In reference to this entire string and not just the last entry, it is interesting on this (and almost all the lists to which I subscribe) how these things go through stages. First there is a question or statement (information). Then there is a reply (information). Then there are multiple replies giving different answers and/or points of view (also information). Information and sharing is why I subscribe to all of my lists, and I assume it is the same for other subscribers. At this point, I am still following the string. However, at some point, people begin to argue their point versus another respondent's point. This is when we have left information for difference of opinion and the debate of the validity of a given point. When the wife and I have a disagreement out in public, we usually express separate points of view. However, when we come to the argument stage supporting our own point and showing why the other's point is not valid, we take it private -- out of earshot of others, to the car, or home. While I am not a person who makes list rules, I think that when a string gets to the argument stage (prolonging far beyond the interest level of most people other than the main posters arguing), it might make sense to take it private. You know the old saying about the futility of trying to change someone's point of view on religion and politics. It likely also applies to the positions people take in many list arguments. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Asher" <pasher@ee.net> To: <COPYRIGHT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [COPYRIGHT] Distribution, a right of the copyright holder / was "Who owns... > At 03:07 AM 4/15/2006, you wrote: >>Getting back to the original question at hand...My point is that he >>doesn't >>hold the right to distribution once he agrees to the recording--he's given >>the right away to the company who does the reocording. No company would >>agree >>to record a presentation if it wasn't for the specific purpose of having >>the >>right to distribute/sell it. The only way the lecturer would possess the >>right to distribute his lecture is if he recorded it himself. Remember >>that the >>mere presentation of a live lecture doesn't create a copyright. Placing >>that >>lecture/content into a fixed medium creates the copyright--therefore, >>before >>the recording in many cases there would be no copyrighted content for >>anyone >>to possess. > > Joan, > > Cliff is correct. Unless the right to distribution was granted > exclusively (which must be in writing) the speaker/author still retains > the right to distribute in other ways and/or to other markets. The > copyright in an audio recording of an extemporaneous speech is separate > and apart from the copyright iin the speech itself. The speaker is the > author of the words. The person making the recording is the author of the > recording. > > 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." > > Pat > > > > > ==== COPYRIGHT Mailing List ==== > LATIN-WORDS-L is a mailing list for anyone with a genealogical or > historical interest in deciphering and interpreting written documents in > Latin from earliest to most recent 20th Century times, and discussing old > Latin words, phrases, names, abbreviations and antique jargon. To > subscribe, send subscribe to mailto:LATIN-WORDS-L-request@rootsweb.com > (Mail Mode) or mailto:LATIN-WORDS-D-request@rootsweb.com (Digest Mode) > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > >