Re: Performers' Right in Sound Recordings

Re: John Noble's post of new GATT implementation legislation for protection of sound recordings:

Thanks for posting the details of the new statutes. Is it apparent from the legislative history or anyone's general knowledge how the legislation's use of the word "live" is to be interpreted? (From the pieces of the statutes forwarded to us, a definition of the term in this context does not seem to be included.)

Reading it strictly, as a lawyer would, a "live performance" might be construed as ANY performance created by live people which happened to be taped. But reading it as a music industry person, a "live" performance only means one performed in front of an audience as opposed to in a recording studio. One interpretation allows the new laws to protect all human (or animal?) produced music, while the other only protects "bootlegs" of live concerts. I thought I read something about the latter being the intent. Is there any insight available out there on this?

Thanks.
scott fedewa
<fedewacs[_at_]leland.stanford.edu> Received on Thu Dec 15 1994 - 07:58:31 GMT