Ever since the inception of the first copyright laws, a constant debate has existed: the balance between artist's rights and the freedom of the public to utilize copyrighted works. Once a copyright expires, anyone may use it in any way they see fit. This enables publishing companies to reprint copies of some of histories greatest literary works and sell them at a price accessible to all of us (i.e. Barnes and Noble "Classics," which traditionally retail for $5-$7).
However, works in the public domain are also subject to reinterpretation and reinvention...sometimes to the detriment of the author's original intent. A perfect example of this, I believe, exists now in the form of Seth Grahame-Smith's "reinterpretation" of classic works such as Wurthering Heights and Pride and Prejudice, to which he's added certain "trendy" elements to help make the books more appealing to the fickle youth. Call me old-fashioned, but I have an issue with zombies hanging out around Mr. Darcy's house. While I'll admit I'm a stickler for the classics and their prose, I would almost stretch my opinion to include a "modern" interpretation of the language or even an abridged version. However, I just can't embrace the idea that the youth of America is so shallow and brain-dead (excuse the pun... get it? Zombies? Nevermind.) that they need ZOMBIES in Pride and Prejudice to understand its artistic contribution to the literary world. I truly am of the opinion Mr. Graham-Smith's "interpretation" of these works is only to the detriment of their artistic value and to the youth that reads them.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
EMI Working Deal with MLK Estate for Online Content!
My apologies for "yelling" the title of this blog at everyone, but this is very exciting news! Apparently EMI is working a deal w/ Martin Luther King Jr.'s estate to get his speeches released for use in songs and other media. The Estate has been notorious for keeping MLK content under lock and key over the years, so joining the digital revolution is a big deal for the both family and the world at large.
I have to admit I'm a bit concerned about the use in "songs," and I'm imagining the Estate will be very careful when it comes to negotiating the master use rights (which is the copyright that must be licensed in order for the actual "sound recording" of MLK to be used - this is a separate right from the copyright on the speech itself). There's a nice article about the deal here. I did find it a bit strange that entertainment attorney Monica Ewing "couldn't imagine" who would use MLK's speeches in songs; I'm not sure if she meant that 1) no one will want to use them; or 2) the possibilities are endless. The latter is really where my thoughts are coming from; I think artists will be scrambling to snag such a significant piece of history for their works. MLK wasn't just about civil rights - he was about unity, world peace, happiness...all these things the world is STILL struggling with today, and perhaps more than ever. With our new president's message of
"hope," I think a lot of people, in art and in other ways, are interested in exploring that idea right now.
Outside the use in songs, I'm hoping the entire speeches themselves will soon be available. From an educational standpoint, the idea that MLK's speeches will be available to students across the world with the click of a button is a PRICELESS addition to learning.
Personally, I'm over the moon that this content is being released. Thoughts are welcome!
I have to admit I'm a bit concerned about the use in "songs," and I'm imagining the Estate will be very careful when it comes to negotiating the master use rights (which is the copyright that must be licensed in order for the actual "sound recording" of MLK to be used - this is a separate right from the copyright on the speech itself). There's a nice article about the deal here. I did find it a bit strange that entertainment attorney Monica Ewing "couldn't imagine" who would use MLK's speeches in songs; I'm not sure if she meant that 1) no one will want to use them; or 2) the possibilities are endless. The latter is really where my thoughts are coming from; I think artists will be scrambling to snag such a significant piece of history for their works. MLK wasn't just about civil rights - he was about unity, world peace, happiness...all these things the world is STILL struggling with today, and perhaps more than ever. With our new president's message of
"hope," I think a lot of people, in art and in other ways, are interested in exploring that idea right now.
Outside the use in songs, I'm hoping the entire speeches themselves will soon be available. From an educational standpoint, the idea that MLK's speeches will be available to students across the world with the click of a button is a PRICELESS addition to learning.
Personally, I'm over the moon that this content is being released. Thoughts are welcome!
Monday, March 16, 2009
Revolve Nation Announces Movie Screening!
Hello fellow artists and entrepreneurs,
I would like to formally announce that Revolve Nation, a nonprofit associated with Exemplar Companies, is continuing its annual tradition of screening a new movie about entrepreneurship to inspire and motivate those us with the "entrepreneurial bug." This year's selection is "August," starring Josh Hartnett. The screening will be presented one time only on April 15th at 6 pm at the Semel Theater at Emerson, located at 10 Boylston Place, 3rd floor.
The film will be followed by a distinguished panel of guests for a Q&A session on the following topic: "The Race for Capital Funding in a Tough Market." Come out for a great evening of film and networking! Keep an eye on the Revolve Nation page on www.meetup.com for the official posting to RSVP - seats will be going fast! Looking forward to seeing you all there.
