Re Lectures

For what it is worth:
I think this is a Principal/Independent Contractor and contract question. There is no controversy that the University is the principal and the lecturer the Independent Contractor. The Independent Contractor is producing for the Principal material. I don’t think it matters who places the lecture in a fixed form of expression the fact it is in such form makes the lecture copyrightable. The material produced for the Principal is available for the Principal’s use on that occasion only unless there is some agreement to the contrary. An analogous situation is when a major producer of copyright material hires independents to do some of the creative elements. In this situation the contract between the Principal and Independent Contractor spells out all of the uses both parties can make of the creative product and often transfers all the right title and interest to the Principal. This is akin to some of the issues faced by the National Writers Union before the lawsuit with the NY Times. In each case the reporters had to enter contracts with the NY Times. These contracts spelled out the rights the Times had in the story as well as the rights the writer had in the story. That case in fact turned in part on the fact these agreements did not cover the selling of the stories to Lexis Nexis who included them in the Lexis Nexis Database that indexed the Times. The Principal can only use the material as contemplated in the agreement. The agent still has the right to use the material in other non spelled out situations as he or she is the one who produced the material. Respectfully Submitted
Gary A Poe JD PhD.
University of South Florida Department of MIS Received on Fri Apr 15 2005 - 21:35:00 GMT