|
|
Join us each Tuesday as Bob Ingersoll analyzes how the law
is portrayed in comics then explains how it would really work.
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
THE LAW IS A ASS for 07/11/2000
DOCKET ENTRY
"The Law is a Ass" Installment #51
Originally written as installment #279 and published in Comics Buyer's Guide issue #1390, July 7, 2000 issue
Okay, here's one of those "important" columns. For the most part, I write them as a giggle. Sure, I'm trying to educate my readers about how the law works. But mostly I'm trying to be entertaining. But sometimes I tackle issues, issues about which I feel and about which I want to share my feelings; hoping that I can convince a good number of you to feel as do I.
This column ran in Comics Buyer's Guide only recently. But with the summer convention season upon us, it's something that needs to be repeated now.
******
"The Law is a Ass"
Installment #51
by
Bob Ingersoll
You're breaking the law and should stop. Not that I can take the high road, I've broken the law and I should stop, too.
The first thing we should establish is what law we're breaking. The copyright law, first passed in 1790. It's been amended many times, most-recently 1976. We'll be dealing with the '76 law; I have neither the time, patience nor Endust required to pour through two-hundred-year-old law books.
The copyright law grants certain, absolute rights to a work's author; "author," being a term of art that doesn't always mean the actual creator/s of a work. Sometimes the creators who actually did the work on the work aren't the authors for copyright purposes. This happens when the work is "work-for-hire;" either when an employee creates a work as part of his/her employment or when a work is specifically commissioned, in writing, as a work-for-hire. With work-for-hire, whoever commissioned the work is considered the author for copyright purposes, even if that entity didn't do one whit of work on the work. If we're talking about a Superman story, as we will be, the author is DC Comics, Inc. If we're talking about an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the author is 20th Century Fox. If we're talking about Barney and Friends... Well, does anyone really want to acknowledge authorship of that?
The copyright law grants certain exclusive rights to the work's author, be it the actual creator or the "author" under work-for-hire. These include the right to reproduce the work and the right to distribute the work. The author alone controls how the work is reproduced or distributed and can prevent all others from reproducing or distributing the work, in any form. Included in these rights is the author's right to withhold the work from reproduction or distribution. If the author decides that he, she or it doesn't want the work reproduced or distributed, the author has the exclusive right to make this decision.
Which brings us to where we're breaking the law. If DC Comics commissions a Superman story--for the sake of argument, let's say one about Superbaby's babysitter--then, for reasons it thinks are valid, decides it doesn't want to publish the story; it has that right. It's work for hire and DC, as the author of the work, possesses the exclusive right to determine whether the story will ever see the light of day. We may disagree with that decision. We may rant and rail and complain about the decision, and we have the right to do this. We do not, however, have the right to post a copy of the story on a web page as an act of protest. That's a publication and distribution of the work without the consent of the copyright holder and against the law. It doesn't matter that we really want to see the story, our wants come in second to the author's wishes under the copyright law.
If 20th Century Fox decides not to air the season finale of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, it has that right. Again, we can rant, rail and complain. We can vilify and whine. We can even boycott. (In short, the very sort of things that make us look like the pathetic "Getalifes" we're always joking about, I mean it was just a TV show.) What we can't do is digitize a satellite feed of the show and post it on the web. Not even if the Creator, Producer, Writer of the show suggests that we should. He is, after all, not the author of the program, so hadn't the right to suggest we violate copyright. And what we really can't do is to pop a tape into a dubbing VCR and run off as many bootleg copies of this missing episode as we think we can sell at a convention. Again, this is a publication and distribution of the work in violation of the author's copyright.
These tapes are called bootlegs for a reason, you know; they're illegal. Bootlegging used to describe the act of smuggling illegal goods in the legs of high boots. Bootlegging then became associated with the illegal manufacture and sale of alcohol during prohibition. Now bootleg refers to a variety of items which are illegally manufactured and sold; including videotapes.
If you tape Buffy the Vampire Slayer off the air for your own personal library, that's legal. The Supreme Court has said off-the-air recording for personal use doesn't violate copyright If you make copies of your library and sell them, that's illegal, unless you have the permission of the author. And how many of you think those con vendors had Fox's permission to sell "Graduation Day" before the episode even aired?
Those of you who raised your hands, go to the other room. I'll be there in a moment to tell you about the rabbits.
The vendors who are selling those bootleg tapes are breaking the copyright law. Moreover, when we buy such tapes--and I'm ashamed to admit, I've done it in the past--we are encouraging, counseling and assisting these people to break the law, by giving them money. That makes us aiders and abettors to the crime and, in the eyes of the law, equally as guilty as the bootleggers.
Understand, not every tape sold at a convention is illegal. Copyright law has a provision called the "first sale" doctrine which says the author can only control the first sale of a copy. If you own a legal copy of something--say, a licensed Buffy tape or a copy of Action Comics #1--you may legally sell your copy. But you can't run that licensed tape through a dubbing VCR or your Action through a photocopier, make more copies and sell those.
So, the next time you're at a convention and you see bootleg tapes of some unreleased movie, think twice about buying one. Then think again and walk away. Not only are they against the law, there's usually a reason the movies weren't released in the first place. I mean, have you actually seen the Fantastic Four movie? It's really pretty bad.
******
Bob Ingersoll--a public defender in Cleveland, Ohio who can be reached at P.O. Box 24314, Lyndhurst, OH 44124 or law@wfcomics.com--admits that I had an ulterior motive to writing this column. Yes, it was something I thought needed to be said; but I've also pretty much guaranteed that I can never buy another bootleg tape. And that's not a bad thing. I mean, have you actually seen the Fantastic Four movie? It's really pretty bad.
<< 07/04/2000 | 07/11/2000 | 07/18/2000 >>
Discuss this installment with me in World Famous Comics' General Forum.
Recent Installments:
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
|
|
|
Anything Goes Trivia