I would like to formally announce that Revolve Nation, a nonprofit associated with Exemplar Companies, is continuing its annual tradition of screening a new movie about entrepreneurship to inspire and motivate those us with the "entrepreneurial bug." This year's selection is "August," starring Josh Hartnett. The screening will be presented one time only on April 15th at 6 pm at the Semel Theater at Emerson, located at 10 Boylston Place, 3rd floor.
The film will be followed by a distinguished panel of guests for a Q&A session on the following topic: "The Race for Capital Funding in a Tough Market." Come out for a great evening of film and networking! Keep an eye on the Revolve Nation page on www.meetup.com for the official posting to RSVP - seats will be going fast! Looking forward to seeing you all there.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Big Doin's in Copyright Law!
In what many would consider a long-awaited moved, the Judiciary Committee is finally holding a hearing on the Performance Right Act, which would amend the Copyright Act and mandate that royalties be paid to the owners of sound recordings when they're played on "terrestrial" radio. Currently, owners of sound recordings (i.e. the record companies) only get paid on "digital audio transmissions"; translation = online radio. However, owners of underlying copyrights of songs (i.e. publishers and songwriters) get paid for digital AND terrestrial transmissions.
The reason for this is purely political; the regular broadcast industry has very strong political ties and have, time and time again, lobbied hardcore against having to pay for the use of sound recordings. However, webcasters tried to prevent having to pay for digital transmissions and failed miserably, and may claim they are facing bankruptcy because of it. Will the same fate await regular radio if this Act passes? Should owners of sound recordings be afforded the same rights as songerwriters? Some say no, given that nearly all sound recordings are owned by the big bad record companies, which already make a killing on record sales (though down, each physical CD sale nets about $7 to the record company). However, I would argue this isn't about morality and how "deserves" to get paid; it's about equality. This has been a glaring loophole in the Copyright Act for a long time and one, I think, that was never intended, as The United States is one of the only countries in the entire modern world that doesn't pay owners of sound recordings on radio. It will be very interesting to see how this pans out, and whether or not the braodcast industry will be able to win where webcasters have lost.
The reason for this is purely political; the regular broadcast industry has very strong political ties and have, time and time again, lobbied hardcore against having to pay for the use of sound recordings. However, webcasters tried to prevent having to pay for digital transmissions and failed miserably, and may claim they are facing bankruptcy because of it. Will the same fate await regular radio if this Act passes? Should owners of sound recordings be afforded the same rights as songerwriters? Some say no, given that nearly all sound recordings are owned by the big bad record companies, which already make a killing on record sales (though down, each physical CD sale nets about $7 to the record company). However, I would argue this isn't about morality and how "deserves" to get paid; it's about equality. This has been a glaring loophole in the Copyright Act for a long time and one, I think, that was never intended, as The United States is one of the only countries in the entire modern world that doesn't pay owners of sound recordings on radio. It will be very interesting to see how this pans out, and whether or not the braodcast industry will be able to win where webcasters have lost.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Local Boston Artist Launches Healing DVD
Over the course of the last few months, I have had the privilege of representing one of the kindest and sweetest artists in the Boston Area - Ms. Linda Dehart, a seasoned and talented artist specializing in watercolors. In October 2008, Ms. DeHart approached myself and a colleague witha big dream: she wanted to create a DVD that synchronized 1,000 of her watercolor paintings to ten pieces of healing music. This project was going to be massive and unlike anything she had ever undertaken; it would require a full web team, a marketing and PR team, and organizational team, and, of course, a legal team. From a legal persepective alone it required substantial drafting and negotiating of 3 separate copyrights: a synchronization right ("synch"), a master use right, and a public performance right (as the DVD would be marketing to health facilities who would play it publicly at their offices, in patient rooms, etc).
A quick copyright diversion for those interested - copyright owners hold 6 "exclusive" rights: the rights to 1) copy/reproduce; 2) distribute; 3) create a "derivative work"; 4) publicly display; 5) publicly perform; and 6) perform publicly via digital transmission. If you wish to do anything with a piec that someone else wrote/painted, etc., you need to get specific permission (except in some instances where you can go through one organization that issues that type of license). When you "synchronize" music to any image, you must negotiation straight with the copyright owner. Luckily, all of the artists Ms. DeHart was working with own all their own copyrights, save two, which were own by record companies. So on my end, there were 10 licenses to negotiation, each with 3 different rights in them.
This was the first project that I had licensed from beginning to end, and I was honored and proud to be a part of it. The launch of the DVD was last night at the British Consulate Offices in Cambridge, MA and it was just beautiful. I would urge everyone to visit www.dehartart.com and check out the samples of each of the tracks, which are designed to offer a broad range of healing, from a mere moment of repose to relief from serious pain. I hope you will find them as relaxing as I did, and in such a busy world, I believe we all deserve a moment to ourselves during the day.
