Re: [d@DCC] Movie copyright duration

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
To: "General Copyright Discussions \(questions, organizing, etc\)" <discuss (at) list.digital-copyright.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:57:16 -0400
References: <mailman.1.1184774402.20251.discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca> <d004dec23477.469ddbc1@shaw.ca> <469E419C.4080809@mail.mcgill.ca>

Jonathan Addleman wrote:
> I think that then the default life + 50 applies for any feature film.
> I'd be very happy to hear otherwise though, since publication date makes
> much more sense for movies, IMHO.

   Removing the life+ part makes sense for all copyright.  For some 
things date of making (recordings of various types, including 
photography) and date of authorized publication for other types of works.

   Unfortunately we have an uphill battle against antiquated treaties 
written pre-computer that allege that registration is complex and life+ 
has legitimacy.


   I wish I had an easy answer to your question.  Everything I've read 
suggests that this is yet another messy area.  Typical of 
backward-facing Canadian Copyright policy, clarifying and simplifying 
important things such as the cultural recycling date of works isn't seen 
as a priority by the government!

-- 
  Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
  Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
  rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
  http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/

  "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
   manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
   portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca
http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss