. All I am saying is that copyright law does vary from country to country and people need to understand the law in their own country.

My example of someone selling CDs was intended to illustrate that general point, not to comment on anyone else's arguments. So I accept is isn't relevant to the discussion on JaM recordings but then again it wasn't supposed to be relevant.

If a country defers to the law of the country of origin of the work (as Badger Dance states) then fine. But, again, that's for people in that country to know and understand.

People should make informed decisions based on their own circumstances. I don't think anyone would argue with that. :-)

kJ

--- In just-a-minute@..., Clitheroe Kid <clitheroekid@...> wrote:
>
>
> We are obviously using the example of Australia because 'Just A Minute' is a BBC show, made in the UK, but which is currently being aired in Australia.
>
> Regarding the Berne Convention, I disagree. The Convention harmonises the laws of all signatory nations, in effect, so that the same laws exist in England and in Australia. Signatories to the Convention agree to do this - to change their copyright laws to comply with the provisions of the Convention. It's what signing the Convention treaty is all about.
>
> For example, the UK copyright term is 70 years, now, which the UK changed as required by the Convention. But it was previously 50 years, and in the case of Broadcast Copyright - the copyright in a broadcast - it still is 50 yrs. The Convention is really about enforcement. The two countries have the same copyright laws, those which the Convention requires them to adopt, and this makes enforcement of a copyright claim in Australia straightforward.
>
> A 1967 broadcast of Just A Minute will enjoy copyright as a broadcast for 50 years, i.e. until 2017.
>
> The law in Convention countries does NOT prohibit non-commercial use. But - a big but - an Australian wanting to sell CDs is not what we are discussing. I made the point about file sharing, that it is NOT a sale of the recording. The entire point of the NON-commercial exception is that where no money changes hands, i.e. in a file sharing event, that is NOT a sale of the work/recording. Where the work is given away for free, it is not a commercial use of the work, and there is accordingly no breach of copyright.
>
> The BBC must prove, as required in the Berne Convention, that their copyright has been breached. In a claim by the BBC, they must inevitably fail if they cannot show this. Where there has not been a sale, but merely a gift, the BBC must inevitably fail on this point: for UK law, in compliance with the Convention, only prohibits commercial use - i.e. sale - of a copy, and if the file sharer has not been paid for the copy then commercial use cannot be shown.

 
<<<<   7048   >>>>

Back to the Top