Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

On 4 Aug 1998, Timothy Phillips <hrothgar[_at_]telepath.com> wrote:
>
> That copyrights can stifle creativity is a fact of experience for a
> number of biographers and historians. It's also a fact in the lives of
> summer theaters which can't afford to perform musicals. (Robert Kolker,
> "Theatres on Alert as Congress Looks at Copyright Law", Back Stage
> 36(9), March 3, 1995, p. 3) It's also a fact in the lives of community
> orchestras which now must now pay $600 to RENT the orchestral score of
> Prokofyev's "Peter and the Wolf" for two performances, when prior to its
> restoration to copyright under the URAA/GATT, the score could be BOUGHT
> for $70, which allowed unlimited performances and unlimited copying.
> But it's hard to prove how many musicals DON'T get performed, and how
> many orchestras choose NOT to perform "Peter and the Wolf" because of
> the rental fees.

There are plenty of other costs to produce a show. Why single out copyright? What about the landlord, the utilities, the costumes and props, the bookkeepers and administrators, etc., etc.

I would not deny creativity in performance, but reading a score like "Peter and the Wolf" is a pale claim in comparison to authorship and the original production.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com Received on Fri Aug 07 1998 - 23:23:12 GMT