date:20110203

Re: [Videolib] Apple making available Russian films without approval

2011-02-03 Thread Jessica Rosner

Two points of clarification, one which I think most people know is that the
US did not allow GATT to extend copyright beyond US copyright so no film
copyrighted prior to 1924 is under copyright in the US regardless of it's
status in its country of origin. Also the copyright is not exactly
"automatic" under GATT. In order for the copyright to take effect the rights
holder has to file their paperwork with the copyright office at the Library
of Congress. A lot of rights holders have in fact not done this, either
because they are unaware of it or because no one is really sure who owns it.
In any event a lot of smaller foreign films have been put out under dubious
circumstances which are not illegal unless the rights holder has in fact
filed their claim with the copyright office. However the rights holder can
file at any time which would stop any further distribution of the work by
anyone besides them or their agent. Current agreements do make copyright
reciprocal without having to file but this was not the case for many
decades.

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Brewer, Michael <
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu> wrote:

> >From a colleague who is more well versed on international copyright that I
> am.
>
> Michael Brewer
> Team Leader for Instructional Services
> University of Arizona Libraries
> brew...@u.library.arizona.edu
>
> ---
>
> It's the TRIPS Agreement, implementing the Berne Convention, that put
> eligible foreign works into (or back into) copyright in the U.S., starting
> on January 1, 1996. A key condition is that the work was protected on the
> restoration date in the country of origin. The restoration date for the
> Russian Federation was 1/1/96. On that date, eligible works originating in
> the territory of the Russian Federation, and still in copyright there,
> obtained a U.S. copyright term.
>
> Many eligible works that were still in copyright under Russian Federation
> law on 1/1/96, but their copyright terms have since expired  in Russia. At
> the same time, the U.S copyrights have a life of their own and may still be
> in effect.
>
> For example, a work that was published in Moscow in 1930 by an author who
> died in 1952, barring any exceptional situations, would have expired in the
> Russian Federation in 2002.  But because it was still copyrighted in the RF
> on 1/1/96, it would have been restored in the U.S. The U.S. term for that
> work would be 95 years from publication- thus it is protected in the U.S.
> through 2025.
>
> These situations are very common- copyright terms can widely diverge from
> one country to another on the same work.
>
> Janice Pilch
> Chair, Commitee on Library and Information Resources, Subcomittee on
> Copryright Issues Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian
> Studies
>
>
> Janice T. Pilch
> Associate Professor of Library Administration, Humanities Librarian
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University Library
> 1408 West Gregory Drive
> Urbana, IL 61801
> Tel. (217) 244-9399
> Email: pi...@illinois.edu
>
> 
>
> From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:
> videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 12:56 PM
> To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [Videolib] Apple making available Russian films without
> approval
>
> This really makes no sense. The only way you can get covered by GATT in the
> US is if the film is copyrighted in it's country of origin and the country
> is signatory of GATT. Well at least that is what I have been told from
> copyright people.
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Brigid Duffy  bdu...@sfsu.edu>> wrote:
> For example, this note from Wikipedia on "The Snow Maiden":
>
> The film is listed as being in the public domain on the website of the
> Russian Federal Agency of Culture and Cinematography<
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russian_Federal_Agency_of_Culture_and_Cinematography&action=edit&redlink=1>.
> [1] The film
> also lapsed into the public domain in the United States when its US
> copyright expired, but the copyright was restored under the GATT treaty.
> [2]
>
> I would call that messy.
>
> Brigid Duffy
> Academic Technology
> San Francisco State University
> San Francisco, CA  94132-4200
> E-mail: bdu...@sfsu.edu
>
>
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote:
>
>
> At one point the issue with the Russian films was that they had not signed
> the GATT treaty, but I assume they have since. Mosfilm had a huge problem in
> the US because there was an insane bootlegger here that usually went by the
> name of St. Petersburg films that actually tried to file copyright claims at
> the Library of Congress on most Russian classics. The guy was a real piece
> of work and Mosfilms rep here took him to court man

Re: [Videolib] Apple making available Russian films without approval

2011-02-03 Thread Brewer, Michael

>From a colleague who is more well versed on international copyright that I am. 

Michael Brewer
Team Leader for Instructional Services
University of Arizona Libraries
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu

---

It's the TRIPS Agreement, implementing the Berne Convention, that put eligible 
foreign works into (or back into) copyright in the U.S., starting on January 1, 
1996. A key condition is that the work was protected on the restoration date in 
the country of origin. The restoration date for the Russian Federation was 
1/1/96. On that date, eligible works originating in the territory of the 
Russian Federation, and still in copyright there, obtained a U.S. copyright 
term.

Many eligible works that were still in copyright under Russian Federation law 
on 1/1/96, but their copyright terms have since expired  in Russia. At the same 
time, the U.S copyrights have a life of their own and may still be in effect.

For example, a work that was published in Moscow in 1930 by an author who died 
in 1952, barring any exceptional situations, would have expired in the Russian 
Federation in 2002.  But because it was still copyrighted in the RF on 1/1/96, 
it would have been restored in the U.S. The U.S. term for that work would be 95 
years from publication- thus it is protected in the U.S. through 2025.

