About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 Ent. & Sports Law. 3 (1994-1995)
Economic and Moral Rights under U.S. Copyright Law - Protecting Authors and Producers in the Motion Picture Industry

handle is hein.journals/entspl12 and id is 83 raw text is: Economic and Moral Rights under U.S. Copyright Law Protecting Authors and Producers in the Motion Picture Industry LAURA A. PITTA trong protection has developed to shield the motion picture industry from deleteri- ous forces-both on a domestic level and an international one. Summarized here are the legal shields that protect creators and producers of audio- visual works.' First, a philosophical backdrop of the differences between the common law system of copyright and the civil law author's right system is presented.2 Next, the economic rights established under U.S. statutory law are examined. A discussion of the Berne Convention concept of moral rights with respect to audiovisual works and its entrance into U.S. law follows. Finally, the civil law concept of neighboring rights ancillary to author's rights is explained and compared with similar existing protec- tions under U.S. laws. Philosophical Backdrop In the United States, creators and producers of motion pictures are protected by the Copyright Act of 1976.3 Some countries (especially those of the civil law tradition) distinguish rights in such works from rights in other works, based upon the nature of the right holder, creator or corporate financier. The dif- ference is largely due to the philosophical underpin- nings of the copyright and author's right laws. When protection of works was first shifting in the seventeenth century from a sovereign privilege to a statutory right, two schools of thought emerged. One school, natural law, was absorbed into the civil law countries and promoted especially by France and Germany. Because the authors invested their creativi- ty, the works belonged to them. This school advanced the notion that protection should extend to both the author's economic and personal interests. Statutes merely codified these naturally existing rights.' With the advent of modern cinematography, its corporate organization and other technological advances, laws based upon natural law principles proved inefficient and inadequate because such laws do not extend full protection to corporate entities. On the basis of these principles, ownership of rights in a motion picture always vests in an individual first- only then may those rights be transferred or licensed; however, the personal rights remain with the cre- ators. Because the focus is on the individual, this school is often referred to as recognizing droit d'auteur or author's right. This system poses a diffi- cult problem for modern marketing of motion pic- tures. All the rights of each of the individuals involved must be addressed. A shortcut developed, in the form of presumptions as to ownership of rights and neighboring rights, to allow effective exploitation of the work.5 Meanwhile, the common law was developing in a different way. Common law countries, especially the United States and the United Kingdom, recognized a common law right of perpetual duration based upon natural property rights;6 however, when codified by the legislators,7 only limited economic protection was extended to authors. The statutes did not codify nat- ural law, they replaced it and created economic rights initially in the form of an exclusive reproduction right for a limited time.8 The purpose of this exclusive right was to protect the economic rights held by cre- ators or publishers who purchased the original cre- ator's rights. Thus, creators relinquished all rights in a work (unless otherwise contractually agreed) in exchange for pecuniary recompense.9 In contrast to the situation in author's right coun- tries, the developing motion picture industry brought no need to change the basis of the copyright protec- tion system in the common law countries. Full eco- nomic rights could be held by a corporate entity. In the latter half of the twentieth century, interna- tional copyright protection has become of much greater concern, as the motion picture industry has become supranational.10 This has brought a clash of the two systems and their philosophies. Author's right countries (e.g., France and Germany) focus almost exclusively on the individual creator, while the com- mon law countries (e.g., United States and the United Kingdom) focus on the owner of the copyright, whether that is the creator, publisher, broadcaster or corporation. In the United States, freedom of contract is one of the most sacred principles. Yet with the growing international emphasis on natural law (at least in the ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORTS LAWYER 3 VOLUME 12, NUMBER 4 - WINTER 1995

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most