I agree with Pat and Joan about the importance of continuing a discussion until differing opinions are resolved. I specifically asked Pat to comment, but I also said, " I await the comments of other list members." Joan picked a statement about distribution with which she disagreed. She gave her reason(s), then I quoted copyright law to support my position. I think that this is the way the list should work. Most of the members of the list remain in the background, but are here to learn. Misstatements should be corrected on the list rather than privately so that list members don't learn the wrong thing. Continuing with the discussion about distribution rights....... Pat wrote: Stephen Fishman says: "If the speech was given extemporaneously (improvised, not written down in advance) but recorded with the speaker's permission, the author/speaker usually owns the copyright in the speech itself, the same way as if it was written down. But the recording of the speech belongs to the people who recorded it." [For those not familiar with the name, Stephen Fishman is the author of several copyright books.] Notice in the first sentence that Fishman confirms what I had concluded in a previous email; that taping/recording a speech that was not written down (therefore uncopyrightable) will in itself result in the speaker acquiring/owning the copyright of the speech. I don't interpret the second sentence to mean that the recorder owns the copyright to the recording. To me, it says simply that the single copy of the recording is owned by the recorder. That is like a person owning a copy of a book. **I don't think that distribution rights to the recording resides with the recorder. I believe the recorder can only distribute the recording with the permission of the copyright holder of the speech.** This permission can be verbal if it is non-exclusive, but the speaker should determine the intentions of the recorder. Does he/she want to make a few copies and distribute them to some friends, or does the recorder want to make hundreds of copies and sell them? I invite agreement or disagreement with my conclusions in the previous paragraph, especially the part between the asterisks. Cliff Lamere >

At 02:13 PM 4/15/2006, you wrote: >**I don't think that distribution rights to the recording resides with the >recorder. I believe the recorder can only distribute the recording with >the permission of the copyright holder of the speech.** Cliff, Quoting Fishman again, a continuation of the same paragraph (The Copyright Handbook 16/11) "A video, film, or sound recording of a speech is a copyrighted work in its own right, owned by the person who made the work." I read that (assuming the recording of the extemporaneous speech was made with permission) to say that the person who made the recording has the right to distribute his/her recording as part of his/her copyright in the recording, which is separate and apart from the speaker's copyright in the "words". The recorder, however, would not have the right to make and distribute a written transcription of the words, since those words still belong to the speaker. The recorder only owns the sound recording. Clear as mud? Pat