A quick copyright diversion for those interested - copyright owners hold 6 "exclusive" rights: the rights to 1) copy/reproduce; 2) distribute; 3) create a "derivative work"; 4) publicly display; 5) publicly perform; and 6) perform publicly via digital transmission. If you wish to do anything with a piec that someone else wrote/painted, etc., you need to get specific permission (except in some instances where you can go through one organization that issues that type of license). When you "synchronize" music to any image, you must negotiation straight with the copyright owner. Luckily, all of the artists Ms. DeHart was working with own all their own copyrights, save two, which were own by record companies. So on my end, there were 10 licenses to negotiation, each with 3 different rights in them.
This was the first project that I had licensed from beginning to end, and I was honored and proud to be a part of it. The launch of the DVD was last night at the British Consulate Offices in Cambridge, MA and it was just beautiful. I would urge everyone to visit www.dehartart.com and check out the samples of each of the tracks, which are designed to offer a broad range of healing, from a mere moment of repose to relief from serious pain. I hope you will find them as relaxing as I did, and in such a busy world, I believe we all deserve a moment to ourselves during the day.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
9th Circuit Stops CA Vid Game Law
I just found this story today, although, sadly, it was reported about two weeks ago. California has struck down a video game law that would have prohibited children under 18 (well, legally speaking, nearly all people under 18 are "children" in the eyes of the law - with some exceptions) from renting or buying "violent" video games. The Court said the law violated children's first (free speech) and fourteenth (due process) amendment rights, and that there were "less restrictive" means in place or which could be implemented which would "empower" parents to make the ultimate decision about what their kids should and shouldn't be exposed to.
Let me first say that I am a HUGE gamer. My favorite thing to do at night when I get home is to crack a beer and turn on my 360 (right now I'm working on the Fable II expansion pack). My boyfriend and I DVR more shows on G4 than on all other channels combine, and we frequently attempt to kick each other's asses in fighting games every weekend. I take pride in Street fight fatalities. However, and I'm not trying to go all Tipper Gore on everyone, but I'm an adult; I'm not an impressionable 12-year old. And while I completely respect a parent's right to make the ultimate decision about their child's upbringing, the court it operating under the false assumption that parents are being ACTIVE in this part of their kids' lives. However, I can tell you from personal experience that most parents don't even know what the "M" rating means, nevermind what's actually in some games like GTA, Dead Space (one of my favorites), Fallout 3 and others. This is where the problem lies - apathy from parents.
If that law were to have gone through, parents could still make the ultimate decision by doing research and purchasing the game on their child's behalf, after educating themselves and their child about the content of the game and what it means. I'm not saying you have to sit down and have a long, drawn out "sex talk" with little Johnny about violent video games, but at least be aware his avatar may be having sex with hookers, killing them, stealing their cars and driving around Vice City with the body in the back seat. I know it sounds like I'm being preachy, but honestly - I would have no problem with my kid, which he/she reaches a certain age, playing these games. However, you can bet your ass I'll know what's in them and make sure my kid understands the difference between virtual reality and reality.
In a slightly related note, The Onion has brilliantly pointed out that violent video games can teach survival techniques. This, I feel, is the number one reason to be involved in choosing your child's video games - you want make sure it is teaching them life skills, such as accurate zombie shooting.
Let me first say that I am a HUGE gamer. My favorite thing to do at night when I get home is to crack a beer and turn on my 360 (right now I'm working on the Fable II expansion pack). My boyfriend and I DVR more shows on G4 than on all other channels combine, and we frequently attempt to kick each other's asses in fighting games every weekend. I take pride in Street fight fatalities. However, and I'm not trying to go all Tipper Gore on everyone, but I'm an adult; I'm not an impressionable 12-year old. And while I completely respect a parent's right to make the ultimate decision about their child's upbringing, the court it operating under the false assumption that parents are being ACTIVE in this part of their kids' lives. However, I can tell you from personal experience that most parents don't even know what the "M" rating means, nevermind what's actually in some games like GTA, Dead Space (one of my favorites), Fallout 3 and others. This is where the problem lies - apathy from parents.
If that law were to have gone through, parents could still make the ultimate decision by doing research and purchasing the game on their child's behalf, after educating themselves and their child about the content of the game and what it means. I'm not saying you have to sit down and have a long, drawn out "sex talk" with little Johnny about violent video games, but at least be aware his avatar may be having sex with hookers, killing them, stealing their cars and driving around Vice City with the body in the back seat. I know it sounds like I'm being preachy, but honestly - I would have no problem with my kid, which he/she reaches a certain age, playing these games. However, you can bet your ass I'll know what's in them and make sure my kid understands the difference between virtual reality and reality.
In a slightly related note, The Onion has brilliantly pointed out that violent video games can teach survival techniques. This, I feel, is the number one reason to be involved in choosing your child's video games - you want make sure it is teaching them life skills, such as accurate zombie shooting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
