Re: Beatles unauthorized releases

On Wed, Mar 22, 2000, Colin Seeger <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Xiao Jinhong <limabean[_at_]pobox.org.sg> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Colin Seeger <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > In the absence of any copyright or proprietary rights being granted
> > > to a performance (sorry for the apparent oxymoron, but it seems to
> > > be the only way to describe the legislative thinking), the fact
> > > that a recording was made without the artist's or the record
> > > company's consent, is immaterial.
> >
> > Didn't TRIPS (and therefore signatories' implementations of it) change
> > that picture by mandating the protection of performances? Singapore,
> > at least, amended her Copyright Act in 1998 for TRIPS compliance,
> > introducing new "performance rights" aimed at bootlegs.
> >
> > I'm not sure how the transitional provisions deal with to pre-1998
> > performances though.
>
> Absolutely. Most countries have or are in the process of introducing
> "performers' protection" provisions which enable performers to authorise
> recordings (audio and/or visual) of their performances. I protects aun
> unfixed performancem, which is why I don't like to think of it as a true
> copyright-based right, even though most are shoe-horned into Copyrigth
> legislation (e.g the Australian Copyright Act)
>
> I don't know of any which are retrospective in effect, save to the
> extent of giving a cluse of action to performers to enable them to take
> action to prohibit commercial expolitation of any recordings which are
> "unauthorised".

Sorry, I've got a little behind with reading messages.

In the UK, we have had protection for performances since 1988 (and before that through the criminal law, which the courts bent to create civil remedies too). Back in the late 70s, there was a bouble album of Beatles performances from Hamburg released in the UK. Nothing the Beatles could do to stop it. Then a couple of years ago, what I think were the same tapes re-appeared in CD format: only this time the remaining Beatles could successfully take action to prevent them being sold. (The defendant argued that he had an oral consent from John Lennon, which prompted a typically laconic response from George Harrison, who was quoted as saying something like funny that it should be the one who wasn't around to support the story who was said to have given the consent.) The 1988 Act is retroactive, giving rights to performers in their qualifying performances whenever they took place (provided of course that the performer didn't die so long ago that the rights have lapsed). A friend of mine receives periodic payments from the Musicians' Union relating to recordings of performances involving her grandfather, who was dead before the 1988 Act came into operation.

Peter Groves
<peter.groves[_at_]virgin.net> Received on Fri Mar 24 2000 - 22:15:04 GMT