Is there somewhere I can read up on this? If they are not covered by US copyright law, what are they covered by ?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Brewer, Michael < brew...@u.library.arizona.edu> wrote: > Pre 1976 musical recordings are not covered by US Copyright law, though, > so 108 does not apply (and was not written for them). This is the problem. > If it did apply, there would be no problem here, as libraries and archives > could digitize the old stuff that is deteriorating under 108 for > preservation purposes. > > > > 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, September 30, 2010 10:02 AM > *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu > *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] Preservation vs. prohibitions on duplication > > > > I would have to read the report itself but copyright law does not in any > way prevent the PRESERVATION of audio recordings. In fact the section of > everyone keeps going to justify making a copy of deteriorating work was > written for audio recordings. What the law does do is prevent the preserved > work from being used by anyone save researchers who must go to > archive/library which preserved it. Bottom line works can preserved for > archival purposes, but they can not be sold or made available outside the > archive. I see little likelihood of any change in copyright law that would > allow preserved material still under copyright to be made available beyond > the archive without permission of the rights holder. > This is frustrating since many rights holders are hard to find, often > ornery and may want a lot of money, but they are still the owners. There has > of course been a movement to allow "orphan" works , particularly those in > the last years of copyright to be copied, but again I just don't see major > changes in copyright law because the big rights holders have too much at > stake ( as well as the little ones). > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Shoaf,Judith P <jsh...@ufl.edu> wrote: > > I thought this was interesting, focusing on audio recordings and the > preservation vs. copyright situation. > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_endangered_digital_recordings > > judy > > Judith P. Shoaf > Director, Language Learning Center > University of Florida > PO 117300 > Gainesville, Florida 32611 > 352-392-2112 > > > 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. > > > > 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. > >
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.