These situations are very common- copyright terms can widely diverge from one 
country to another on the same work.

Janice Pilch
Chair, Commitee on Library and Information Resources, Subcomittee on Copryright 
Issues Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies


Janice T. Pilch
Associate Professor of Library Administration, Humanities Librarian University 
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University Library
1408 West Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801
Tel. (217) 244-9399
Email: pi...@illinois.edu



From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu 
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 12:56 PM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Apple making available Russian films without approval

This really makes no sense. The only way you can get covered by GATT in the US 
is if the film is copyrighted in it's country of origin and the country is 
signatory of GATT. Well at least that is what I have been told from copyright 
people.
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Brigid Duffy 
mailto:bdu...@sfsu.edu>> wrote:
For example, this note from Wikipedia on "The Snow Maiden":

The film is listed as being in the public domain on the website of the Russian 
Federal Agency of Culture and 
Cinematography.
 [1] The film also 
lapsed into the public domain in the United States when its US copyright 
expired, but the copyright was restored under the GATT treaty. 
[2]

I would call that messy.

Brigid Duffy
Academic Technology
San Francisco State University
San Francisco, CA  94132-4200
E-mail: bdu...@sfsu.edu


On Feb 3, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote:


At one point the issue with the Russian films was that they had not signed the 
GATT treaty, but I assume they have since. Mosfilm had a huge problem in the US 
because there was an insane bootlegger here that usually went by the name of 
St. Petersburg films that actually tried to file copyright claims at the 
Library of Congress on most Russian classics. The guy was a real piece of work 
and Mosfilms rep here took him to court many times and did win. I actually had 
to file some paperwork for Kino which had some of the films under contract and 
even had to speak to the guys parole officer.
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Brewer, Michael 
mailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu>> wrote:
While it may be messy (who actually owns what, because of changes in the studio 
system), these things are all clearly under copyright.  In the 1990s things we 
messy, but since then, with the signing of various international treaties, a 
great deal of what was published in the Soviet period is protected (even though 
it once was not in the US).
mb

Michael Brewer
Team Leader for Instructional Services
University of Arizona Libraries
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu

From: 
videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu 
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu]
 On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:22 AM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Apple making available Russian films without approval

I don't know if this has anything to do with this but the copyright status on a 
lot of Russia

Re: [Videolib] notice to faculty re video/dvd acquisitions

2011-02-03 Thread Jeanne Little

Rhonda,

We used to put faculty requester information into our order records
when they asked us to purchase titles, and then when it was received
and cataloged, a postcard/email was sent to them announcing it's
arrival. Now that we are faced with patron confidentiality issues,
we felt we could no longer place their names in order records that
many staff see. We stopped notifying at that time. We do produce a
'new title' list each month that is available from our library's
main home page. If a library liaison was involved, they work
directly with the faculty and may watch to see when a requested item
has been received and then send them an email announcement.

Usually what I tell faculty that call and speak directly with me is
that when the order has been placed, they will find the title in our
online opac with a status of 'on order'. Once they see that record
in the system, they can contact our circulation desk and they can
place a hold on the item for them. After the item has been received,
the status gets changed by our cataloging staff to read 'one copy
being processed". It will only be a short time later that it should
be available for use. And if they have asked for a hold to be
placed, they will be notified by our circulation staff that it is
available at the desk for them to checkout. I think they will hold
it for three days and then it goes on to the shelf for the rest of
our patrons.

Hope this helps.

Jeanne Little

Rod Library
Collection Management & Special Services
University of Northern Iowa

On 2/3/2011 12:48 PM, Rosen, Rhonda J. wrote:

Hi everyone,
For the academic university crowd….
I’m curious as to how you notify or if you
notify faculty who request that the library purchase a
video/dvd.
1. Do you notify the selector when the
item has come in?
1a) Do you only notify the
selector when it is a rush?
2. If you have Faculty library liaisons in
each department, do you notify them of new media in their
subject area?
2a) if so, do you ask them
to spread the word
2b) if not, do you notify
the department at large by sending a mass email t to all the
profs?
3. Do you notify librarian subject
selectors and ask them to forward on the notification?
4. Do you rely solely on an online
newsletter or monthly acquisitions list for books and media in
one?
5. Alternatives?
Thanks for any responses,
Rhonda
Rhonda
Rosen| Head, Media & Access Services
William H. Hannon Library | Loyola Marymount University
One LMU Drive, MS 8200 | Los Angeles, CA 90045-2659
rhonda.ro...@lmu.edu| 310/338-4584|
http://library.lmu.edu
"You
see, I don't believe that libraries should be drab places
where people sit in silence, and that's been the main reason
for our policy of employing wild animals as librarians."
--Monty Python

VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.

--
"The University of Northern Iowa provides transformative learning experiences that inspire students to embrace challenge, engage in critical inquiry and creative thought, and contribute to society."

<>VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues
relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control,
preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and
related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective
working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication
between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
distributors.

43 matches

Mail list logo