On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, John Muller wrote:
> on 6/4/03 11:33 AM, Francis C Poole at fpoole@UDel.Edu wrote:
> > Sue or Joe Librarian reading the
> > Wizard of Oz to the public in a Library is not the same as giving a public
> > screening of Victor Fleming's Wizard of Oz or the Wiz.
> Okay, by that logic, how about the public playing of Jim Dale's unabridged
> readings of the Harry Potter books? I realize that this may be a whole side
> topic, but we are talking about the public exhibition/performance of
> copyrighted materials, no? Sue and Joe librarian can read a Potter book out
> loud to a group, but if the IDENTICAL TEXT is played from a Dale recording,
> it would clearly be a public performance violation, as I understand this
> It would seem that medium and conveyance are the operative limitations,
> whether it be film, datastream, video, text, or whathaveyou being
> displayed/performed/exhibited on a public level.
> > As I have too frequently had to remind my colleagues in the
> > print world, a book is not a film. The two are different creatures with
> > different and often multiple sets of rights which may be owned by
> > several entities.
> So what is actually being affected when an item is copyrighted? The
> intellectual property? The performance of said property? Personal usage?
> Public exhibition? The physical appearance? All of the above? None of the
> above? When money is exchanged, is a work "purchased" or is it a licence
> with clearly delineated usage stipulations?
> Like you say, a book is not a film, but both are copyrighted works. Sounds
> like some media forms just have more rights than others...
> John F. Müller
> Sonoma State University Library
> Jean & Charles Schulz Information Center - Multimedia Department
> 1801 East Cotati Ave.
> Rohnert Park, CA 94928
> Phone: (707) 664-2590
> FAX: (707) 664-2090
> Videolib mailing list
Videolib mailing list