Re: copyright by successors of Barrie J.M.

On 25/07/2000, Kevin Grierson <kgrierson[_at_]wilsav.com> wrote:
>
> On 07/21/2000, Ewan Kirk <ewan.j.kirk[_at_]solent.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> > By way of correction to my last posting: the perpetual right mentioned
> > in s.301 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 is not a full
> > copyright, but merely a right to recieve royalties. Therefore it
> > appears that the trustees of Great Ormond Street Hospital cannot object
> > to any use of the work, but are merely entitled to a royalty from it.
>
> Is the royalty rate set by statute?

According to clause 5 of Schedule 6 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, the amount can be set by agreement between the trustees of the hospital and the party wishing to license the work, and in default of agreement the matter is to be referred to the Copyright Tribunal.

Ewan Kirk

---
Ewan.J.Kirk[_at_]solent.ac.uk