"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3e294b0b@news.povray.org...
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > 1)  View animations with the sound turned off.
>
>   Ignoring the problem does not remove the problem.
>   The question is not whether you can listen to the music or not. The
problem
> is that the author of the animation has violated copyright. Viewers
turning
> sound off does not fix this.
>

<rant:hot button issue>

Who's copyright?
This is the IRTC, eh? Not the AmericanRTC.

The point is that what may be protected in the USA is public domain in
the rest of the world.

Other points:

1. Copyright infringement is a pursuit for those who believe their
property has been infringed. No action is ever taken without a complaint
by the ip owner. It is not the job, or duty,  by either law or IRTC rules,
for
anyone to police copyright issues vis a vis IRTC entries.

2. Though it is customary in some venues in some areas of the world to
always acknowledge that permission by the ip owner has been granted, it
is neither mandantory to do so legally nor is it even peripherally mentioned
in the IRTC rules and guidelines. Who is to say (or who will investigate)
if permission has been given or that royalties have been paid?

3. It is, and always will be, the prerogative of the admin team to modify,
enhance, change or otherwise express the rules of the IRTC. There is
nothing, at present, that addresses the use of copyrighted music other than
to suggest it is an unnecessary and likely ignored unrequired part of an
entry.

4. Should the current state of the rules and guidelines change, I would
suggest
someone volunteer to collate and coordinate all the differeing copyright
laws
vis a vis public domain and be prepared to deal with severe
multi-jurisdictional
issues.

No one can authoritatively write about someone's alleged copyright
infringement
without specific knowledge, undertanding of the contradictrory juridictional
issues,
and without being a party to any allegation.

Remember, there is no infringement without a complaint by an alleged owner
and without a formal leglal proceeding followed by a judgement in court.

At most, if so inclined, an IRTC judge may choose to alert the ip owner of
what
they might deem to be an infringement. Making any statements beyond
expressing
an opinion that there may be infringement is not useful to anyone.

Notwithstanding the very recent US Supreme Ct. upholding of the
Bono/Disney virtually eternal extension of US copyright, the rest of the
world
is enjoying the public domain status of much music from the 1950's.
Maria Callas, a lot of folk, country, a few Elvis tunes, a whole lot of
jazz,
etc. etc. etc.

If one of our entrants from France or Germany (or other) legally uses what
is
public domain music in their country - just how are American judges and
entrants
going to object?

Finally - I personally believe original music mixed into an original IRTC
anim
entry is best, but I am not about to make any unfounded judgements about
an entrants use of music. It's not a germane part of the judging process and
there are too many unvoiced assumptions being made about the legalities with
respect to any individual entrant's home country laws.


Again - the admin team will have the final word on this issue

- if it is an issue, especially considering that there is no infringement
without
an owner's complaint.

</rant>

Doug Sterrett "yes, I know about the Berne convention and the WTO"

Post a reply to this message